the interior Natures of several Creatures as their exterior figures and Phonomena's which makes them write many Paradoxes but few Truths supposing that Sense and Art can onely lead them to the knowledg of truth when as they delude rather their judgments instead of informing them But Nature has placed Sense and Reason together so that there is no part or particle of Nature which has not its share of reason as well as of sense for every part having self-motion hath also knowledg which is sense and reason and therefore it is fit we should not onely imploy our senses but chiefly our reason in the search of the causes of natural effects for Sense is onely a workman and Reason is the designer and surveigher and as reason guides and directs so ought sense to work But seeing that in this age sense is more in fashion then reason it is no wonder there are so many irregular opinions and judgments amongst men However although it be the mode yet I for my part shall not follow it but leaving to our Moderns their Experimental or Mode-Philosophy built upon deluding Art I shall addict my self to the study of Contemplative-Philosophy and Reason shall be my guide Not that I despise sense or sensitive knowledg but when I speak of sense I mean the perception of our five exterior senses helped or rather deluded by Art and Artificial instruments for I see that in this present Age Learned men are full of Art and Artificial trials and when they have found out something by them they presently judg that all natural actions are made the same way as for example when they find by Art that Salt will make Snow congeal into Ice they instantly conclude from thence that all natural congelations are made by saline particles and that the Primum Frigidum or the Principal cause of all natural cold must needs be salt by reason they have found by Art that salt will do the same effect in the aforesaid commixture with Snow But how grosly they are deceived rational men may judg If I were a Chymist and acknowledged their common Principles I might perchance have some belief in it but not whilest I follow reason nay I perceive that oftentimes our senses are deluded by their own irregularities in not perceiving always truly and rightly the actions of Art but mistaking them which is a double error and therefore that particular sensitive knowledg in man which is built meerly upon artificial experiments will never make him a good Philosopher but regular sense and reason must do it that is a regular sensitive and rational inquisition into the various actions of Nature For put the case a Microscope be true concerning the magnifying of an exterior object but yet the magnitude of the object cannot give a true information of its interior parts and their motions or else great and large bodies would be interiously known even without Microscopes The truth is our exterior senses can go no further then the exterior figures of Creatures and their exterior actions but our reason may pierce deeper and consider their inherent natures and interior actions and although it do sometimes erre for there can be no perfect or universal knowledg in a finite part concerning the Infinite actions of Nature yet it may also probably guess at them and may chance to hit the Truth Thus Sense and Reason shall be the ground of my Philosophy and no particular natural effects nor artificial instruments and if any one can shew me a better and surer ground or Principle then this I shall most willingly and joyfully embrace it 26. Of the Measures Degrees and different sorts of Heat and Cold. SOme Experimental Philosophers are much inquisitive into the measures of Heat and Cold and as we have setled standards for weight and magnitude and time so they endeavour to measure the varying temperature and gradual differences of heat and cold but do what they can their artificial measures or weights neither will nor can be so exact as the natural are to wit so as not to make them err in more or less Neither is it possible that all the degrees of heat and cold in Nature can be measured for no man can measure what he doth not know and who knows all the different sorts of heats and colds Nay if man did endeavour to measure onely one sort of heat or cold as for example the degrees of the heat or coldness of the air how is it possible that he should do it by reason of the continual change of the motions of heat or cold of the air which are so inconstant that it were surer to measure the fluidity of the air then to measure the degrees of heat or cold of the air for the temper of the air and of its heat and cold may vary so as many times we shall never find the same measure again Wherefore if we desire to have some knowledg of the degrees of some sorts of heat or cold my opinion is that we may more easily attain to it by the help of rational perception then by a sensitive inspection of artificial Weather-glasses or the like for reason goes beyond sense and although the sensitive perception is best next the rational yet the rational is above the sensitive But some of the learned conceive the degrees of heat and cold are made by bare divisions whenas in my opinion they are made by the several degrees of their corporeal figurative motions They do also imagine that there 's no degree but must ascend from one to two from two to three and so forth through all numbers and that from one to twenty there be so many degrees as there be numbers when as in my opinion there 's no more but one degree required from one to a Million or more for though both in Nature and Art there are degrees from one single figure to another yet there may also be but one degree from one to a million without reckoning any intermediate degrees or figures so that a body when it moves quick or slow needs not to go through all the intermediate degrees of quickness or slowness as to move quicker and quicker slower and slower but may immediately move from a very slow to a very quick degree the truth is no man is able to measure the infinite degrees of natural motions for though Nature consists of particular finites yet it doth also consist of infinite particulars finite in figure infinite in number and who can number from finite to infinite But having discoursed hereof elsewhere I return to heat and cold aud let others dispute whether the degrees of heat and cold in the air be the same with the degrees of animal perceptions or with the degrees of animal cold and heat my opinion is that there being several sorts and several particular heats and colds they cannot be just alike each other but there 's some difference betwixt them as for example there are shaking freezing chilly windy numb
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
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
perpendicular line as well as these Creatures do by reason of the depth of their bodies from the soles of their feet to the surface of their back the weight of their depth over-powering the strength of their leggs Wherefore the weight of a Creature lies for the most part in the shape of its body which shape gives it such sorts of actions as are proper for it as for example a Bird flies by its shape a Worm crawls by its shape a Fish swims by its shape and a heavy Ship will bear it self up on the surface of water meerly by its exterior shape it being not so much the interior figure or nature of Wood that gives it this faculty of bearing up by reason we see that many pieces of Timber will sink down to the bottom in water Thus Heaviness and Lightness is for the most part caused by the shape or figure of the body of a Creature and all its exterior actions depend upon the exterior shape of its body Whether it be possible to make Man and other Animal Creatures that naturally have no Wings flie as Birds do SOme are of opinion that is not impossible to make Man and such other Creatures that naturally have no wings flie as Birds do but I have heard my Noble Lord and Husband give good reasons against it For when he was in Paris he discoursing one time with Mr. H. concerning this subject told him that he thought it altogether impossible to be done A Man said he or the like animal that has no Wings has his arms set on his body in a quite opposite manner then Birds wings are for the concave part of a Birds wing which joins close to his body is in man outward and the inward part of a mans arm where it joins to his body is in Birds placed outward so that which is inward in a Bird is outward in Man and what is inward in Man is outward in Birds which is the reason that a Man has not the same motion of his arm which a Bird has of his wing For Flying is but swimming in the Air and Birds by the shape and posture of their wings do thrust away the air and so keep themselves up which shape if it were found the same in Mans arms and other animals leggs they might perhaps flie as Birds do nay without the help of Feathers for we see that Bats have but flesh-wings neither would the bulk of their bodies be any hinderance to them for there be many Birds of great and heavy bodies which do nevertheless flie although more slowly and not so nimbly as Flies or little Birds Wherefore it is onely the different posture and shape of Mens arms and other Animals leggs contrary to the wings of Birds that makes them unapt to flie and not so much the bulk of their bodies But I believe that a four-legg'd Creature or Animal may more easily and safely go upright like Man although it hath its leggs set on in a contrary manner to Mans arms and leggs for a four-legg'd animals hind-leggs resemble man's arms and its fore-leggs are just as man's leggs Nevertheless there is no Art that can make a four legg'd Creature imitate the actions of man no more then Art can make them have or imitate the natural actions of a Bird For Art cannot give new motions to natural parts which are not proper or natural for them but each part must have such proper and natural motions and actions as Nature has designed for it I will not say but Art may help to mend some defects errors or irregularities in Nature but not make better that which Nature has made perfect already Neither can we say Man is defective because he cannot flie as Birds for flying is not his natural and proper motion We should rather account that Man monstrous that could flie as having some motion not natural and proper to his figure and shape for that Creature is perfect in its kind that has all the motions which are naturally requisite to the figure of such a kind But Man is apt to run into extreams and spoils Nature with doting too much upon Art 13. Of Snails and Leeches and whether all Animals have blood WHether Snails have a row of small teeth orderly placed in the Gums and divided into several smaller and greater or whether they have but one small bended hard bone which serves them instead of teeth to bite out pretty large and half-round bits of the leaves of trees to feed on Experimental Philosophers may enquire by the help of their Microscopes My opinion is That Snails are like Leeches which will not onely bite but suck but this I do verily believe that Snails onely bite Vegetables not Animals as Leeches do and though Leeches bite into the skin yet they do not take any part away but suck onely out the juicy part that is the blood and leave the grosser substance of flesh behind and so do Snails bite into herbs to suck out the juicy substance or else there would be found flesh in Leeches and herbs in Snails which is not so that Snails and Leeches bite for no end but onely to make a passage to suck out the juicy parts and therefore I cannot perceive that they have bones but I conceive their teeth or parts they pierce withal to be somewhat of the nature of stings which are no more Bones then the points of Fire are I do not certainly affirm they are stings but my meaning is that they are pointed or piercing figures that is as I said of the nature of stings there being many several sorts of pointed and piercing figures which yet are not stings like as there are several sorts of grinding and biting figures which are not teeth for there are so many several sorts of figures in Vegetables Minerals Animals and Elements as no particular Creature is able to conceive Again it is questioned whether those Creatures that suck blood from others have blood themselves as naturally belonging to their own substance and my opinion is that it is no necessary consequence that that should be a part of their substance on which they feed food may be converted into the substance of their bodies by the figurative transforming motions but it is not part of their substance before it is converted and so many Creatures may feed on blood but yet have none of themselves as a natural constitutive part of their being besides there are Maggots Worms and several sorts of Flies and other Creatures that feed upon fruits and herbs as also Lobsters Crabs c. which neither suck blood nor have blood and therefore blood is not requisite to the life of every animal although it is to the life of man and several other animal Creatures Neither do I believe that all the juice in the veins is blood as some do conceive for some of the juice may be in the way of being blood and some may have altered its nature from being blood to
the air into every place and by the falling drops of rain is wash'd down out of it and so dispersed into all places and there takes onely root and propagates where it finds a convenient soil for it to thrive in but this is onely a wild fancy and has no ground and no experimental Writer shall ever perswade me that by his Dioptrical glasses he has made any such experiment wherefore I insist upon sense and reason which inform me of the various productions of Nature which cannot be reduced to one principal kind but are more numerous then mans particular and finite reason can conceive Neither is it a wonder to see Plants grow out of the Earth without any waste of the Earth by reason there are perpetual compositions and divisions in Nature which are nothing else but an uniting and disjoyning of parts to and from parts and prove that there is an interchangeable ingress and egress or a reciprocal breathing in all Natures parts not perceptible by man so that no man can tell the association of parts and growing motions of any one much less of all Creatures 15. Of the Seeds of Vegetables SOme do call the seeds of Vegetables the Cabinet of Nature wherein are laid up her Jewels but this in my opinion is a very hard and improper expression for I cannot conceive what Jewels Nature has nor in what Cabinet she preserves them Neither are the seeds of Vegetables more then other parts or Creatures of Nature But I suppose some conceive Nature to be like a Granary or Store-house of Pinebarley or the like which if so I would fain know in what grounds those seeds should be sown to produce and increase for no seeds can produce of themselves if they be not assisted by some other matter which proves that seeds are not the prime or principal Creatures in Nature by reason they depend upon some other matter which helps them in their productions for if seeds of Vegetables did lie never so long in a store-house or any other place they would never produce until they were put into some proper and convenient ground It is also an argument that no Creature or part of Nature can subsist singly and precised from all the rest but that all parts must live together and since no part can subsist and live without the other no part can also be called prime or principal Nevertheless all seeds have life as well as other Creatures neither is it a Paradox to say seeds are buried in life and yet do live for what is not in present act we may call buried intombed or inurned in the power of life as for example a man when his figure is dissolved his parts dispersed and joyned with others we may say his former form or figure of being such a particular man is buried in its dissolution and yet liveth in the composition of other parts or which is all one he doth no more live the life of a Man but the life of some other Creature he is transformed into by the transforming and figuring motions of Nature nay although every particle of his former figure were joyned with several other parts and particles of Nature and every particle of the dissolved figure were altered from its former figure into several other figures nevertheless each of these Particles would not onely have life by reason it has motion but also the former figure would still remain in all those Particles though dispersed and living several sorts of lives there being nothing in Nature that can be lost or annihilated but Nature is and continues still the same as she was without the least addition or diminution of any the least thing or part and all the varieties and changes of natural productions proceed onely from the various changes of Motion But to return to seeds some Experimental Writers have observed that the seed of Corn-violets which looks almost like a very small Flea through the Microscope appears a large body cover'd with a tough thick and bright reflecting skin very irregularly shrunk and pitted insomuch that it is almost an impossibility to find two of them wrinkled alike and wonder that there is such variety even in this little seed But to me it is no wonder when I consider the variety of Nature in all her works not onely in the exterior but also in the interior parts of every Creature but rather a wonder to see two Creatures just alike each other in their exterior figures And since the exterior figures of Creatures are not the same with the interior but in many or most Creatures quite different it is impossible that the exterior shape and structure of bodies can afford us sure and excellent instructions to the knowledg of their natures and interior motions as some do conceive for how shall a feather inform us of the interior nature of a Bird we may see the exterior flying motions of a Bird by the help of its wings but they cannot give us an information of the productive and figurative motions of all the interior parts of a Bird and what makes it to be such a Creature no more then the exterior view of a mans head arms legs c. can give an Information of his interior Parts viz. the spleen liver lungs c. Also in Vegetables although those sorts of Vegetables which are outwardly burning may be outwardly pointed and they that are hot and burning within may be inwardly pointed yet no Microscope is able to present to our view those inward points by the inspection of the exterior figure and shape of those Vegetables Neither doth it follow that all those which are outwardly pointed must needs be of a hot and burning nature except they be also pointed inwardly Nay although some particular Creatures should seem to resemble each other in their exterior shapes and figures so much as not to be distinguished at the first view yet upon better acquaintance we shall find a great difference betwixt them which shews that there is more variety and difference amongst Natures works then our weak senses are able to perceive nay more variety in one particular Creature as for example in Man then all the kind or sort of that Creature viz. Mankind is able to know And if there be such difference betwixt the exterior figures of Creatures of one sort what may there be betwixt their exterior shapes and interior natures Nevertheless although there be such variety not onely in the General kinds of Creatures but in every Particular yet there is but one ground or principle of all this variety which is self-motion or self-moving Matter And I cannot enough admire the strange conceits of some men who perceiving and believing such a curious variety and various curiosity of Nature in the parts of her body and that she is in a perpetual motion and knows best her own Laws and the several proprieties of bodies and how to adapt and fit them to her designed ends nay that God hath implanted
