Ralph Cudworth: A Treatise Concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality: With A Treatise of Freewill (Cambridge Texts in the History of Philosophy)

Copyrighted material

CAMBRIDGE TEXT S IN THE HISTOR Y OF PHILOSOPHY

RALPH CUDWORTH

A Treatise Concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality with A Treatise oj Freewill

C JPYnghied ~

CAMBRIDGE TEXT S IN TH E HIST O RY OF PHILO SOPH Y

KARL AMER1KS !'..f..... of PkliMDl"Y> u,,",",iIy of N",,, Do_

DESMOND M. CLARKE !'..flUM of P!.iiMD",y. UoiDmily c.l1q, c.".j. Th< "",in objcdiv. of Cambridr< Tum in II>< Hiiro'y of PIIilooophy ill ,,, up.ond th< 1'Uf 'V'

ate

RALPH CU DWORTH

A Treatise Concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality WITH

A Treatise of Freewill ED1HD 8Y

SA RAH HUTTON

CAMBRIDGE UN IV ERSITY PR ESS

,.

r::- ' ··., .... _s,.

I '

7

-..c

...

lIoolloi ,A,.qofC. .... ..

'llItriaP:lf;T, I " E' ",I ... , .. to w.. '"'" - . Now T.... NY ' .., '-..1 I. lISA dt.M.(W' · ·

.d

• M'

!

or

'• . ,• uL '"

_

F"...

,

""0''''''''''

~ _ __

7

","", . " . ,

II"

. .

.....

'

_ " ~_"'IIdI._L.oI . ,@. ,f

.".'_""fo-"'_lihuy

""Mtw _J>-"'Iooi ' ' ' - - J C I"."'". , , __ •, .-._ . _ _ Cood-oh., ...... ,6,J-4'. ,~

IT_

.............. '

_..I

A_ '

~

II _

7

,I

_of '"', ,,

II

. ., . . . . . . .

_of_'laIpIoCoodo"._ ", SonI
"

Co~ct",inl

£u",./ and J_ldk Morolily, tt.en:by ensuring a European-wide diffusion for Tlct TrtallM alongside Cudwonh's Trw h/lt/krNal S)'IlntI.l Selections from his works wen: published in French tranwtion in Jran J..., Qen;'. BiblulIlliqut (},ouit, when", they became the cemrc-piea of a delute ber.o.·...,n J..., Qen; and Bayle. Cudwonh's doctrine of 'Plastic Nature' continued to be discussed in France through the Enligtllmmem and well into the nineu:enth century.J An Italian tran.~tion of Cudworth', works by Luigi Benedetti was publislM:d in Italy in ,g23" Continuing interest in Cud"..".th in nincttenth-«ntury Britain can be gauged from tile publication of an ed ition of hi. Sy.um ond TU.IIM by John Harrison in ,8,,5, ond the priming of one of his unpublished monuscripts as A TmlllM of Fru JPiIl by J . Allen in , 838. Ever since: Marti~u's discussion of Cudwonh in [886, there has been a sua:eKsion of shan discussio", of ond extracts from £Im",/ .,..1 J"""Mla~k Mor./jly . The mOSt imponam study of Cudwonh this antury,j.A. Passmore's Ralph C"","TlII: An I"urpmaI;"" ('95 ' ) focu.sa on tI\osc writings not published in hi. lifetime, A Trt.'iu c....«",i"l Eu",.1 ani J"u".udlt M or./iry and tile unpublished manuscripts on free will.~ Cudwonh is chiefl y remembered today as a kading mc:mbu of the group of sevmteenth-ccntury philosopher theologians now known ... the Cambridge Platonist.. This group indud es such figu res as Nathaniel Culver"'ell (d. ,65'), John Smith ( ,618-52) and Peter Sterry (d. 1672), as well ... the Olher philosopher of the "",,up .fter Cudwonh, Henry More ( ,6, ..-81). Their sobriquet deri,·es from the fact th.t they "-ere all educated at Cambridge ond they all, to diffen:m degrees, dre'" on the philosophy of Plato and his followers in preference to the AristotcIi.nism of the schools. As a group they are characterized more by a common OIItlook thon a rigid set of doctrines. Their liberal theological temper was malched by a broadly syncretic approach to phiJosophy. Their insiSI(n~ on the importance of reason in malre,.. of relip,.. was I

I •

,


do.,g,rth-s..;.')""~~""."pp . 1J7-n

"

