按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
prove a proposition from whence the existence of is
inferred。 Pray is not this arguing in a circle？
。 In the premise I only mean that the motion is
proportional to the velocity； jointly with the extension and
solidity。
。 But； allowing this to be true； yet it will not
thence follow that gravity is proportional to ； in your
philosophic sense of the word； except you take it for granted
that unknown ； or whatever else you call it； is
proportional to those sensible qualities； which to suppose is
plainly begging the question。 That there is magnitude and
solidity； or resistance； perceived by sense； I readily grant； as
likewise； that gravity may be proportional to those qualities I
will not dispute。 But that either these qualities as perceived by
us； or the powers producing them； do exist in a ； this is what I deny； and you indeed affirm； but；
notwithstanding your demonstration； have not yet proved。
。 I shall insist no longer on that point。 Do you think；
however； you shall persuade me that the natural philosophers have
been dreaming all this while？ Pray what becomes of all their
hypotheses and explications of the phenomena； which suppose the
existence of Matter？
。 What mean you； Hylas； by the ？
。 I mean the appearances which I perceive by my senses。
。 And the appearances perceived by sense； are they not
ideas？
。 I have told you so a hundred times。
。 Therefore； to explain the phenomena； is； to shew how
we come to be affected with ideas； in that manner and order
wherein they are imprinted on our senses。 Is it not？
。 It is。
。 Now； if you can prove that any philosopher has
explained the production of any one idea in our minds by the help
of ； I shall for ever acquiesce； and look on all that
hath been said against it as nothing； but； if you cannot； it is
vain to urge the explication of phenomena。 That a Being endowed
with knowledge and will should produce or exhibit ideas is easily
understood。 But that a Being which is utterly destitute of these
faculties should be able to produce ideas； or in any sort to
affect an intelligence； this I can never understand。 This I say；
though ｛243｝ we had some positive conception of Matter； though we
knew its qualities； and could comprehend its existence； would yet
be so far from explaining things； that it is itself the most
inexplicable thing in the world。 And yet； for all this； it will
not follow that philosophers have been doing nothing； for； by
observing and reasoning upon the connexion of ideas； they
discover the laws and methods of nature； which is a part of
knowledge both useful and entertaining。
。 After all； can it be supposed God would deceive all
mankind？ Do you imagine He would have induced the whole world to
believe the being of Matter； if there was no such thing？
。 That every epidemical opinion； arising from
prejudice； or passion； or thoughtlessness； may be imputed to God；
as the Author of it； I believe you will not affirm。 Whatsoever
opinion we father ' on Him； it must be either because He has
discovered it to us by supernatural revelation； or because it is
so evident to our natural faculties； which were framed and given
us by God； that it is impossible we should withhold our assent
from it。 But where is the revelation？ or where is the evidence
that extorts the belief of Matter？ Nay； how does it appear； that
Matter； ； is thought to exist by all mankind； or indeed； by
any except a few philosophers； who do not know what they would be
at？ Your question supposes these points are clear； and； when you
have cleared them； I shall think myself obliged to give you
another answer。 In the meantime； let it suffice that I tell you；
I do not suppose God has deceived mankind at all。
。 But the novelty； Philonous； the novelty！ There lies
the danger。 New notions should always be discountenanced； they
unsettle men's minds； and nobody knows where they will end。
。 Why the rejecting a notion that has no foundation；
either in sense； or in reason； or in Divine authority； should be
thought to unsettle the belief of such opinions as are grounded
on all or any of these； I cannot imagine。 That innovations in
government and religion are dangerous； and ought to be
discountenanced； I freely own。 But is there the like reason why
they should be discouraged in philosophy？ The making anything
known which was unknown before is an innovation in knowledge：
and； if all such innovations had been forbidden； ｛244｝ men would
have made a notable progress in the arts and sciences。 But it is
none of my business to plead for novelties and paradoxes。 That
the qualities we perceive are not on the objects： that we must
not believe our senses： that we know nothing of the real nature
of things； and can never be assured even of their existence： that
real colours and sounds are nothing but certain unknown figures
and motions： that motions are in themselves neither swift nor
slow： that there are in bodies absolute extensions； without any
particular magnitude or figure： that a thing stupid； thoughtless；
and inactive； operates on a spirit： that the least particle of a
body contains innumerable extended parts： these are the
novelties； these are the strange notions which shock the genuine
uncorrupted judgment of all mankind； and being once admitted；
embarrass the mind with endless doubts and difficulties。 And it
is against these and the like innovations I endeavour to
vindicate Common Sense。 It is true； in doing this； I may perhaps
be obliged to use some ； and ways of speech not common。
But； if my notions are once thoroughly understood； that which is
most singular in them will； in effect； be found to amount to no
more than this。 that it is absolutely impossible； and a plain
contradiction； to suppose any unthinking Being should exist
without being perceived by a Mind。 And； if this notion be
singular； it is a shame it should be so； at this time of day； and
in a Christian country。
。 As for the difficulties other opinions may be liable
to；。 those are out of the question。 It is your business to defend
your own opinion。 Can anything be plainer than that you are for
changing all things into ideas？ You； I say； who are not ashamed
to charge me 。 This is so plain； there is no
denying it。
。 You mistake me。 I am not for changing things into
ideas； but rather ideas into things； since those immediate
objects of perception； which； according to you； are only
appearances of things； I take to be the real things themselves。
。 Things！ You may pretend what you please； but it is
certain you leave us nothing but the empty forms of things； the
outside only which strikes the senses。
。 What you call the empty forms and outside of things
seem to me the very things themselves。 Nor are they empty or
incomplete； otherwise than upon your supposition that Matter
｛245｝ is an essential part