a faculty of knowing in every Creature do yet deny nay rail against Natures self-moving power condemning her as a dull inanimate senseless and irrational body as if a rational man could conceive that such a curious variety and contrivance of natural works should be produced by a senseless and irational motion or that Nature was full of immaterial spirits which did work Natural matter into such various figures or that all this variety should be caused by an Immaterial motion which is generated out of nothing and annihilated in a moment for no man can conceive or think of motion without body and if it be above thought then surely it is above act But I rather cease to wonder at those strange and irregular opinions of Man-kind since even they themselves do justifie and prove the variety of Nature for what we call Irregularities in Nature are really nothing but a variety of Natures motions and therefore if all mens conceits fancies and opinions were rational there would not be so much variety as there is Concerning those that say there is no variety in the Elemental Kingdom as Air Water and Earth Air and Water having no form at all unless a potentiality to be formed into globules and that the clods and parcels of Earth are all Irregular I answer This is more then Man is able to know But by reason their Microscopes cannot make such Hermaphroditical figures of the Elements as they can of Minerals Vegetables and Animals they conclude there is no such variety in them when as yet we do plainly perceive that there are several sorts of Air Fire Water Earth and no doubt but these several sorts and their particulars are as variously figured as other Creatures Truly it is no consequence to deny the being of that which we do not see or perceive for this were to attribute a Universal and Infinite knowledg to our weak and imperfect senses And therefore I cannot believe that the Omnipotent Creator has written and engraven his most mysterious Designs and Counsels onely in one sort of Creatures since all parts of Nature their various productions and curious contrivances do make known the Omnipotency of God not onely those of little but also those of great sizes for in all figures sizes and actions is apparent the curious variety of Nature and the Omnipotency of the Cretor who has given Nature a self-moving power to produce all these varieties in her self which varieties do evidently prove that Nature doth not work in all Creatures alike nor that she has but one Primary or Principal sort of motions by which she produces all Creatures as some do conceive the manner of wreathing and unwreathing which they have observed in the beard of a Wild-oat mentioned before to be the first foot step of sensation and animate motion and the most plain simple and obvious contrivance Nature has made use of to produce a motion next to that of rarefaction and condensation by heat and cold for this is a very wild and extravagant conceit to measure the infinite actions of Nature according to the rule of one particular sort of motions which any one that has the perfect use of his sense and reason may easily see and therefore I need not to bring many arguments to contradict it 16. Of the Providence of Nature and of some Opinions concerning Motion COncerning those that speak of the Providence of Nature the preserving of Vegetables to wit that Nature is very curious and careful in preserving their seminal principles and lays them in most convenient strong and delicate cabinets for their safer protection from outward danger I confess Nature may make such protections that one Creature may have some defence from the injuries and assaults of its fellow-Creatures but these assaults are nothing but dissolving motions as friendly and amiable associations are nothing else but composing motions neither can any thing be lost in Nature for even the least particle of Nature remains as long as Nature her self And if there be any Providence in Nature then certainly Nature has knowledg and wisdom and if she hath knowledg and wisdom then she has sense and reason and if sense and reason then she has self-motion and if Nature has self-motion then none of her parts can be called inanimate or soul-less for Motion is the life and soul of Nature and of all her parts and if the body be animate the parts must be so too there being no part of the animate body of Nature that can be dead or without motion whereof an instance might be given of animal bodies whose parts have all animal life as well as the body it self Wherefore those that allow a soul or an informing actuating and animating form or faculty in Nature and her parts and yet call some parts inanimate or soul-less do absolutely contradict themselves And those that say all the varieties of Nature are produced not by self-motion but that one part moves another must at last come to something that moves it self besides it is not probable that one part moving another should produce all things so orderly and wisely as they are in Nature But those that say Motion is no substance and consequently not material and yet allow a generation and annihilation of Motion speak in my opinion non-sence for first how can self-motion the Author and Producer of all things work all the varieties that are in Nature and be nothing it self Next how can that which is nothing for all that is not Material is nothing in Nature or no part of Nature be generated and annihilated Nay if Motion be Material as surely it is yet there can neither be a new generation nor an annihilation of any particular Motion in Nature for all that is material in Nature has its being in and from Infinite Matter which is from Eternity it being impossible that any other new Matter should be created besides this Infinite Matter out of which all natural things consist or that any part of this matter should be lost or annihilated But perhaps those that believe new generations and annihilations of particular motions may say that their opinion is not as if those particular Motions were generated out of some new matter but that the matter of such motions is the same with the matter of all other natural Creatures and that their perishing or annihilation is not an utter destruction or loss of their being out of Nature but onely of being such or such a motion like as some Vegetables and Elements are generated and perish in one night Truly if their meaning be thus then it were better to name it an alteration or change of Motion rather then a new Generation and a Perishing or Annihilation But my intention is not to plead for other mens opinions but rather to clear my own which is that Motion is material for Figure Motion and Matter are but one thing and that no particular Motion is or can be lost in Nature nor created anew as
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
concerning Contraction and Dilation my opinion is That there can be no Contraction nor Extension of a single part by reason there is no such thing as a single or individeable part in Nature for even that which the learned call an atome although they make it a single body yet being mateterial or corporeal it must needs be divideable Wherefore all Contraction and Dilation consists of parts as much as body doth and there is no body that is not contractive and dilative as well as it is divideable and composeable for parts are as it were the effects of a body by reason there is no body without parts and contraction and extension are the effects of parts and magnitude and place are the effects of contraction and extension and all these are the effects of corporeal figurative self-motion which I have more fully declared in several places of my Philosophical Works But some may say It is impossible that a body can make it self bigger or less then by Nature it is My answer is I do not conceive what is meant by being little or great by Nature for Nature is in a perpetual motion and so are her parts which do work intermix join divide and move according as Nature pleases without any rest or intermission Now if there be such changes of parts and motions it is impossible that there can be any constant figure in Nature I mean so as not to have its changes of motions as well as the rest although they be not all after the same manner And if there can be no constant figure in Nature there can neither be a constant littleness or greatness nor a constant rarity or density but all parts of Nature must change according to their motions for as parts divide and compose so are their figures and since there are contracting and dilating motions as well as there are of other sorts there are also contracting and dilating parts and if there be contracting and dilating parts then their magnitude changes accordingly for magnitude doth not barely consist in quantity but in the extension of the parts of the body and as the magnitude of a body is so is place so that place is larger or less according as the body contracts or dilates for it is well to be observed that it is not the interior figure of any part of Creature of Nature that alters by contraction or dilation for example Gold or Quicksilver is not changed from being Gold or Quicksilver when it is rarified but onely that figure puts it self into several postures Which proves that the extension of a body is not made by an addition or intermixture of forraign parts as composition nor contraction by a diminution of its own parts as division for dilation and composition as also division and contraction are different actions the dilation of a body is an extension of its own parts but composition is an addition of forreign parts and contraction although it makes the body less in magnitude yet it loses nothing of its own parts The truth is as division and composition are natural corporeal motions so are contraction and dilation and as both composition and division belong to parts so do contraction and dilation for there can be no contraction or dilation of a single part 31. Of the Parts of Nature and of Atomes ALthough I am of opinion that Nature is a self-moving and consequently a self-living and self-knowing infinite body divideable into infinite parts yet I do not mean that these parts are Atomes for there can be no Atome that is an individeable body in Nature because whatsoever has body or is material has quantity and what has quantity is divideable But some may say if a part be finite it cannot be divideable into Infinite To which I answer that there is no such thing as one finite single part in Nature for when I speak of the parts of Nature I do not understand that those parts are like grains of Corn or sand in one heap all of one figure or magnitude and separable from each other but I conceive Nature to be an Infinite body bulk or magnitude which by its own self-motion is divided into infinite parts not single or individable parts but parts of one continued body onely discernable from each other by their proper figures caused by the changes of particular motions for it is well to be observed first that Nature is corporeal and therefore divideable Next That Nature is self-moving and therefore never at rest I do not mean exteriously moving for Nature being infinite is all within it self and has nothing without or beyond it because it is without limits or bounds but interiously so that all the motions that are in Nature are within her self and being various and infinite in their changes they divide the substance or body of Nature into infinite parts for the parts of Nature and changes of Motion are but one thing for were there no Motion there would be no change of figures 'T is true Matter in its own nature would be divideable because wheresoever is body there are parts but if it had no motion it would not have such various changes of figures as it hath wherefore it is well to be considered that self-motion is throughout all the body of Nature and that no part or figure how small soever can be without self-motion and according as the motions are so are the parts for infinite changes of motions make infinite parts nay what we call one finite part may have infinite changes because it may be divided and composed infinite ways By which it is evident first that no certain quantity or figure can be assigned to the parts of Nature as I said before of the grains of corn or sand for infinite changes of motions produce infinite varieties of figures and all the degrees of density rarity levity gravity slowness quickness nay all the effects that are in Nature Next that it is impossible to have single parts in Nature that is parts which are individeable in themselves as Atomes and may subsist single or by themselves precised or separated from all other parts for although there are perfect and whole figures in Nature yet are they nothing else but parts of Nature which consist of a composition of other parts and their figures make them discernable from other parts or figures of Nature For example an Eye although it be composed of parts and has a whole and perfect figure yet it is but a part of the Head and could not subsist without it Also the Head although it has a whole and perfect figure yet 't is a part of the Body and could not subsist without it The same may be said of all other particular and perfect figures As for example an Animal though it be a whole and perfect figure yet it is but a part of Earth and some other Elements and parts of Nature and could not subsist without them nay for any thing we know to the contrary the
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
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
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
has parts by reason there can be no single part in Nature but wheresoever is body or matter there are parts also and therefore matter cannot be void of figure But if by Form he mean the innate and inherent self-motion of Matter he contradicts himself for how can all things be made of matter as their principle if matter be destitute of self-motion Wherefore Infinite Matter has not onely self-motion but also figure though not a circumscribed or limited figure Neither can it be proved that Nature being infinite is not qualitative no more then she can be proved to have no parts or to be finite In short it is impossible for my reason to believe that Matter should be capable of and subject to all forms and yet be void of all quality form and species for whatsoever has neither form figure nor quality is no body and therefore Plato's Matter is immaterial or incorporeal If it were possible that there could be some converse or meeting between his and my soul I would ask his soul how he would prove that one and the same thing could exist and not exist at one and the same time that is how matter could be no matter or something and nothing at the same time and whence it came to be thus For though our reason does believe that the Omnipotent Creator can make something of nothing and reduce something into nothing yet no reason is able to comprehend how God could make a being which is neither something nor nothing neither corporeal nor incorporeal But Plato concludes that Matter is destitute of all form because it is subject to change of forms and figures in its particulars which is a very great mistake for the changes of forms or figures do not alter the nature of Matter but prove rather that wheresoever there is form or figure there is matter also so that none can be without the other at no time A piece of Wax may be transformed into millions of figures but it can never be deprived of all figure no more can Matter 8. Concerning Ideas Plato's Opinion is That they are Principles of Nature and the Eternal Notions of God perfect in themselves or an External exemplar of things which are according to Nature But I would ask him what Notions are and whence they come and if they be pictures or patterns of all things in Nature What makes or causes them He will say They are the Thoughts of God But what Creature in the Universe is able to describe the Thoughts or Notions of God For though I do humbly acknowledg God to be the Author of Nature and with the greatest reverence and fear adore that Infinite Deity yet I dare not attribute any Notions or Ideas to God nor in any manner or way express him like our humane condition for I fear I should speak irreverently of that Incomprehensible Essence which is above all finite Capacity Reason or Idea Next he says That those Ideas are not of things made by Art nor of singulars nor of preternatural accidents as diseases nor of vile and abject things nor of Relatives Which if so I would enquire whence those effects do proceed for if the Eternal Ideas according to his opinion are Principles of all natural things they must also be principles of the aforementioned effects they being also natural If they do not proceed from any principle they must proceed from themselves which cannot be by reason they are effects of Nature but if they have another principle besides the Eternal Notions or Ideas then there must be another power besides these which power would oppose the divine power or the power God has endued Nature withal In short If the Ideas of God be the Principle of Nature they must be a principle of all natural things for that which is not Universal can never be a principle which if so then the Ideas or Notions of God would not onely be the Cause and Principle of all Goodness but of all evil effects and if there be more wicked or evil souls in the World then good ones there would proceed more evil from God then good which is not onely impossible but impious to affirm But Perchance he will say That the Ideas of the aforementioned effects are generated and annihilated I answer As for Nature she being Eternal and Infinite is not subject to new generations and annihilations in her particulars neither can Principles be generated and annihilated and as for supernatural or immaterial Ideas they being incorporeal cannot be subject to a new generation or annihilation for what is supernatural is not capable of natural affections nor subject to a natural capacity any ways In truth Plato with his Ideas in God in the Angelick Mind in the Soul c. makes a greater stir then needs and breeds more confusion in Nature then she really knows of for Nature is as easie to be understood in her general principles that regular sense and reason may conceive them without framing any such Ideas or Minds He distinguishes also the Idea or exemplar of an house which the architect has in his mind and as his pattern exactly strives to imitate from the building or structure of the house it self by this that he calls that intelligible but this material and sensible when as yet the form or pattern in the Architects mind is as much material as the builded house it self the onely difference is that the Exemplar or figure in the Mind is formed of the rational matter onely which is the purest finest and subtilest degree and the other is made of grosser materials 9. The Soul of the World he makes immaterial but the body material and hence he concludes the World to be Eternal because the soul is such which is not capable to be without body and although it be incorporeal yet its office is to rule and govern corporeal Nature But concerning the Soul of Nature I have sufficiently declared my opinion thereof in other places to wit that it is impossible she should be immaterial for if the body of Nature be dividable and composable the soul must be so too but that which is not material cannot admit of division nor composition wherefore the soul cannot be immaterial or else some parts of the world would be destitute of a soul which might deserve it as well as the rest which would argue a partiality in the Creator I wonder wise men will attribute bodily affections to immaterial beings when as yet they are not able to conceive or comprehend them by which they confound and disturb Nature which knows of no Immaterials but her Essence is Matter 10. As for his Ethicks where he speaks of Beauty Strength Proportion c. I 'le onely say this That of all these there are different sorts for there 's the strength of the Mind and the strength of the Body and these are so various in their kinds and particulars that they cannot be exactly defined also Beauty considering onely that which is