'."'. _ Ll>nry. "'oId . ... ~. ~"",oIio'lto Birphilosophical method was soon 10 Ix regarded as ounnoded. 16 Whalever the Ihwlogical politics of Cudworth's position, in philosophical Ierms, CUd ...·orth kepI his finger on the pulse of new developments ;n philosophy: in addilion 10 addressing the philosophy of Dcsl:artcs and Hobbes, Tlu Trw I"ttlktl~dl SYIINff contains a n-Jutation of Spinoza's T.dUdIJU Ihtolo:in-JHllilirIU (t67o). Although A Trtdliu: Om ..,."i,,: EUntdl.nJ /tnltlllldk 1010r.lily "'";IS not published until l73t. it proNbly cirClllated in manuscripl bcfon: then. Its publication history Iherefon: ""es ;t a somc"'hat unusual posilion ;n relation to the hisrory of philoi;oph y because il was published io a "err diffe...,nl conleXI from that of ;tS original production. It was retmved from manuscript obscurity by [d,,-ard Qand1cr. Bishop sU("(:CS5ivcJy of Lichficld and of Durham, and published at a time of )i"ely dcNte on ethical ntionalism. Ihe natun: of moral obligation and the foundations of moral ""minry•• deb'le which was sparked by SiUIlucl Clarke. Boyle lectures.1< Whm Cudworth wrotc EUrndf ''''ltIIIldk M.rdlily. the OlUrch of England had still not rnched a satisfactory accommodation ...;th religious disstnt. It had nOI worked OUI the I.ticudinarian compromise, which took it inro the eighteenth century. The political uphe..u of the Civil W.r and interregnum Wen: fresh in people'. memories, as were the theological debotcs oca.sioned by tIte predestinarian Calvinism which cha!"l\Clerized establishment Puritanism of those years. On the philosophia l front, Cartcsianism "'as still a ...,lalively ne'" phenomenon, as was the philowphy of Thomas Hobbes, who already bore the brand of atheist materialiR The Royal

."J

" ... _ " ' " , ... pubb,,"'oJ TIS.CuoI_>• . . -........ ito _ tatd _ley, _ _1 •• ~ Cud ....tlo.". Iod. ..t b~ '""" plliIoIorial ...... in IIio E,;u.t. u ... _ oJ '69' . s.. .... 4 ..... '70S. '""" puU. hoc! ... 1lection (Ud""'t''''''); in his account of the oper:nions of the !IOUI he deplo)'5 the terminology of Plotinus; and it was from Plato that he dni~ed his term u~ 10 '""press the rebtionship of the phYlical order 10 the intdkctual. Cud wonh undoubtedly foun d a precedent for combinin, Stoicism and PlalOnism in the early Qun:h Fathers, notably Origcn. Hi. debt 10 Patristic thought is borne out by his LI.5re:m, particularly in his distinction beN"«n sen.., and intellect, in tools account (If the relation of wul to body, and in his discus&ion of sense ])t'r«ption. Cudworth's reservations about sen.., knowledge: are consistent with the undulying PJatooism (If this thinking. He argues that knowledp' derived from the seoses is not true knowledge:. Sense impressions a..e rea:ived passively. The data acquired in mis WlIy can only furnish US with particularities and superficial appear.mces. Moreover, the senses do not pcraive enemal objects as

bIINWi,,{/io~

they are, but, acoording to the mtthmical hypothesi" they ",presl:n1 them as mo"emrnts or impressions of one kind Or another. Such data ha,·t 10 be p~ by the mind before they can be understood. Knowledge is produced octi"el y from within the mind, nOt received pass-i"ely from ,,·ithout. A sen.. tion is 'a pusion in the soul', the result of wrporeal nlO"emems, md perceptible by vinue of the 'natural s)"mpath{ "'hich the soul has for the body. Such impressions ""' in" oluntal)': that is, the ""ul has no wntrol o,'er them. At best ..,nsation is 'a ~rtai n kind of drowsy and somnolent pr!occption' of the soul (p. 56). Although Cudwonh ",~rds sense-knowledge as inferior to knDwln!1>" generatn! by the mind. his position is nOI mtHmpiricist. On the contrary, he spttifically acknnwledges the adequxy Df the Knses for pro"iding koowledge Dr Ihe utemal world and of the bod y, as well as for assistin g the mind in framing hypotMscs (see below, p. 57)· Book tV is the longest of the treatise, Ionl>'" thm the first th,,,,, put together. In it Cudworth elaborates his theol)' of knowled l>" in order, he says, 'to COnfUle Sttplicism or fmtaSticism' (Ihe II1Ives the acti"ily of mind; 'knowledge is an inw.rd and attin energy of the mind itselr (p. 73). The mind i. furnished "';Ih the conttpts ("Ostanoal things than the modifications of mere IitllliCless maner'. SeI;ondly, with regard 10 epistemology, Cudworth denies that the principks of monli(y can be deduced from SCAR knowledge. Acwrdingly he rejccn; the model of the mind as r"s", and argllCS thai only an innarist epistemology can provide knowledge of 1I00d and evil, just and unjllSt. There is alhird, psychological, aspect of Cudworth's theory of mind, which is nOi dealt with in this work, but is treated in his writings on freewill. Cudworth prepares for this at the end of:1 TrtllIlst Qno,mo;", EIt""'! uJ I".".",dk M"rdf;,y whm M asserts thai moral principles arc, like immutable ideas, 'anticipations', and thai these are nOI 'men intellecluol forms', hut derive from Whal he calls '~other more inward and vital principle'. He does not elaborate on what this principle might be beyond describinll il as 'a nalural determination to do 5OfT\C thinp and avoid others' (p. 145). This is a formulalion which aIlTCSponds ro his a1nctpt of the will as "tl "",,";hll in A T"_riu ,,[Frttfp;!I. where il is ~nked 10 the life-sustaininll function of the soul. This underlines Ihe continuity between both treatises, and ronfirms that Elmo,,/ uJ I".",,,ldk MOT"Hty is more of 1 prologue: 10 a larger untise on ethics than the discussion of ethics that the otle implies.