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
Besides many of their Writings are but parcels taken from the ancient but such Writers are like those unconscionable men in Civil Wars which endeavour to pull down the hereditary Mansions of Noble-men and Gentlemen to build a Cottage of their own for so do they pull down the learning of Ancient Authors to render themselves famous in composing Books of their own But though this Age does ruine Palaces to make Cottages Churches to make Conventicles and Universities to make private Colledges and endeavour not onely to wound but to kill and bury the Fame of such meritorious Persons as the Ancient were yet I hope God of his mercy will preserve State Church and Schools from ruine and destruction Nor do I think their weak works will be able to overcome the strong wits of the Ancient for setting aside some few of our Moderns all the rest are but like dead and withered leaves in comparison to lovely and lively Plants and as for Arts I am confident that where there is one good Art found in these latter ages there are two better old Arts lost both of the AEgyptians Grecians Romans and many other ancient Nations when I say lost I mean in relation to our knowledg not in Nature for nothing can be lost in Nature Truly the Art of Augury was far more beneficial then the lately invented Art of Micrography for I cannot perceive any great advantage this Art doth bring us Also the Ecclipse of the Sun and Moon was not found out by Telescopes nor the motions of the Loadstone nor the Art of the Card nor the Art of Guns and Gun-powder nor the Art of Printing and the like by Microscopes nay if it be true that Telescopes make appear the spots in the Sun and Moon or discover some new Stars what benefit is that to us Or if Microscopes do truly represent the exterior parts and superficies of some minute Creatures what advantages it our knowledg For unless they could discover their interior corporeal figurative motions and the obscure actions of Nature or the causes which make such or such Creatures I see no great benefit or advantage they yield to man Or if they discover how reflected light makes loose and superficial Colours such as no sooner percieved but are again dissolved what benefit is that to man For neither Painters nor Dyers can inclose and mix that Atomical dust and those reflections of light to serve them for any use Wherefore in my opinion it is both time and labour lost for the inspection of the exterior parts of Vegetables doth not give us any knowledg how to Sow Set Plant and Graft so that a Gardener or Husbandman will gain no advantage at all by this Art The inspection of a Bee through a Microscope will bring him no more Honey nor the inspection of a grain more Corn neither will the inspection of dusty Atomes and reflections of light teach Painters how to make and mix Colours although it may perhaps be an advantage to a decayed Ladies face by placing her self in such or such a reflection of Light where the dusty Atomes may hide her wrinkles The truth is most of these Arts are Fallacies rather then discoveries of Truth for Sense deludes more then it gives a true Information and an exterior inspection through an Optick glass is so deceiving that it cannot be relied upon Wherefore Regular Reason is the best guide to all Arts as I shall make it appear in this following Treatise It may be the World will judg it a fault in me that I oppose so many eminent and ingenious Writers but I do it not out of a contradicting or wrangling nature but out of an endeavour to find out truth or at least the probability of truth according to that proportion of sense and reason Nature has bestowed upon me for as I have heard my Noble Lord say that in the Art of Riding and Fencing there is but one Truth but many Falshoods and Fallacies So it may be said of Natural Philophy and Divinity for there is but one Fundamental Truth in each and I am as ambitious of finding out the truth of Nature as an honourable Dueller is of gaining fame and repute for as he will fight with none but an honourable and valiant opposite so am I resolved to argue with none but those which have the renown of being famous and subtil Philosophers and therefore as I have had the courage to argue heretofore with some famous and eminent Writers in Speculative Philosophy so have I taken upon me in this present work to make some reflections also upon some of our Modern Experimental and Dioptrical Writers They will perhaps think my self an inconsiderable opposite because I am not of their Sex and therefore strive to hit my Opinions with a side stroke rather covertly then openly and directly but if this should chance the impartial World I hope will grant me so much Justice as to consider my honesty and their fallacy and pass such a judgment as will declare them to be Patrons not onely to Truth but also to Justice and Equity for which Heaven will grant them their reward and time will record their noble and worthy Actions in the Register of Fame to be kept in everlasting Memory TO THE READER Curteous Reader I Do ingeniously confess that both for want of learning and reading Philosophical Authors I have not expressed my self in my Philosophical Works especially in my Philosophical and Physical Opinions so clearly and plainly as I might have done had I had the assistance of Art and the practice of reading other Authors But though my Conceptions seem not so perspicuous in the mentioned Book of Philosophical Opinions yet my Philosophical Letters and these present Observations will I hope render it more intelligible which I have writ not out of an ambitious humour to fill the World with useless Books but to explain and illustrate my own Opinions For what benefit would it be to me if I should put forth a work which by reason of its obscure and hard notious could not be understood especially it is knowil that Natural Philosophy is the hardest of all humane learning by reason it consists onely in Contemplation and to make the Philosophical Conceptions of ones mind known to others is more difffcult then to make them believe that if A. B. be equal to C. D. then E. F. is equal to A. B. because it is equal to C. D. But as for Learning that I am not versed in it no body I hope will blame me for it since it is sufficiently known that our Sex is not bread up to it as being not suffer'd to be instructed in Schools and Vniversities I will not say but many of our Sex may have as much wit and be capable of Learning as well as Men but since they want Instructions it is not possible they should attain to it for Learning is Artificial but Wit is Natural Wherefore when I began to read the Philosophical Works
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
part had but two degrees to wit the sensitive and rational so the Inanimate was but grosser and purer and as for density rarity softness hardness c. they were nothing but various compositions and divisions of parts or particular effects nor was it density or hardness that made grossness and thinness or rarity of parts that made fineness and purity for Gold is more dense then dross and yet is more pure and fine but this is most probable said they that the rarest compositions are most suddenly altered nor can the grossness and fineness of the parts of Nature be without Animate and Inanimate Matter for the dulness of one degree poises the activity of the other and the grossness of one the purity of the other all which keeps Nature from extreams But replied my later Thonght You say that there are infinite degrees of hardness thickness thinness density rarity c. Truly answered the former if you 'l call them degrees you may for so there may be infinite degrees of Magnitude as bigger and bigger but these degrees are nothing else but the effects of self-moving Matter made by a composition of parts and cannot be attributed to one single part there being no such thing in Nature b they belong to the infinite parts of Nature joined in one body and as for Matter it self there are no more degrees but animate and inanimate that is a self-moving active and perceptive and a dull passive and moved degree My later Thoughts asked since Natures parts were so closely joined in one body how it was possible that there could be finite and not single parts The former answered That finite and single parts were not all one and the same for single parts said they are such as can subsist by themselves neither can they properly be called parts but are rather finite wholes for it is a meer contradiction to say single parts they having no reference to each other and consequently not to the body of Nature But what we call finite Parts are nothing else but several corporeal figurative motions which make all the difference that is between the figures or parts of Nature both in their kinds sorts and particulars And thus finite and particular parts are all one called thus by reason they have limited and circumscribed figures by which they are discerned from each other but not single figures for they are all joined in one body and are parts of one infinite whole which is Nature and these figures being all one and the same with their parts of Matter change according as their parts change that is by composition and division for were Nature an Atome and material that Atome would have the properties of a body that is be dividable and composable and so be subject to infinite changes although it were not infinite in bulk My later Thoughts replied That if a finite body could have infinite compositions and divisions then Nature need not to be infinite in bulk or quantity besides said they it is against sense and reason that a finite should have infinite effects The former answered first As for the infiniteness of Nature it was certain that Nature consisted of infinite parts which if so she must needs also be of an infinite bulk or quantity for where soever is an infinite number of parts or figures there must also be an infinite whole since a whole and its parts differ not really but onely in the manner of our conception for when we conceive the parts of Nature as composed in one body and inseparable from it the composition of them is called a whole but when we conceive their different figures actions and changes and that they are dividable from each other or amongst themselves we call them parts for by this one part is discerned from the other part as for example a Mineral from a Vegetable a Vegetable from an Element an Element from an Animal c. and one part is not another part but yet these parts are and remain still parts of infinite Nature and cannot be divided into single parts separated from the body of Nature although they may be divided amongst themselves infinite ways by the self-moving power of Nature In short said they a whole is nothing but a composition of parts and parts are nothing but a division of the whole Next as for the infinite compositions and divisions of a finite whole said they it is not probable that a finite can have infinite effects or can be actually divided into infinite parts but yet a body cannot but have the proprieties of a body as long as it lasts and therefore if a finite body should last eternally it would eternally retain the effects or rather proprieties of a body that is to be dividable and composable and if it have self-motion and was actually divided and composed then those compositions and divisions of its parts would be eternal too but what is eternal is infinite and therefore in this sense one cannot say amiss but that there might be eternal compositions and divisions of the parts of a finite whole for wheresoever is self-motion there is no rest But mistake us not for we do not mean divisions or compositions into single or infinite parts 〈◊〉 perpetual and eternal change and self-motion of the parts of that finite body or whole amongst themselves But because we speak now of the parts of Infinite Nature which are Infinite in number though finite or rather distinguished by their figures It is certain said they that there being a perpetual and eternal self-motion in all parts of Nature and their number being infinite they must of necessity be subject to infinite changes compositions and divisions not onely as for their duration or eternal self-motion but as for the number of their parts for parts cannot remove but from and to parts and as soon as they are removed from such parts they join to other parts which is nothing else but a composition and division of parts and this composition and division of the Infinite parts of Nature hinders that there are no actual divisions or compositions of a finite part because the one counter-balances the other for if by finite you understand a single part there can be no such thing in Nature since what we call the finiteness of parts is nothing else but the difference and change of their figures caused by self-motion and therefore when we say Infinite Nature consists of an infinite number of finite parts we mean of such parts as may be distinguished or discerned from each other by their several figures which figures are not constant but change perpetually in the body of Nature so that there can be no constant figure allowed to no part although some do last longer then others Then my later Thoughts desired to know whether there were not degrees of Motion as well as there are of Matter The former answered That without question there were degrees of motion for the rational parts were more agil quick
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
peace and neighbourly sriendship it would not onely be worth their labour but of as much praise as could be given to them But as Boys that play with watry Bubbles or fling Dust into each others Eyes or make a Hobby-horse of Snow are worthy of reproof rather then praise for wasting their time with useless sports so those that addict themselves to unprofitable Arts spend more time then they reap benefit thereby Nay could they benefit men either in Husbandry Architecture or the like necessary and profitable imployments yet before the Vulgar sort would learn to understand them the world would want Bread to eat and Houses to dwell in as also Cloths to keep them from the inconveniences of the inconstant weather But truly although Spinsters were most experienced in this Art yet they will never be able to spin Silk Thred or Wool c. from loose Atomes neither will Weavers weave a Web of Light from the Sun's Rays nor an Architect build an House of the bubbles of Water and Air unless they be Poetical Spinsters Weavers and Architects and if a Painter should draw a Lowse as big as a Crab and of that shape as the Microscope presents can any body imagine that a Beggar would believe it to be true but if he did what advantage would it be to the Beggar for it doth neither instruct him how to avoid breeding them or how to catch them or to hinder them from biting Again if a Painter should paint Birds according to those Colours the Microscope presents what advantage would it be for Fowlers to take them Truly no Fowler will be able to distinguish several Birds through a Microscope neither by their shapes nor colours They will be better discerned by those that eat their flesh then by Micrographers that look upon their colours and exterior figures through a Magnifying-glass In short Magnifying-glasses are like a high heel to a short legg which if it be made too high it is apt to make the wearer fall and at the best can do no more then represent exterior figures in a bigger and so in a more deformed shape and posture then naturally they are but as for the interior form and motions of a Creature as I said before they can no more represent them then Telescopes can the interior essence and nature of the Sun and what matter it consists of for if one that never had seen Milk before should look upon it through a Microscope he would never be able to discover the interior parts of Milk by that instrument were it the best that is in the World neither the Whey nor the Butter nor the Curds Wherefore the best optick is a perfect natural Eye and a regular sensitive perception and the best judg is Reason and the best study is Rational Contemplation joyned with the observations of regular sense but not deiuding Arts for Art is not onely gross in comparison to Nature but for the most part deformed and defective and at best produces mixt or hermaphroditical figures that is a third figure between Nature and Art which proves that natural Reason is above artificial Sense as I may call it wherefore those Arts are the best and surest Informers that alter Nature least and they the greatest deluders that alter Nature most I mean the particular Nature of each particular Creature for Art is so far from altering Infinite Nature that it is no more in comparison to it then a little Flie to an Elephant no not so much for there is no comparison between finite and Infinite But wise Nature taking delight in variety her parts which are her Creatures must of necessity do so too 4. Of the Production of Fire by a Flint and Steel SOme learned Writers of Micrography having observed the fiery sparks that are struck out by the violent motion of a Flint against Steel suppose them to be little parcels either of the Flint or Steel which by the violence of the stroke are at the same time severed and made red hot nay sometimes to such a degree as they are melted together into glass But whatsoever their opinion be to my sense and reason it appears very difficult to determine exactly how the production of Fire is made by reason there are so many different sorts of Productions in Nature as it is impossible for any particular Creature to know or describe them Nevertheless it is most probable that those two bodies do operate not by incorporeal but corporeal motions which either produce a third corporeal figure out of their own parts or by striking against each other do alter some of their natural corporeal figurative parts so as to convert them into fire which if it have no fuel to feed on must of necessity die or it may be that by the occasion of striking against each other some of their looser parts are metamorphosed and afterwards return to their former figures again like as flesh being bruised and hurt becomes numb and black and after returns again to its proper figure and colour or like as Water that by change of motion in the same parts turns into Snow Ice or Hail may return again into its former figure and shape for Nature is various in her corporeal figurative motions But it is observable that Fire is like seeds of Corn sown in Earth which increases or decreases according as it has nourishment by which we may see that Fire is not produced from a bare immaterial motion as I said before for a spiritual issue cannot be nourished by a corporeal substance but it is with Fire as it is with all at least most other natural Creatures which require Respiration as well as Perception for Fire requires Air as well as Animals do By Respiration I do not mean onely that animal respiration which in Man and other animal Creatures is performed by the lungs but a dividing and uniting or separating and joyning of parts from and to parts as of the exterior from and to the interior and of the interior from and to the exterior so that when some parts issue others do enter And thus by the name of Respiration I understand a kind of Reception of forreign Matter and emission of some of their own as for example in Animals I mean not onely the respiration performed by the lungs but also the reception of food and of other matter entering through some proper organs and pores of their bodies and the discharging of some other matter the sameway and if this be so as surely it is then all or most Creatures in Nature have some kind of Respiration or Reciprocal breathing that is Attraction and Expiration receiving of nourishment and evacuation or a reception of some forreign parts and a discharging and venting of some of their own But yet it is not necessary that all the matter of Respiration in all Creatures should be Air for every sort of Creatures nay every particular has such a matter of Respiration as is proper both
to the nature of its figure and proper for each sort of respiration Besides although Air may be a fit substance for Respiration to Fire and to some other Creatures yet I cannot believe that the sole agitation of Air is the cause of Fire no more then it can be called the cause of Man for if this were so then Houses that are made of Wood or cover'd with Straw would never fail to be set on fire by the agitation of the Air. Neither is it requisite that all Respirations in all Creatures should be either hot or cold moist or dry by reason there are many different sorts of Respiration acording to the nature and propriety of every Creature whereof some may be hot some cold some hot and dry some cold and dry some hot and moist some cold and moist c. and in Animals at least in Mankind I observe that the respiration performed by the help of their lungs is an attraction of some refrigerating air and an emission of some warm vapour What other Creatures respirations may be I leave for others to inquire 5. Of Pores AS I have mentioned in my former Discourse that I do verily believe all or most natural Creatures have some certain kind of respiration so do I also find it most probable that all or most natural Creatures have Pores not empty Pores for there can be no Vacuum in Nature but such passages as serve for respiration which respiration is some kind of receiving and discharging of such matter as is proper to the nature of every Creature And thus the several Organs of Animal Creatures are for the most part imployed as great large pores for Nature being in a perpetual motion is always dissolving and composing changing and ordering her self-moving parts as she pleases But it is well to be observed that there is difference between Perception and Respiration for Perception is onely an action of Figuring or Patterning when as the Rational and Sensitive Motions do figure or pattern out something but Respiration is an action of drawing sucking breathing in or receiving any ways outward parts and of venting discharging or sending forth inward parts Next although there may be Pores in most natural Creatures by reason that all or most have some kind of Respiration yet Nature hath more ways of dividing and uniting of parts or of ingress and egress then the way of drawing in and sending forth by Pores for Nature is so full of variety that not any particular corporeal figurative motion can be said the prime or fundamental unless it be self-motion the Architect and Creator of all figures Wherefore as the Globular figure is not the prime or fundamental of all other figures so neither can Respiration be called the prime or fundamental motion for as I said Nature has more ways then one and there are also retentive Motions in Nature which are neither dividing nor composing but keeping or holding together 6. Of the Effluvium's of the Loadstone IT is the opinion of some that the Magnetical Effluviums do not proceed intrinsecally from the stone but are certain extrinsecal particles which approaching to the stone and finding congruous pores and inlets therein are channelled through it and having acquired a motion thereby do continue their current so far till being repulsed by the ambient air they recoil again and return into a vortical motion and so continue their revolution for ever through the body of the Magnet But if this were so then all porous bodies would have the same Magnetical Effluviums especially a Char-coal which they say is full of deep pores besides I can hardly believe that any Microscope is able to shew how those flowing Atomes enter and issue and make such a vortical motion as they imagine Concerning the argument drawn from the experiment that a Magnet being made red hot in the fire not onely amits the Magnetical Vigor it had before but acquires a new one doth not evince or prove that the Magnetical Effluviums are not innate or inherent in the stone for fire may over-power them so as we cannot perceive their vigour or force the motions of the Fire being too strong for the motions of the Loadstone but yet it doth not follow hence that those motions of the Loadstone are lost because they are not perceived or that afterwards when by cooling the Loadstone they may be perceived again they are not the same motions but new ones no more then when a man doth not move his hand the motion of it can be said lost or annihilated But say they If the Polary direction of the Stone should be thought to proceed intrinsecally from the Stone it were as much as to put a Soul or Intelligence into the Stone which must turn it about as Angels are feigned to do Celestial Orbs. To which I answer That although the turning of the Celestial Orbs by Angels may be a figment yet that there is a soul and intelligence in the Loadstone is as true as that there is a soul in Man I will not say that the Loadstone has a spiritual or immaterial soul but a corporeal or material one to wit such a soul as is a particle of the soul of Nature that is of Rational Matter which moves in the Loadstone according to the propriety and nature of its figure Lastly as for their argument concluding from the different effluviums of other as for example electrical and odoriferous bodies c. as Camphire and the like whose expirations they say fly away into the open air and never make any return again to the body from whence they proceeded I cannot believe this to be so for if odoriferous bodies should effluviate and waste after that manner then all strong odoriferous bodies would be of no continuance for where there are great expences there must of neeessity follow a sudden waste but the contrary is sufficiently known by experience Wherefore it is more probable that the Effluviums of the Loadstone as they call them or the disponent and directive faculty of turning it self towards the North is intrinsecally inherent in the stone it self and is nothing else but the interior natural sensitive and rational corporeal motions proper to its figure as I have more at large declared in my Philosophical Letters and Philosophical Opinions then that a stream of exterior Atomes by beating upon the stone should turn it to and fro until they have laid it in such a position 7. Of the Stings of Nettles and Bees I Cannot approve the opinion of those who believe that the swelling burning and smarting pain caused by the stinging of Nettles and Bees doth proceed from a poysonous juice that is contained within the points of Nettles or stings of Bees for it is commonly known that Nettles when young are often-times eaten in Sallets and minced into Broths nay when they are at their full growth good-huswifes use to lay their Cream-cheeses in great Nettles whereas if there were any poyson in them the interior
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
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
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
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
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
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
But when the figurative motions in particular productions do not move after this ordinary way as in the productions of Monsters it is called a praeter-natural or irregular production proceeding from the irregularity of motions not praeternatural in respect to general Nature but in respect to the proper and particular nature of the figure And in this regard I call Artifical effects Hermaphroditical that is partly Natural and partly Artificial Natural because Art cannot produce any thing without natural matter nor without the assistance of natural motions but artificial because it works not after the way of natural productions for Art is like an emulating Ape and will produce such figures as Nature produces but it doth not nor cannot go the same way to work as Nature doth for Natures ways are more subtil and mysterious then that Art or any one particular Creature should know much less trace them and this is the true construction of my sense concerning natural and artificial production whereby it is manifest that I am not of the opinion of that Experimental Writer who thinks it no improbability to say that all natural effects may be called artificial nay that Nature her self may be called the Art of God for Art is as much inferior to Nature as a part is inferior to the whole and all Artificial Effects are Irregular in comparison to Natural wherefore to say God or Nature works Artificially would be as much as to say they work irregularly 3. Of Natural Matter and Motion IAm of that Learned Authors mind who counts those but narrow souls and not worthy the name of Philosophers that think any body can be too great or too vast as also too little in its natural dimensions and that Nature is stinted at an atome and brought to a non-plus of her sub-divisions for truly if there cannot be Extreams in Infinite there can also be none in Nature and consequently there can neither be smallest nor biggest strongest nor weakest hardest nor softest swiftest nor slowest c. in Nature by reason Nature is Infinite in her actions as well as in her parts and hath no set bounds or limits and therefore the Corpuscularian or Atomical Writers which do reduce the parts of Nature to one certain and proportioned Atome beyond which they imagine Nature cannot go because their brain or particular finite reason cannot reach further are much deceived in their arguments and commit a fallacy in concluding the finiteness and limitation of Nature from the narrowness of their rational Conceptions Nevertheless although Natures actions and parts are Infinite considered in general yet my opinion is that Nature never doth actually run into Infinite in her particular actions and parts for as there are infinite divisions so there are also infinite compositions in Nature and as there are infinite degrees of hardness slowness and thickness so there are also infinite degrees of softness swiftness thinness c. so that every particular motion or action of Nature is ballanced and poised by its opposite which hinders a running into infinite in natures particulars and causes a variety of natural figures for although Infinite Matter in it self and its own essence is simple and homogeneous as the learned call it or of the same kind and nature and consequently is at peace with it self yet there is a perpetual opposition and war between the parts of nature where one sometimes gets the better of the other and overpowers it either by force or slight and is the occasion of its dissolution into some other figure but there 's no part so powerful as to reduce any thing into nothing or to destroy it totally from being Matter nay not Nature her self has such a power but God alone who as he has made Nature so he may destroy her for although Nature has an Infinite power yet she is not omnipotent but her power is a natural infinite power when as Omnipotency is an attribute onely belonging to God neither hath she a divine but a natural infinite knowledg by which it is evident that I do not ascribe divine attributes to Nature which were to make her a God nor detract from Nature that which properly belongs to her for Nature being infinite in body and parts it would be absurd to confine her to a finite power and knowledg By parts I understand not onely the infinite figures and fizes but also the infinite actions of Nature and I am of Des Cartes opinion that the parts of Matter may be made bigger or less by addition or subtraction of other parts but I cannot yield to him when he says that Motion may be swifter and slower by addition given to the movent by other contiguous bodies more swiftly moving or by subduction of it by bodies slower moved and that Motion may be transferred out of one body into another for Motion cannot be conceived much less subsist without Matter and if Motion should be transferred or added to some other body Matter must be added or transferred also Neither doth the addition of some parts of Matter add always exterior local motion to the body it is joyned to but they retain the motion proper to their own figure and nature as for example if a stone be added to an animal it will rather hinder then help its exterior motions But I must refer the Reader to my other Philosophical Works in which I have discoursed more of this subject 4. Nature cannot be known by any of her Parts IAm not of Plinius's Opinion That Nature in her whole power is never more wholly seen then in her smallest Works For how can Nature be seen in a part when as Infinite cannot be known neither in nor by any Part much less a small Part Nay were Nature a great finite body it could not be perceived intirely in and by a small or minute part no more then a humane eye can see all this world Celestial and Terestial at once 'T is true Reason being joyned to Sense may make a better discovery then if they were separated but as the humane optick sense is not capable to perceive the greatest so neither the smallest creatures exterior much less their interior parts although assisted by Art for Art as I mentioned before many times deludes rather then informs making hermaphroditical figures and Nature has more variety and curiosity in the several forms and figurative corporeal motions of one of the smallest creatures then the most observing and clearest optick sense can perceive But mistake me not I do not say that Arts are not profitable but that they are not truly and thorowly intelligent or knowing of all Natures works for several Arts are like several other Creatures which have their particular natures faculties and proprieties beyond which they cannot go and one Creature is not able to comprehend or know all other Creatures no not any one single Creature perfectly which ifso then none can inform what it doth not know Nay not onely one particular Creature is not
able to know it but not one particular kind or sort of Creatures as for example all Man-kind that ever have liv'd or are at present living in this world could never find out the truth of Nature even in the least of her parts nay not in themselves For what man is he that knows the figurative corporeal motions which make him to be such a Creature as Man or that make any part of him and what Man or Art can inform us truly of the figurative motions that make the nature of blood flesh bones c. or can give a reason why the heart is triangular and the head spherical and so for every differently-shaped part of his body I will not say but that Man may guess at it but not infallibly know it by any Art wherefore Reason will more truly discover so much of Nature as is discoverable to one kind or fort of Creatures then Art can do for Art must attend Reason as the chief Mistris of Information which in time may make her a more prudent and profitable servant then she is for in this age she is become rather vain then profitable striving to act beyond her power as I do undertake to write beyond my experience for which 't is probable Artists will condemn me but if I err I ask their pardon and pray them to consider the Nature of our sex which makes us for the most part obstinate and wilful in our opinions and most commonly impertinently foolish And if the Art of Micrography can but find out the figurative corporeal motions that make or cause us to be thus it will be an Art of great same for by that Artists may come to discover more hidden causes and effects but yet I doubt they will hardly find out the interior nature of our fex by the exterior form of their faces or countenances although very curious and full of variety of several beauties nay I dare on the contrary say had a young beautiful Lady such a face as the Microscope expresses she would not onely have no lovers bnt be rather a Monster of Art then a picture of Nature and have an aversion at least a dislike to her own exterior figure and shape and perchance if a Lowse or Flea or such like insect should look through a Microscope it would be as much affrighted with its own exterior figure as a young beautiful Lady when she appears ill-favoured by Art I do not say this as if Optick Glasses could not present the true figure of an Original for if they do not exceed the compass of natural dimensions they may but when they endeavour to go beyond them and do more then Nature has done they rather present monstrous then truly natural figures Wherefore those in my opinion are the best Artists that keep nearest to Natures Rules and endeavour not to know more then what is possible for a finite part or creature to know for surely there is no better way to be rightly and truly informed of Natures works then by studying Natures corporeal figurative motions by the means of which study they will practise Arts as far as Art is able to be practised more easily and successfully then they will do without it But to conclude this discourse some parts of Nature are more indued with regular reason then others which is the cause that some creatures of