,,,bill,,

A Tuatist of FrulPifl The three draft treatises on 'Liberty and Necessity' conlinue: the ~ projca as Elmo,,/ ",.J 1_ldft M orality hy takinll the discussion fo .....vd to more oh,musly ethical questions. They all deal with the problem of monl ruponsibilily, and with the psycholOJY of autonmoIlS action. They can be described as psychological both in the old Sal.., of living In account of the soul, and in the more: modem sense of discussing mmtal &ctors which .ffect beha,·iour. For the will is the ruling principle which co-ordiru.les the functions of the soul and direc:ti the action. of the individual beinll. The only one of these treaoses to be published, that printed here: as:1 TrtI.l;u o[ Frttfpiff, is 1M shortest of the three. A5 in the casc of the olher two, much of it is taken up with technical discussion, theological as ....,ll as philosophical. ChaPICTS 13-27 deal with the ohjcaions of detenninists to the freedom of the will, especially those of Hobbes but also of Pomponazzi and various unnamed ~hers. And chapter 3 raises

'VI

ate

difficulties connected "ith a d~terministic position _ many (If them drawn from Origt:n. In his cOr>a:pt of freewill os a power of the soul, combining the functions of intelkct and vo~tioo., Cud".-onh di$penses with traditional fllClllcy psycholugy, which divided the will from intelLect os separate f....... lries of the soul. He is thus abk t(l sidestep the two main opposing traditions concerning the relationship of reason and will in Western thw1ogy: the Thornist vje .... , IIIXXIrding to which the will foll_ the din:ctin, (If the intellect, and the voluntarist positioo. of Scows and Odham which subordinates intelkct to will. In his critique of the doctrine of the indifference of the will he und()IJbtedly h.d Suarez and his follow"rs in mind, although he does not nante his thwlogialopponents. For Cudwonh, moral behaviour is r>(II shaped by external incentives and disincenti~es, but is founded on the principles of ,·inue innate to the soul. Cudwonh conai,·es of the will os the ..,If-d~termining power of the .... ul which predisposes it towards the good . This dri,·" to ...&rds the good is the spring and moti'";Ition of all action. In FruJPill it is described os a kind of premonition, '. anain vaticirullion, prtSage, scent. and odour of one IN''''''''''' H",,,,,. One supreme highest good transcendin, all $ a ",ud.nl a! Em .... nud Collt:gt-. gradual.. BA. lks47 11">49 1651 1652 • 653 165-4 1655 ,660 166-;

ejtction of ~bridgtcs from Mosheim'. tnnslatiOIl). II ""35 tnn.bted into Utili by J.L. Mo&heim, RI"I"lp~j CruI,."m~, 'YII,,,,,, ;"Idfuln/is ~"jus Ii"j,...m {jena, 1733, rq>r. Lciden, 1773) md ill10 Itllim by Luigi BellCdetti SUit",,, i"ltlltl/l4lf. de/1II0NiO, 5 vols. (Pavia, [823). His Sysum was reprinted in facsimile (SlImpn-Bad Cann.tan, 1.idge, [99~), ch~ple, S. A T".I;;'; 0,"'''";118 EI"""I alld 1_~ldlt Mo.ality is discussed in j. Manineau, TyPN of Elltie,,1 ThIOry, 2 vots. (Oxford, .&!IS), L .A.S. Bigge, BritiJJo Moralis,., 2 vats. «(hfard, 11197), E.M. Austin, Tit. ElltiN of 1M C ..1IhrUJ,1 PlalOllim (Philadelphia, 1935), A.N. Prior, usie and Iltt B",is of ElltiN (Oxford, 1949), D.O. RJphael, Bnl"It Alo,,,/isl,, ,650-,800, 1 "015. (Oxford, [Oll'ition to the English terminology. These terms are taken from his cJassical sources but are not, strictly, quotations from Greek or Roman philosophy. Sin~ tlte readability of the English is disrupted by repetition of such terms, and since Cudworth's habit of inserting Greek