one and the same fort or kind as for example Mankind are more wife and ingenious then others and therefore it is not art but regular sense and reason that makes some more knowing and some more wife and ingenious then others and the irregular motions of sense and reason that make some more ignorant or more extravagant in their opinions then others 5. Art cannot introduce new forms in Nature SOme account it a great honour That the Indulgent Creator although he gives not to Natural Creatures the power to produce one atome of matter yet allows them the power to introduce so many forms which Philosophers teach to be nobler then matter and to work such changes amongst Creatures that if Adam was now alive and should survelgh the great variety of mans production that are to be found in the shops of Artificers the Laboratories of Chymists and other well furnished Magazines of Art he would admire to see what a new world it were Where first I do not understand how man or any other creature should have the power of making or introducing new forms if those forms were not already in Nature for no Creature by any Art whatsoever is able to produce a new form no more then he can make an atome of new matter by reason the power lies in Nature and the God of Nature not in any of her Creatures and if Art may or can work changes amongst some fellow-creatures they are but natural by reason Nature is in a perpetual Motion and in some parts in a perpetual transformation Next as for the Question Whether forms be more noble then the matter my opinion is that this can with no more ground of truth be affirmed then that the effect is nobler then its cause and if any creature should have power to make forms which are more noble then matter it self then certainly that creature would be above Nature and a creator rather then a creature Besides form cannot be created without matter nor matter without form for form is no thing subsisting by it self without matter but matter and form make but one body and therefore he that introduces a new form must also introduce a new matter and though Art changes forms yet it cannot be said to introduce a new form for forms are and have been eternally in Nature as well as Matter so that nothing is created anew which never was in Nature before 'T is true if Adam were alive now he might see more variety but not more Truth for there are no more kinds and sorts of natural Creatures then there were at his time though never more metamorphosed or rather I may say disfigured unnatural and hermaphroditical issues then there are now which if they should make a new world by the Architecture of Art it would be a very monstrus one But I am sure art will never do it for the world is still as it was and new discoveries by Arts or the deaths and births of Creatures will not make a new world nor destroy the old no more then the dissolving and composing of several parts will make new Matter for although Nature delights in variety yet she is constant in her ground-works and it is a great error in man to study more the exterior faces and countenances of things then their interior natural figurative motions which error must undoubtedly cause great mistakes in so much as mans rules will be false compared to the true Principles of Nature for it is a false Maxime to believe that if some Creatures have power over others they have also power over Nature it might as well be believed that a
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
be annihilated and generated anew If they answer not I am of their opinion but if they say they are annihilated and generated anew then I would fain know who is their Generator and Annihilator for nothing can generate and annihilate it self And if they say God I answer It is not probable that God should have made any thing imperfect especially in the production of Nature for if there be things created anew which never were before in Nature it argues that Nature was not perfect at first because of a new addition of so many Creatures or if any thing could be annihilated in Nature it would likewise argue an imperfection in Nature viz. that Nature was perfecter before those things were annihilated And thus it would inferr as if God had not power either to have made Nature perfect at first or that God wanted work and was forced to create and annihilate every moment for certainly the work of creation and annihilation is a divine action and belongs onely to God Lastly concerning the functions and offices which the animal spirits perform in animal or at least humane bodies by their several motions and migrations from the brain through the spinal marrow nerves tendons fibres into all the parts of the body and their return to the brain I have declared my opinion thereof twelve years since in my work of Poetical Fancies which then came out the first time and I thought it not unfit to insert here out of the same book these following lines both that my meaning may be the better understood and that they may witness I have been of that opinion so many years ago The reason why Thoughts are made in the Head Each Sinew is a small and slender string Which all the Senses to the body bring And they like pipes or gutters hollow be Where animal spirits run continually Though small yet they such matter do contain As in the skull doth lie which we call brain Which makes if any one do strike the heel That sense we quickly in the brain do feel It is not sympathy but all one thing Which causes us to think and pain doth bring For had the heel such quantity of brain As doth the head and scull therein contain Then would such thoughts as in the brain dwell high Descend into our heels and there they 'ld lie Insinews small brain scattered lies about It wants both room and quantity no doubt For did a sinew so much brain but hold Or had so large a skin it to infold As has the scull then might the toe or knee Had they an optick nerve both hear and see Had sinews room Fancy therein to breed Copies of Verse might from the heel proceed And again of the motion of the Blood Some by their industry and Learning found That all the blood like to the Sea turns round From two great arteries it doth begin Runs through all veins and so comes back again The muscles like the tides do ebb and flow According as the several spirits go The sinews as small pipes come from the head And they are all about the body spread Through which the animal spirits are convey'd To every member as the pipes are laid And from those sinew-pipes each sense doth take Of those pure spirits as they us do make 9. Of the Doctrine of the Scepticks concerning the Knowledg of Nature WHen Scepticks endeavour to prove that not any thing in Nature can be truely and thorowly known they are in my opinion in the right way as far as their meaning is that not any particular Creature can know the Infinite parts of Nature for Nature having both a divideable and composeable sense and reason causes ignorance as well as knowledg amongst Particulars But if their opinion be that there is no true knowledg at all found amongst the parts of Nature then surely their doctrine is not onely unprofitable but dangerous as endeavouring to overthrow all useful and profitable knowledg The truth is that Nature being not onely divideable but also composeable in her parts it cannot be absolutely affirmed that there is either a total ignorance or a universal knowledg in Nature so as one finite part should know perfectly all other parts of Nature but as there is an ignorance amongst Particulars caused by the division of Natures parts so there is also a knowledg amongst them caused by the composition and union of her parts Neither can any ignorance be attributed to Infinite Nature by reason she being a body comprehending so many parts of her own in a firm bond and indissoluble union so as no part can separate it self from her must of necessity have also an Infinite wisdom and knowledg to govern her Infinite parts And therefore it is best in my judgment for Scepticks and Dogmatists to agree in their different opinions and whereas now they express their wit by division to shew their wisdom by composition for thus they will make an harmonious consort and union in the truth of Nature where otherwise their disagreement will cause perpetual quarrels and disputes both in Divinity and Philosophy to the prejudice and ruine of Church and Schools which disagreement proceeds meerly from self-love For every Man being a part of Nature which is self-loving as well as self-moving would fain be at least appear wiser then his fellow-creatures But the Omnipotent Creator has ordered Nature so wisely as to divide not onely her power but also her wisdom into parts which is the reason that she is not Omnipotent being divideable and composeable When as God can neither be divided nor composed but is one simple and individual incomprehensible being without any composition of parts for God is not material 10. Of Natural Sense and Reason THose Authors which confess That vulgar Reason is no better then a more refined Imagination and that both Reason Fancy and the Senses are influenced by the bodies temperament and like the Index of a Clock are moved by the inward springs and wheels of the corporeal Machine seem in my opinion to confirm that natural sense and reason is corporeal although they do it in an obscure way and with intricate arguments But truly do what they can yet they must prove reason by reason for irrational discourse cannot make proofs and arguments to evince the truth of Nature But first it must be proved what Sense and Reason is whether Divine or Natural Corporeal or Immaterial Those that believe natural sense and reason to be immaterial are in my opinion in a great error because Nature is purely corporeal as I have declared before And those which affirm that our understanding will and reason are in some manner like to God's shall never gain my assent for if there be so great a difference between God's Understanding Will and Decree and between Natures as no comparison at all can be made betwixt them much more is there between a part of Nature viz. Man and the Omnipotent and Incomprehensible God for there
is an Infinite difference between Divine Attributes and Natural Properties wherefore to similize our Reason Will Understanding Faculties Pasions and Figures c. to God is too high a presumption and in some manner a blasphemy Nevertheless although our natural reason and faculties are not like to divine attributes yet our natural rational perceptions are not always delusions and therefore it is certain that Natures knowing parts both sensitive and rational do believe a God that is some Being above Nature But many Writers endeavour rather to make divisions in Religion then promote the honour and worship of God by a mutual and united agreement which I confess is an irregularity and imperfection in some parts of Nature and argues that Nature is not so perfect but she has some faults and infirmities otherwise she would be a God which she is not 11. Of a General Knowledg and Worship of God given him by all Natural Creatures IT is not the sight of the beauteous frame of this world as some do conceive that makes men believe and admire God but the knowledg of the existence of God is natural and there 's no part of Nature but believes a God for certainly were there not any optick sense in Nature yet God would be the God of Nature and be worshiped and adored by her Creatures which are her parts for it is irreligious to say God should want admiration and adoration for want of an eye or any other of the animal or humane organs surely Nature has more ways then five to express and declare God's Omnipotency It is Infinite sense and reason that doth worship and adore God and the several perceptions of this sense and reason know there is a God that ought to be worshipped and adored and not onely Ears or Eyes or the like exterior organs of man Neither is it man alone but all Creatures that do acknowledg God for although God cannot be perfectly known what he is in his Essence yet he may be known in as much as Nature can know of him But since Nature is dividable in her parts each part has but a particular knowledg of God which is the cause of several Religions and several opinions in those Religions and Nature being also composeable it causes a conformity and union of those Opinions and Religions in the fundamental knowledg which is the existence of God Wherefore that which makes a general and united knowledg of the Existence of God is that Nature is intire in her self as having but one body and therefore all her parts which are of that body have also one knowledg of God for though the parts be different in the Worship of God yet they have not a different belief of the Existence of God not that God can be perfectly known either by Nature or any of her parts for God is Incomprehensible and above Nature but in as much as can be known to wit his Being and that he is All-powerful and that not any thing can be compared or likened to him for he is beyond all draught and likeness as being an Eternal Infinite Omnipotent Incorporeal Individual Immovable Being And thus it is not one part or creature viewing another that causes either the knowledg or admiration of God but the soul and life of Nature which are her sensitive and rational parts and Nature being the Eternal servant and Worshipper of God God hath been also eternally worshipped and adored for surely God's Adoration and Worship has no beginning in time neither could God be worshipped and adored by himself so as that one part of him should adore and worship another for God is an individual and simple Being not composed of parts and therefore as it is impossible for me to believe that there is no general Worship and Adoration of God so it is impossible also to believe that God has not been adored and worshipped from all Eternity and that Nature is not Eternal for although God is the Cause of Nature and Nature the Effect of God yet she may be Eternal however there being nothing impossible to be effected by God but he as an Eternal Cause is able to produce an Eternal Effect for although it is against the rules of Logick yet it is not above the power of God 12. Of a Particular Worship of God given him by those that are his chosen and elect People NAtural Philosophy is the chief of all sorts of knowledges for she is a Guide not onely to other Sciences and all sorts of Arts but even to divine knowledg it self for she teaches that there is a Being above Nature which is God the Author and Master of Nature whom all Creatures know and adore But to adore God after a particular manner according to his special Will and Command requires his Particular Grace and Divine Instructions in a supernatural manner or way which none but the chosen Creatures of God do know at least believe nor none but the sacred Church ought to explain and interpret And the proof that all men are not of the number of those elect and chosen people of God is that there can be but one True Religion and that yet there are so many several and different opinions in that Religion wherefore the Truth can onely be found in some which are those that serve God truly according to his special Will and Command both in believing and acting that which he has been pleased to reveal and command in his holy Word And I pray God of his infinite mercy to give me Grace that I may be one of them which I doubt not but I shall as long as I follow the Instruction of our blessed Church in which I have been educated 'T is true many persons are much troubled concerning Free-will and Predestination complaining that the Christian Church is so divided about this Article as they will never agree in one united belief concerning that point which is the cause of the trouble of so many Consciences nay in some even to despair But I do verily believe that if man do but love God from his soul and with all his power and pray for his saving Graces and offend not any Creature when offences can or may be avoided and follow the onely Instructions of the sacred Church not endeavouring to interpret the Word of God after his own fancy and vain imagination but praying zealously believing undoubtedly and living virtuously and piously he can hardly fall into despair unless he be disposed and inclined towards it through the irregularities of Nature so as he cannot avoid it But I most humbly thank the Omnipotent God that my Conscience is in peace and tranquility beseeching him of his mercy to give to all men the like 13. Of the Knowledg of Man SOme Philosophical Writers discourse much concerning the knowledg of Man and the ignorance of all other Creatures but I have sufficiently expressed my opinion hereof not onely in this but in my other Philosophical Works to wit that I believe other
Creatures have as much knowledg as Man and Man as much in his kind as any other particular Creature in its kind But their knowledges being different by reason of their different natures and figures it causes an ignorance of each others knowledg nay the knowledg of other Creatures many times gives information to Man As for example the Egyptians are informed how high the River Nilus will rise by the Crocodil's building her nest higher or lower which shews that those Creatures fore-see or fore-know more then Man can do also many Birds fore-know the rising of a Tempest and shelter themselves before it comes the like examples might be given of several other sorts of Animals whose knowledg proceeds either from some sensitive perceptions or from rational observations or from both and if there be such a difference in the rational and sensitive knowledg of one kind of Creatures to wit Animals much more in all other kinds as Vegetables Minerals Elements and so in all Natures Works Wherefore he that will say there is no knowledg but in Man at least in Animal kind doth in my opinion say more then ever he will be able to prove nay the contrary is so evident as it is without all dispute But Man out of self-love and conceited pride because he thinks himself the chief of all Creatures and that all the World is made for his sake doth also imagine that all other Creatures are ignorant dull stupid senseless and irrational and he onely wise knowing and understanding And upon this ground some believe that Man is bound and decreed to pray to God for all other Creatures as being not capable to pray for themselves like as a Minister is bound to pray for his Flock But really if the Pastor should onely pray and his Sheep not but they did continue in their sins I doubt his Prayers would be of little effect and therefore it is well if their Prayers and Petitions be joyned together The like may be said of all other Creatures for the single knowledg and devotion of Man-kind cannot benefit other Creatures if they be ignorant and not capable to know admire adore and worship God themselves And thus no man with all the force of Logick will ever be able to prove that he is either the chief above all other Creatures or that he onely knows and worships God and no natural Creature else for it is without dispute that other Creatures in their kinds are as knowing and wise as Man is in his kind 14. A Natural Philosopher cannot be an Atheist IWonder how some of our learned Writers can imagine that those who study Reason and Philosophy should make them their Vouchees of Licentious practices and their secret scorn of Religion and should account it a piece of wit and gallantry to be an Atheist and of atheism to be a Philosopher considering that Reason and Philosophy is the onely way that brings and leads us to the natural knowledg of God for it would be as much absurdity to say Reason and Philosophy induce Atheism as to say Reason is not Reason for Reason is the most knowing and wisest part of Nature and the chief knowledg of Nature is to know there is a God wherefore those that do argue in such a manner argue without reason and by calling others weak heads and fools prove themselves Irrational But I perceive their supposition is built upon a false ground for they are of opinion That the Exploding of Immaterial substances and the unbounded prerogative of Matter must needs infer Atheism which whether it do not shew a weaker head then those have that believe no Immaterial substances in Nature Rational men may judg For by this it is evident that they make Immaterial substances to be Gods by reason they conclude that he who believes no Immaterial substance in Nature is an Atheist And thus by proving others Atheists they commit Blasphemy themselves for he that makes a God of a Creature sins as much if not more then he who believes no God at all And as for the unbounded prerogative of Matter I see no reason why men should exclaim against it for why should Immaterial substances have more prerogative then Material Truly I may upon the same ground conclude the prerogative of Matter as well as they do the prerogative of Spirits for both are but Creatures and in that case one has no more prerogative then the other for God could make a Material Being to move it self as well as a Material Nothing Nevertheless although Matter is self-moving yet it has not a God-like omnipotent power nor any divine attributes but an Infinite Natural power that is a power to produce infinite effects in her own self by infinite changes of Motions Neither doth it argue that Nature is above God or at least God-like for I do not say that Nature has her self-moving power of her self or by chance but that it comes from God the Author of Nature which proves that God must needs be above Nature although Nature is Infinite and Eternal for these proprieties do not derogate any thing from the Attributes of God by reason Nature is naturally Infinite which is Infinite in quantity and parts but God is a Spiritual Supernatural and Incomprehensible Infinite and as for the Eternity of Nature it is more probable to Regular Reason then that Nature should have any beginning for all beginning supposes time but in God is no time and therefore neither beginning nor ending neither in himself nor in his actions for if God be from all Eternity his actions are so too the chief of which is the production or creation of Nature Thus natural reason may conceive that Nature is the Eternal servant of God but how it was produced from all Eternity no particular or finite creature is able to imagine by reason that not onely God but also Nature is Infinite and a finite Creature can have no Idea or conception of Infinite 15. Of the Rational Soul of Man OF all the opinions concerning the Natural Soul of Man I like that best which affirms the Soul to be a self-moving substance but yet I will add a Material self-moving substance for the Soul of Man is part of the Soul of Nature and the Soul of Nature is Material I mean onely the Natural not the Divine Soul of Man which I leave to the Church And this natural Soul otherwise called Reason is nothing else but corporeal natural self-motion or a particle of the purest most subtil and active part of Matter which I call animate which animate Matter is the Life and Soul of Nature and consequently of Man and all other Creatures For we cannot in Reason conceive that Man should be the onely Creature that partakes of this soul of Nature and that all the rest of Natures parts or most of them should be soul-less or which is all one irrational although they are commonly called nay believed to be such Truly if all other Creatures cannot
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
who pretend to have searched the depth of Nature and disclosed her secrets it causes great admiration in any body and may well serve for an argument to confirm the variety and difference of sensitive and rational knowledg and the ignorance amongst natural parts for if Creatures of the same particular kind as men have so many different Perceptions what may there be in all Nature But Infinite Nature is wise and will not have that one part of hers should know more then its particular nature requires and she taking delight in variety orders her works accordingly 16. Whether Animal Parts separated from their Bodies have Life SOme do question Whether those Parts that are separated from animal Bodies do retain life But my opinion is That all parts of Nature have life each according to the propriety of its figure and that all parts of an animal have animal life and motion as long as they continue parts of the animal body but if they be separated from the body to which they did belong although they retain life yet they do not retain animal life because their natural motions are changed to some other figure when they are separated so that the parts which before had animal life and motion have then such a kind of life and motion as is proper and natural to the figure into which they are changed or transformed But some separated parts of some Creatures retain longer the life of that composed figure whose parts they were then others according as the dissolving and transforming motions are slower or quicker as for example in some Vegetables some Trees if their boughs armes or branches be lopt or cut from a lively stock those boughs or branches will many times remain lively according to the nature of the figure whose parts they were for a good while nay if they be set or planted they will grow into the same figure as the stock was or if joyned into another stock they will be partly of the nature of the stock which they did proceed from and partly of the nature of the stock into which they were ingrafted But yet I do not perceive that animal kind can do the like for I make a question whether a man's arm if cut off from his body and set to another mans body would grow and keep its natural form and figure so as to continue an arm and to receive nourishment from that body it is joyned to nevertheless I will not eagerly contradict it considering that Nature is very different and various both in her productions and nourishments nay so various as will puzzle if not confound the wisest part or Creature of Nature to find them out 17. Of the Splene COncerning the splene of an animal Creature whether it may artificially be cut out and the body closed up again without destruction of the animal figure as some do probably conceive I am not so good an artist as to give a solid judgment thereof onely this I can say that not all the parts of an animal body are equally necessary for life but some are convenient more then necessary Neither do I perfectly know whether the Splene be one of the prime or principal vital parts for although all parts have life yet some in some particular Creatures are so necessary for the preservation of life as they cannot be spared whereas others have no such relation to the life of an Animal but it may subsist without them And thus although some parts may be separated for some time yet they cannot continue so without a total dissolution of the animal figure but both the severed and the remaining parts change from their nature if not at all times suddenly yet at last And as for the spleen although the separation should not be so great a loss as the pain in loosing it yet some persons will rather lose their lives with ease then endure great pain to save them but the question is if a man was willing to endure the pain whether he would not die of the wound for no creature can assure another of its life in such a case neither can any one be assured of his own for there is no assurance in the case of life and death I mean such a life as is proper to such a Creature for properly there is no such thing in Nature as death but what is named death is onely a change from the dissolution of some certain figure to the composition of another 18. Of Anatomy I Am not of the opinion of those who believe that Anatomifts could gain much more by dissecting of living then of dead bodies by reason the corporeal figurative motions that maintain life and nourish every part of the body are not at all perceptible by the exterior Optick sense unless it be more perceiving and subtiler then the humane optick sense is for although the exterior grosser parts be visible yet the interior corporeal motions in those parts are not visible wherefore the dissecting of a living Creature can no more inform one of the natural motions of that figure then one can by the observing of an egg be it never so exact perceive the corporeal figurative motions that produce or make the figure of a Chicken Neither can artificial optick glasses give any advantage to it for Nature is so subtil obscure and various as not any sort or kind of Creatures can trace or know her ways I will not say but her parts may in their several Perceptions know as much as can be known for some parts may know and be known of others and so the infinite body may have an infinite information and knowledg but no particular Creature no not one kind or sort of Creatures can have a perfect knowledg of another particular Creature but it must content it self with an imperfect knowledg which is a knowledg in Parts Wherefore it is as improbable for humane sight to perceive the interior corporeal figurative motions of the parts of an animal body by Anatomy as it is for a Micrographer to know the interior parts of a figure by viewing the exterior for there are numerous corporeal figures or figurative motions of one particular Creature which lie one within another and most commonly the interior are quite different from the exterior as for example the outward parts of a mans body are not like his inward parts for his brain stomack liver lungs splene midriff heart guts c. are of different figures and one part is not another part no not of the like nature or constitution neither hath a man a face on the inside of his head and so of the rest of his parts for every part has besides its exterior interior figure and motions which are not perceptible by our exterior senses Nevertheless there is some remedy to supply this sensitive ignorance by the perception of Reason for where sense fails reason many times informs it being a more clear and subtile perception then sense is I say many times because reason
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
the fuel alters by its own motion and the fire doth but act occasionally and so do Chymical spirits or extracts which may cause a separation and alter some bodies as readily as fire doth for they are a certain kind of fire to wit such as is called a dead or liquid fire for a flaming fire although it be fluid yet it is not liquid The same may be said of the Antimonial-Cup For it is not probable to sense and reason there should be certain invisible little bodies that pass out of the Cup into the liquor and cause such effects no more then there are magnetical effluviums issuing out of the Load-stone towards Iron there being many causes which neither impart nor lose any thing in the production of their effects but the liquor that is within the Antimonial Cup does imitate the corporeal figurative motions of the Cup and so produces the same effects as are proper to Antimony upon other bodies or parts of Nature In the same manner does the Blood-stone stop bleeding not by imparting invisible Atomes or Rays to the affected parts or else if it were long worn about ones body it would be wasted at least alter its proper figure and vertue but by being imitated by the corporeal figurative motions of the distempered parts Thus many other examples could be alledged to prove that natural motions work such or such effects within their own parts without receiving any from without that is by imitation and not by reception of Motion By which it is evident that properly there is no passive or suffering body in Nature except it be the inanimate part of Matter which in its own nature is moveless or destitute of motion and is carried along with and by the animate parts of Matter However although inanimate Matter has no motion inherent in it self as it is inanimate yet it is so closely mixt with the animate parts that it cannot be considered without motion much less be separable from it and therefore although it acts not of it self yet it acts by vertue of the animate parts of Matter Next I cannot conceive what some Chymists mean when they call those Principles or Elements which they say composed bodies consist of distinct substances for though they may be of different figures yet they are not of different substances because there is but one onely substance in Nature which is Matter whose several actions cause all the variety in Nature But if all the parts of Natural bodies should be called Principles or Elements then there would be infinite Principles in Nature which is impossible because there can be no more but one principle which is self-moving Matter and although several Creatures by the help of fire may be reduced or dissolved into several different particles yet those particles are not principles much less simple bodies or else we might say as well that ashes are a principle of Wood Neither are they created anew because they are of another form or figure then when composed into one concrete body for there 's nothing that is material which is not pre-existent in Nature no nor figure motion or the like all being material although not always subject to our humane sensitive perception for the variation of the corporeal figurative motions blindeth our particular senses that we cannot perceive them they being too subtile to be discerned either by Art or humane perception The truth is if we could see the corporeal figurative motions of natural creatures and the association and division of all their parts we should soon find out the causes which make them to be such or such particular natural effects but Nature is too wise to be so easily known by her particulars Wherefore Chymists need not think they can create any thing anew for they cannot challenge to themselves a divine power neither can there be any such thing as a new Creation in Nature no not of an Atome Nor can they annihilate any thing they 〈◊〉 sooner waste their Estates then reduce the least particle of Matter into nothing and though they make waste of some parts of natural bodies yet those are but changes into other figures there being a perpetual inspiration and expiration that is composition and division of parts but composition is not a new Creation nor division an annihilation and though they produce new forms as they imagine yet those forms though they be new to them are not new in Nature for all that is material has been existent in Nature from all Eternity so that the combination of parts cannot produce anything that is not already in Nature Indeed the generation of new figures seems to me much like the generation of new motions which would put God to a perpetual Creation and argue that he was not able to make Nature or Matter perfect at first or that he wanted imployment But say they it is not Matter that is created anew but onely figures or forms I answer If any one can shew me a figure without Matter I shall be willing to believe it but I am confident Nature cannot do that much less Art which is but a particular effect for as Matter cannot be without Figure so neither can Figure be without Matter no more then body without parts or parts without body and if so no figure or form can be created without Matter there being no such thing as a substanceless form Chymists should but consider their own particular persons as whether they were generated anew or had been in Nature before they were got of their Parents if they had not been pre-existent in Nature they would not be natural but supernatural Creatures because they would not subsist of the same matter as other Creatures do Truly Matter being Infinite how some new material creatures could be created without some parts of this Infinite Matter is not conceivable by humane sense and reason for infinite admits of no addition but if there could be an addition it would presuppose an annihilation so that at the same time when one part is annihilating or perishing another must succeed by a new creation which is a meer Paradox But that which puzles me most is how those substances which they call Tria Prima and principles of natural things can be generated anew for if the principles be generated anew the effects must be so too and since they according to their supposition are Catholick or Universal principles all natural effects must have their origine from them and be like their principles created continually anew which how it be possible without the destruction of Nature is beyond my reason to conceive Some endeavour to prove by their Artificial Experiments that they have and can produce such things out of natural bodies which never were pre-existent in them as for example Glass out of Vegetables without any addition of forreign parts onely by the help of fire To which I answer That in my opinion the same Glass was as much pre-existent in the matter of those
Vegetables and the Fire and in the power of their corporeal figurative motions as any other figure whatsoever otherwise it would never have been produced nay not onely Glass but millions of other figures might be obtained from those parts they being subject to infinite changes for the actions of self-moving Matter are so infinitely various that according to the mixture or composition and division of parts they can produce what figures they please not by a new Creation but only a change or alteration of their own parts and though some parts act not to the production of such or such figures yet we cannot say that those figures are not in Nature or in the power of corporeal figurative self-motion we might say as well that a man cannot go when he sits or has no motion when he sleeps as believe that it is not in the power of Nature to produce such or such effects or actions when they are not actually produced for as I said before although Nature be but one material substance yet there are infinite mixtures of infinite parts produced by infinite self-motion infinite ways in so much that seldom any two Creatures even those of one sort do exactly resemble each other But some may say How is it possible That figure being all one with Matter can change and matter remain still the same without any change or alteration I answer As well as an animal body can put it self into various and different postures without any change of its interior animal figure for though figure cannot subsist without matter nor matter without figure generally considered yet particular parts of matter are not bound to certain particular figures Matter in its general nature remains always the same and cannot be changed from being Matter but by the power of self-motion it may change from being such or such a particular figure for example Wood is as much matter as Stone but it is not of the same figure nor has it the same interior innate motions which Stone hath because it has not the like composition of parts as other creatures of other figures have and though some figures be more constant or lasting then others yet this does not prove that they are not subject to changes as well as those that alter daily nay every moment much less that they are without motion for not all motions are dividing or dissolving but some are retentive some composing some attractive some expulsive some contractive some dilative and infinite other sorts of motions as 't is evident by the infinite variety which appears in the differing effects of Nature Nevertheless it is no consequence that because the effects are different they must also have different principles For first all effects of Nature are material which proves they have but one principle which is the onely infinite Matter Next they are all self-moving which proves that this material principle has self-motion for without self-motion there would be no variety or change of figures it being the nature of self-motion to be perpetually acting Thus Matter and Self-motion being inseparably united in one infinite body which is self-moving material Nature is the onely cause of all the infinite effects that are produced in Nature and not the Aristoteleon Elements or Chymists Tria prima which sense and reason perceives to be no more but effects or else if we should call all those Creatures principles which by the power of their own inherent motions change into other figures we shall be forced to make infinite principles and so confound principles with effects and after this manner that which is now an effect will become a principle and what is now a principle will become an effect which will lead our sense and reason into a herrid confusion and labyrinth of ignorance Wherefore I will neither follow the Opinions of the Ancient nor of our Moderns in this point but search the truth of Nature by the light of regular reason for I perceive that most of our modern Writings are not fill'd with new Inventions of their own but like a lumber stuff'd with old Commodities botch'd and dress'd up anew contain nothing but what has been said in former ages Nor am I of the opinion of our Divine Philosophers who mince Philosophy and Divinity Faith and Reason together and count it Irreligious if not Blasphemy to assert any other principles of Nature then what they I will not say by head and shoulders draw out of the Scripture especially out of Genesis to evince the finiteness and beginning of Nature when as Moses doth onely describe the Creation of this World and not of Infinite Nature But as Pure natural Philosophers do not meddle with Divinity or things Supernatural so Divines ought not to intrench upon Natural Philosophy Neither are Chymists the onely natural Philosophers because they are so much tied to the Art of Fire and regulate or measure all the effects of Nature according to their Artificial Experiments which do delude rather then inform their sense and reason and although they pretend to a vast and greater knowledg then all the rest yet they have not dived so deep into Nature yet as to perceive that she is full of sense and reason which is life and knowledg and in parts orders parts proper to parts which causes all the various motions figures and changes in the infinite parts of Nature Indeed no Creature that has its reason regular can almost believe that such wise and orderly actions should be done either by chance or by straying Atomes which cannot so constantly change and exchange parts and mix and join so properly and to such constant effects as are apparent in Nature And as for Galenists if they believe that some parts of Nature connot leave or pass by other parts to join meet or encounter others they are as much in an error as Chymists concerning the power of fire and furnace for it is most frequently observed thus amongst all sorts of Animals and if amongst Animals I know no reason but all other kinds and sorts of Creatures may do the like nay both sense and reason inform us they do as appears by the several and proper actions of all sorts of drugs as also Minerals and Elements and the like so that none ought to wonder how it is possible that medicines that must pass through digestions in the body should neglecting all other parts shew themselves friendly onely to the brain or kidnies or the like parts for if there be sense and reason in Nature all things must act wisely and orderly and not confusedly and though Art like an Emulating Ape strives to imitate Nature yet it is so far from producing natural figures that at best it rather produces Monsters instead of natural effects for it is like the Painter who drew a Rose instead of a Lion nevertheless Art is as active as any other natural Creature and doth never want imployment for it is like all other parts in a perpetual self-motion and
the Plague But since it is often observed that all bodies are not infected even in a great Plague it proves that the Infection is made by imitation and as one and the same agent cannot occasion the like effects in every Patient as for example Fire in several sorts of Fuels nay in one and the same sort as for example in Wood for some wood takes sooner fire and burns more clearly and dissolves more suddenly then some other so it is also with the Plague and with all other diseases that proceed from an outward Infection for the exterior agent is not an immediate cause but onely an occasion that the Patient has such or such motions and as the imitating motions are stronger or weaker quicker or flower so is the breeding of the disease I will not deny but there may be such figurative corporeal motions in the Air or Earth which may cause infections amongst those animals that live within the compass thereof and many times the Air or Earth may be infected by Animals But some particulars not being infected at all though they be frequently with those that have the Plague it proves that the figurative motions of their bodies do not imitate those motions that make the Plague when as if the Air were filled with infectious Atomes none would escape nay they would not onely enter into Men but Beasts and Birds c. Concerning the Spotted-Plague it proceeds from a general irregularity of dissolving motions which cause a general Gangrene of all the body and to find a cure for this disease is as difficult as to find the Philosophers-stone for though many pretend to cure it yet none has as yet performed it what may be done hereafter I know not but I doubt they will be more able to raise a man from the dead or renew old age and change it into youth then do it As for other Diseases I refer the Reader to my other Works especially my Philosophical Opinions for my design is not now to make a Physical Treatise and there they will find of the disease called Ague that its cause is the irregularity of the digestive or concoctive motions and so of the rest for in this present work I intended nothing else but to make reflections upon Experimental Philosophy and to explain some other Points in Natural Philosophy for the better understanding of my own Opinions which if I have done to the satisfaction of the Reader I have my aim and desire no more 26. Of Respiration HAving made mention both in the foregoing discourse and several other places of this Book of Respiration I 'le add to the end of this part a full declaration of my opinion thereof First I believe that there are Respirations in all Creatures and Parts of Nature performed by the several passages of their bodies to receive forreign and discharge some of their own parts Next I believe That those Respirations are of different sorts according to the different sorts of Creatures Thirdly As the Respirations of natural Parts and Creatures are various and different so are also the pores or passages through which they respire as for example in Man and some other animals the Nostrils Ears Mouth Pores of the skin are all of different figures And such a difference may also be between the smaller pores of the skin of the several parts of man as between the pores of his breast arms legs head c. also the grain or lines of a man's skin may be different like as several figures of wrought Silks or Stuffs sold in Mercers shops which if they did make several colours by the various refractions inflections reflections and positions of light then certainly a naked man would appear of many several colours according to the difference of his pores or grains of the skin and the different position of light But sense and reason does plainly observe that the positions of light do not cause such effects for though every several man for the most part hath a peculiar complexion feature shape humor disoposition c. different from each other so that it is a miracle to see two men just alike one another in all things yet light alters not the natural colour of their bodies no more then it can alter the natural figures and shapes of all other parts of their bodies but what alteration soever is made proceeds from the natural corporeal motions of the same body and not from the various positions refractions and reflections of light whose variety in Nature as it is infinite so it produces also infinite figures according to the infinite Wisdom of Nature which orders all things orderly and wisely OBSERVATIONS UPON THE OPINIONS OF SOME Ancient Philosophers ALthough the indisposition of my body did in a manner disswade me from studying and writing any more yet the great desire I had to know the Opinions of the Ancient Philosophers and whether any came near my own overcame me so much that even to the prejudice of my own health I gave my self to the perusing of the works of that learned Author Mr. Stanly wherein he describes the lives and opinions of the ancient Philosophers in which I found so much difference betwixt their conceptions and my own in Natural Philosophy that were it allowable or usual for our sex I might set up a sector School for my self without any prejudice to them But I being a woman do fear they would soon cast me out of their Schools for though the Muses Graces and Sciences are all of the female gender yet they were more esteemed in former ages then they are now nay could it be done handsomely they would now turn them all from Females into Males so great is grown the self-conceit of the Masculine and the disregard of the Female sex But to let that pass The Opinions of the Ancient though they are not exempt from errors no more then our Moderns yet are they to be commended that their conceptions are their own and the issue of their own wit and reason when as most of the opinions of our Modern Philosophers are patched up with theirs Some whereof do altogether follow either Aristotle Plato Epicurus Pythagoras c. others make a mixture of several of their Opinions and others again take some of their opinions and dress them up new with some additions of their own and what is worst after all this instead of thanks they reward them with scorn and rail at them when as perhaps without their pains and industry our age would hardly have arrived to that knowledg it has done To which ungrateful and unconscionable act I can no ways give my consent but admire and honour both the ancient and all those that are real Inventors of noble and profitable Arts and Sciences before all those that are but botchers and brokers and that I do in this following part examine and mark some of their opinions as erroneous is not out of a humor to revile or prejudice their wit industry
destroyed what will become of the Soul I will not say That the All-powerfull God may not destroy it when he pleases but the infiniteness and perpetual self-motion of Nature will not permit that Nature should be corruptible in it self for God's Power goes beyond the power of Nature But it seems Pythagoras understands by the World no more then his senses can reach so that beyond the Celestial Orbs he supposes to be an infinite Vacuum which is as much as to say an infinite Nothing and my reason cannot apprehend how the World can breath and respire into nothing and out of nothing 5. Neither am I able to conceive the Truth of his assertion That all lines are derived from points and all numbers from unity and all figures from a circle for there can be no such thing as a single point a single unity a single circle in Nature by reason Nature is infinitely dividable and composable neither can they be principles because they are all but effects 6. Concerning the Soul the Pythagoreans call her a self-moving number and divide her into two parts rational and irrational and derive the beginning of the soul from the heat of the brain The Sould of Animate Creatures as they call them they allow to be rational even those which others call irrational to wit those in all other animals besides man but they act not according to reason for want of speech The Rational Soul say they is immortal and a self-moving number where by number they understand the Mind which they call a Monad These and the like opinions which Pythagoreans have of the Soul are able to puzle Solomons wit or understanding to make any conformity of Truth of them and I will not strictly examine them but set down these few Paradoxes 1. I cannot apprehend how the same soul can be divided into substances of such differing nay contrary proprieties and natures as to be rational and irrational mortal and immortal 2. How the heat of the brain can be the Principle of the soul since the soul is said to actuate move and inform the body and to be a Principle of all bodily actions Besides all brains have not the like Temperament but some are hot and some cold and some hotter then others whence it will follow that all animals are not endued with the like souls but some souls must of necessity be weaker and some stronger then others 3. How Irrational Creatures can have a Rational Soul and yet not act according to Reason for want of speech for Irrational Creatures are called so because they are thought to have no reason and as for speech it is an effect and not a Principle of Reason for shall we think a dumb man irrational because he cannot speak 4. I cannot conceive how it is possible that the soul is a self-moving number and yet but a Monad or Unite for a Unite they say is no number but a principle of number Not how the Soul being incorporeal can walk in the air like a body for incorporeal beings cannot have corporeal actions no more then corporeal beings can have the actions of incorporeals Wherefore I will leave those points to the examination of more Learned Persons then my self and as for the Pythagorean Transmigration of Souls I have declared my opinion thereof heretofore in the first part 4. Of Epicurus his Principles of Philosophy 1. COncerning the World Epicurus is of opinion That it is not Eternal and Incorruptible but that it was generated and had a beginning and shall also have an end and perish For says he It is necessary that all compounded things be also dissipated and resolved into those things of which they were compounded By the World he understands a portion of the universe that is the circumference of Heaven containing the Stars the Earth and all things visible For Heaven he supposes to be the extreme or outmost part of the World and by the Universe he understands Infinite Nature which consists of Body and Vacuum for he thinks bodies could not move were there no Vacuum to move in Whereof I do briefly declare my opinion thus If the Universe or Nature it self be Infinite Eternal and Incorruptible all parts of Nature or the Universe must be so too I mean in themselves as they are Matter or Body for were it possible that some of them could perish or be annihilated the Universe would be imperfect and consequently not infinite as wanting some parts of its own body 'T is true particular natural figures may be infinitely changed dissolved transformed but they can never be dissolved from being Matter or parts of Nature and if not they cannot perish no not the figures of finite parts for as Matter cannot perish so neither can figure because matter and figure are but onething and though one part be transformed into millions of figures yet all those figures do not perish in their changes and alterations but continue still in Nature as being parts of Nature and therefore material Thus change alteration dissolution division composition and all other species of motions are no annihilation or perishing neither can it be proved that parts dissolve more then they unite because dissolution or division and composition of parts are but one act for whensoever parts separate themselves from some they must of necessity join to others which doth also prove that there can be no Vacuum in Nature for if there were there would be division without composition besides there would be no parts but all parts would be several wholes by reason they would subsist by themselves Thus Nature would not be one infinite body composed of Infinite parts but every part being a whole by it self would make some kind of a finite world and those parts which separate themselves from each other by the intervals of Vacuum would subsist precised from each other as having no relation to one another and so become wholes of parts nay if several of those intire and single bodies should join closely together they would make such a gap of Vacuum as would cause a confusion and disturbance both amongst themselves and in the Universe Wherefore sense and reason contradicts the opinion of Vacuum neither is there any necessity of introducing it by reason of the motion of natural bodies for they may move without Vacuum better then within Vacuum since all bodies are not of the like Nature that is dense close or compact but there are fluid bodies as well as hard bodies rare as well as dense subtile as well as gross because there is animate and inanimate matter in Nature But concerning the World it seems Epicurus doth not mean by the dissolution of the world an absolute annihilation but onely a reduction into its former principles which are Atomes however if this be his meaning he contradicts himself when he affirms that the universe whose portion the World is was ever such as it is now and shall ever be thus for if it shall continue so for
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
conceive them divided much less to separate them actually from each other and since Nature is one infinite body that is of an infinite bulk or extension and consists of animate and inanimate parts of Matter it must of necessity follow that these mentioned parts are infinite also for there is no particle of Nature whatever nay could it be an Atome that consists not of those mentioned parts or degrees Thus wheresoever I name Infinite degrees of Infinite Matter I call them Infinite not as divided or several but as united in one body producing infinite effects for as I said they make but one Infinite body of Nature Also when in my Philosophical Letters I say that the Animate part of Matter considered in it self could not produce Infinite effects without the Inanimate having nothing to work upon and withal some perhaps will think I contradict my self because in other places I have declared that the rational part of animate Matter works or makes figures in its own degree without the help either of the sensitive or inanimate besides it being matter or material why should it not be able to produce effects in it self as well as with other parts To which I answer my opinion is that the animate part of Matter by which I include the sensitive as well as the rational could not without the inanimate part of Matter produce such infinite variety of effects as Nature has and as are partly subject to our perception for without it there would be no grosser substance for the sensitive to work on nor nothing for the rational to direct besides there would be no such degrees of Matter as thicker and thinner rarer and denser c. nor no variety of figures nay were there no inanimate part of Matttr as well as animate all productions dissolutions and what actions soever would be done in an instant of time and a man or any other natural Creature would be produced as soon as a thought of the mind wherefore to poise or ballance the actions of Nature there must of necessity be an inanimate dull or passive degree of Matter as well as there is an animate active and self-moving and this triumvirate of the constitutive degrees of material nature is so necessary that Nature could not be what she is nor work such variety of figures as she doth without it When I say that Matter cannot know it self because it is infinite I do no not mean as if it had not selfknowledg for as Matter is self-moving so it is also self-knowing nay that the Inanimate part of Matter has also self-knowledg I have sufficiently declared heretofore but my meaning is that its knowledg cannot be limited or circumscribed and that it is an infinite natural self-knowledg Also when in the same place I say That Nature hath no free-will and that no change or alteration can be made in infinite and eternal Matter I mean concerning its own nature for Matter cannot go beyond its nature that is change from being Matter to something immaterial or from a natural being to a non-being nevertheless Nature in her particular actions works and changes her effects as she pleases and according to the wisdom and liberty God hath given her When I say that the sensitive animate part of Matter is the life of the rational soul I do not mean as if the rational part was not living as well as the sensitive but I speak comparatively in comparison to man who as he has humane life soul and body all three constituting or composing but one intire man so in the composition of Nature I name the Inanimate part the Body the Sensitive the Life and the Rational the Soul of Nature nevertheless all parts have life and knowledg for the inanimate although it is not selfmoving and has not an active life and a perceptive knowledg yet has it life and knowledg according to the nature of its degree that is an innate and fixt self-life and self-knowledg and the sensitive although it is not so subtile piercing and active a degree of self-moving Matter as the rational yet has it an active life and knowledg according to the Nature of its degree and it is well to be observed that each degree in their various commixtures do never change their natures for the sensitive doth not acquire a rational life and knowledg nor the rational a sensitive neither does the inanimate part get an active life and a perceptive knowledg for all they are so closely commixt but each retains the nature of its degree for as one part cannot be another part so one parts life and knowledg cannot become another parts life and knowledg or else it would produce a confusion in Nature and all her actions In what place soever both in my Philosophical Opinions and Letters I say that the inanimate part of Matter has neither life nor self-knowledg I mean it has not an active life and a perceptive self-knowledg such as the animate part of Matter has for though the inanimate part of Matter is moved yet it is not selfmoving but it moves by the help of the animate parts of Matter which by reason of their close and inseparable union and commixture bear it along in all their actions and operations and thus its motions or actions are onely passive not active Nevertheless although it has not self-motion yet may it have life and self-knowledg according to its own Nature for self-knowledg does not depend upon motion but is a fixt and innate being In short all parts or degrees of Matter are living and knowing but not all are self-moving but onely the animate When I say that all Matter lives in figures and Creatures and all figures and Creatures lie or live in Matter I mean that Infinite Matter moves figuratively and that all Creatures are composed by corporeal figurative motion for in what places soever of my Philosophical Works I say Figure and Motion I do not mean they are two several things distinct from body but I understand by it corporeal figurative motion or self-moving figurative Matter which is one and the same When I say That the Rational part of Matter lives in the Sensitive and the Sensitive in the Inanimate I do not mean that one lies within the other like as several Boxes are put together the lesser in the bigger but I use this expression onely to denote the close conjunction of these three degrees and that they are inseparably mixt together Concerning the Chapter of Vacuum in my Philosophical Opinions though I was doubtful then which opinion to adhere to yet I have sufficiently declared my meaning thereof in the foregoing observations to wit that there can be no vacuity in Natures body When I name six Principal Motions viz. Attraction Contraction Dilation Digestion Retention Expulsion I do not mean that they are the principles of all motions no more then a circular motion can be said the principle of all natural motions as
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
Ships might fall back which being done her own Fleet came into the Circle without any visible assistance of Sails or Tide and her self being entred into her own Ship the whole Fleet sunk imediately into the bottom of the Seas and left all the Spectators in a deep amazement neither would she suffer any of her Ships to come above the Waters until she arrived into the Blazing-world In time of the Voyage both the Emperess's and Duchess's Soul were very gay and merry and sometimes they would converse very seriously with each other amongst the rest of their discourses the Duchess said she wondered much at one thing which was that since her Majesty had found out a passage out of the Blazing-world into the World she came from she did not inrich that part of the World where she was born at least her own Family when as yet she had enough to inrich the whole World The Emperess's Soul answered that she loved her Native Country and her own Family as well as any Creature could do and that this was the reason why she would not inrich them for said she not onely particular Families or Nations imitated if I can possibly avoid it yet rather then imitate others I should chuse to be imitated by others for my nature is such that I had rather appear worse in singularity then better in the Mode If you were not a great Lady replied the Emperess you would never pass in the World for a wise Lady for the World would say your singularities are Vanities The Duchess's Soul answered she did not at all regard the censure of this or any other age concerning vanities but said she neither this present nor any of the future ages can or will truly say that I am not Vertuous and Chast for I am confident all that were or are acquainted with me and all the Servants which ever I had will or can upon their Oaths declare my actions no otherwise then Vertuous and certainly there 's none even of the meanest Degree which have not their Spies and Witnesses much more those of the Nobler sort which seldom or never are without attendants so that their faults if they have any will easily be known and as easily divulged Wherefore happy are those Natures that are Honest Virtuous and Noble not onely happy to themselves but happy to their Families But said the Emperess if you glory so much in your Honesty and Vertue how comes it that you plead for Dishonest and Wicked persons in your Writings The Duchess answered it was onely to shew her Wit not her Nature At last the Emperess arrived into the Blazing World and coming to her Imperial Palace you may sooner imagine than expect that I should express the joy which the Emperor had at her safe return for he loved her beyond his Soul and there was no love lost for the Emperess equal'd his Affection with no less love to him After the time of rejoicing with each other the Duchess's Soul begg'd leave to return to her Noble Lord but the Emperor desir'd That before she departed she would see how he had employed his time in the Emperess's absence for he had built Stables and Riding-Houses and desired to have Horses of Manage such as according to the Emperess's Relation the Duke of Newcastle had The Emperor enquired of the Duchess the Form and Structure of her Lord and Husbands Stables and Riding-House The Duchess answer'd his Majesty That they were but plain and ordinary but said she had my Lord Wealth I am sure he would not spare it in rendering his Buildings as Noble as could be made Hereupon the Emperor shew'd the Duchess the Stables he had built which were most stately and magnificent among the rest there was one double Stable that held a hundred Horses on a side the main Building was of Gold lined with several sorts of precious Materials the roof was Arched with Agats the sides of the Walls were lined with Cornelian the Floor was paved with Amber the Mangers were Mother of Pearl the Pillars as also the middle Isle or Walk of the Stables were of Crystal the Front and Gate was of Turquois most neatly cut and carved The riding-house was lined with Saphirs Topases and the like the Floor was all of Golden-sand so finely sifted that it was extreamly soft and not in the least hurtful to the Horses feet and the Door and Frontispiece was of Emeralds curiously carved After the view of these Glorious and Magnisicent Buildings which the Duchess's Soul was much delighted withal she resolved to take her leave but the Emperor desired her to stay yet some short time more for they both loved her company so well that they were unwilling to have her depart so soon Several Conferences and Discourses pass'd between them amongst the rest the Emperor desir'd her advice how to set up a Theatre for Plays The Duchess confessed her Ignorance in this Art telling his Majesty that she knew nothing of erecting Theatres or Scenes but what she had by an Immaterial Observation when she was with the Emperess's Soul in the chief City of E. Entering into one of their Theatres whereof the Emperess could give as much account to His Majesty as her self But both the Emperor and Emperess told the Duchess 〈◊〉 she could give directions how to make Plays The Duchess answered that she had as little skill to form a Play after the Mode as she had to paint or make a Scene for shew But you have made Playes replied the Emperess Yes answered the Duchess I intended them for Playes but the Wits of these present times condemned them as uncapable of being represented or acted because they were not made up according to the Rules of Art though I dare say that the Descriptions are as good as any they have writ The Emperor ask'd Whether the Property of Playes were not to describe the several humours actions and fortunes of Mankind 'T is so answered the Duchess Why then replied the Emperor the natural Humours Actions and Fortunes of Mankind are not done by the Rules of Art But said the Duchess it is the Art and Method of our Wits to despise all Descriptions of Wit Humour Actions and Fortunes that are without such Artificial Rules The Emperor ask'd Are those good Playes that are made so Methodically and Artificially The Duchess answer'd They were Good according to the Judgment of the Age or Mode of the Nation but not according to her Judgment for truly said she in my Opinion their Playes will prove a Nursery of Whining Lovers and not an Academy or School for Wife Witty Noble and well-behaved men But I replied the Emperor desire such a Theatre as may make wise Men and will have such Descriptions as are Natural not Artificial If your Majesty be of that Opinion said the Duchess's Soul then my Playes may be acted in your Blazing-World when they cannot be acted in the Blinking-World of Wit and the next time I come to visit
two parts viz. animate and inanimate and that the animate again is of two degrees rational and sensitive by reason the number of two is finite and a finite number cannot make one infinite whole which whole being infinite in bulk must of necessity also consist of infinite parts To which I answer My meaning is not that Infinite Nature is made up of two finite parts but that she consists out of a co-mixture of animate and inanimate Matter which although they be of two degrees or parts call them what you will yet they are not separated parts but make one infinite body like as life soul and body make but one man for animate matter is as I said before nothing else but self-motion which self-motion joyned with inanimate matter makes but one self-moving body which body by the same self-motion is divided into infinite figures or parts not separated from each other or from the body of Nature but all cohering in one piece as several members of one body and onely distinguished by their several figures every part whereof has animate and inanimate matter as well as the whole body Nay that every part has not onely sensitive but also rational matter is evident not onely by the bare motion in every part of Nature which cannot be without sense for wheresoever is motion there 's sense but also by the regular harmonious and well-ordered actions of Nature which clearly demonstrate that there must needs be reason as well as sense in every part and particle of Nature for there can be no order method or harmony especially such as appears in the actions of Nature without there be reason to cause that order and harmony And thus motion argues sense and the well-ordered motion argues Reason in Nature and in every part and particle thereof without which Nature could not subsist but would be as a dull indigested and unformed heap and Chaos Besides it argues that there is also knowledg in Nature and all her parts for wheresoever is sense and reason there is also sensitive and rational knowledg it being most improbable that such an exactly-ordered and harmonious consort of all the infinitely-various actions of Nature should be without any knowledg moving and acting producing transforming composing dissolving c. and not knowing how whether or why to move and Nature being infinite in her own substance as well as in her parts there in bulk here in number her knowledg in general must of necessity be infinite too but in her particulars it cannot but be finite and particular and this knowledg differs according to the nature of each figure or creature for I do not mean that this sense and knowledg I speak of is onely an animal sense and knowledg as some have mis-interpreted for animal sense and knowledg is but particular and belongs onely to that sort of Creatures which are Animals but I mean such sense and knowledg as is proper to the nature of each figure so that Animal Creatures have animal sense and knowledg Vegetables a vegetative sense and knowledg Minerals a mineral sense and knowledg and so of the rest of all kinds and sorts of Creatures And this is my opinion of the Principles of Nature which I submit to the examination of the ingenious and impartial Reader to consider whether it contains not as much probability as the opinion of those whose Principles are either Whirl-pools insensible Minima's Gas Blas and Archeus dusty Atomes thrusting backwards and forwards which they call reaction and the like or of those that make the ground and foundation of the knowledg of Nature artificial Experiments and prefer Art before Reason for my Principles and Grounds are sense and reason and if they cannot hold I know not what will for where sense and reason has no admittance there nothing can be in order but confusion must needs take place 7. Whether Nature be self-moving THere are some who cannot believe That any Man has yet made out how Matter can move it self but are of opinion that few bodies move but by something else no not Animals whose spirits move the nerves the nerves again the muscles and so forth the whole body But if this were so then certainly there must either be something else that moves the spirits or they must move of themselves and if the spirits move of themselves and be material then a material substance or body may move of it self but if immaterial I cannot conceive why a material substance should not be self-moving as well as an immaterial But if their meaning be that the Spirits do not move of themselves but that the Soul moves them and God moves the Soul then it must either be done by an All-powerful Command or by an Immediate action of God The later of which is not probable to wit that God should be the Immediate Motion of all things himself for God is an Immoveable and Immutable Essence wherefore it follows that it is onely done by an Omnipotent Command Will and Decree of God and if so Why might not Infinite Matter be decreed to move of it self as well as a Spirit or the Immaterial Soul But I perceive Man has a great spleen against self-moving corporeal Nature although himself is part of her and the reason is his Ambition for he would fain be supreme and above all other Creatures as more towards a divine Nature he would be a God if arguments could make him such at least God-like as is evident by his fall which came meerly from an ambitious mind of being like God The truth is some opinions in Philosophy are like the Opinions in several Religions which endeavouring to avoid each other most commonly do meet each other like Men in a Wood parting from one another in opposite ways oftentimes do meet again or like Ships which travel towards East and West must of necessity meet each other for as the learned Dr. Donn says the furthest East is West and the furthest West is East in the same manner do the Epicurean and some of our modern Philosophers meet for those endeavour to prove matter to be somewhat like a God and these endeavour to prove man to be something like God at least that part of man which they say is immaterial so that their several opinions make as great a noise to little purpose as the dogs barking or howling at the Moon for God the Author of Nature and Nature the servant of God do order all things and actions of Nature the one by his Immutable Will and All-powerful Command the other by executing this Will and Command the one by an Incomprehensible Divine and Supernatural Power the other in a natural manner and way for God's Will is obey'd by Natures self-motion which self-motion God can as easily give and impart to corporeal Nature as to an Immaterial Spirit but Nature being as much dividable as she is composeable is the cause of several opinions as well as of several other creatures for Nature is fuller