A

1I~1t ~III'" Uri

tcnns dues not amount to a QOI1sistent philosophical vocabulary, I have normally n:a.ined ~I.u:t. terms only on meir fiTst appc:aran« in a puricubr ~gc 2nd have deleted what Sttnt to Ix otiose exotSli. On a few ocasions I hne inserted an English Innslation after a tenn not explained by Cudwonh. Cudwonh clearly observed I different sWldard in quowions from thOK normally observed today. I have tried to indicate in the now me QCCIsions when: he has nO( been entin:ly faithful to the original Latin or Greek. This is sometimes nplicable in tenns of his lOur=, bill often he mUtII wholesale adjustments to 5u;t the: pmnmatical flo .... of his argument. All such interpolations.,.., placed in square brackcu. I have based my edition of Fm",;f/ on the Allen edition of t838, ch«ked against the manuscript (BL, Add. MS 4978). In me case of A Tn.l. Ctnu:.m;"f £1"""I ...d I"""wahl. M~r.1ily I have used me OundltT lim edition. Unfortunately there is no num manuscript apinst which to ch«k it. Spelling and punctu.;n;on have been modemi%ed mrougl>out . Finally, in me interests of Jl('l"Spicuit y, I ho"e on QCCIsion taken libenies with CudwOl"th'l baroque sentences, subdividing me lengthier on.., when this can be done wimout distorting his meaning.

,.

A Treatise Concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality

Copyrighted material

Contents Book, Tht there have b«n some in ~ll ages, who il2ve maintained that good. and evil, jU51 and unjust, wen: nIK naturally and immutably so, but only by human laws and ~PPQintmem. An account of the most ancient of them from Plato and Ari!itode; as also from Diogcnes ~nius and Pluwch. Also in this lOIter age """"" have affirmed that there is no incorporeal substance nOr any natural difference of good and evil, just and unjust. The opinion of some modem theologcn proposed, with its n~ry con~uences, o",ned by some of them, by otben disowned; bur all a]!'fting in this, tbat things morally good. and evil, jU$! and unjust, arc nOi so by n>lure, and antecedent to the di,-inc command, but by the divine command and institution_ CHAPTER I I That good and evil , just and unjust, honest and dishonest, cannot be arbitrary things without nature made by will . Everything must by its own nature be what it is, and nothing else. That even in positi'-e laws and commands, it is not mere will that obligcth, but the natures of good. and evil, just and unjust, rc:aIly existing. The distinction betwixt things naturally and positively good. and evil, more clearly explained. No positive command mal<es any thing moraHy good or evil, just or unjust; nor can oblige othetwisc than by vinue of wil2t is Nlturally just. CHAPTER III Thot the opinion of those who affirm that moral good and evil, just and unjUS!, depend upon the arbitrary will of God, implies a contradiction. The essences of things not convenibll: into nnc annther. Panicular essences depend not on the arbitrary will of God. That there is in God a nature of gooo:lnes& CHAPTU I

,

,.

superior to ",isdom, which measures and detennines hi. ,,-Isdom, as this does his ,,-ill. A mystical or mipnatical representation of the nature of God.

Book

II

I Thai, to a"aid the foroe of "'hat is above demonstratw, ....... philosophers h... e dtoiN that there "'as any immutable nllun: or esKnoe, affirming all being and knowledgtc to be fantastical and relative, of wllom Prougoras, the Abderite, ""as the chief: ... hose inlenl in proposing it, and a tonscquto« thefe(lf " 1lS, lhe destroying of all moralilY, and 10 di5appmve the absolule and immutable nature of good and evil, jUst and unjust. C IIAP TU II 1lIe pretenoetl or groundi for this opinion considered. That il was grounded on the Heratlitical philosophy, which intmduced a moveoble essen«, affirming that nothing stood, but aU things moved. Proll~"'" infen:n« from hence, ... ho to the Heraditical added the old IlonUal Phoenician phibophy, and by this mixture nude up his o"'n. C UAPTU III That the alornical or mechanical philosophy " "as known to ProugDnlS, who Ii"ed before Dt:mocritu5. A brief aa:ount of il. That by the motion of panicla all things are gmerated and corrupted is asserted by him, and thai all sensible qUlllities are nothing without us, but ooly pusions and sc:nsa110m in u... CIlAPTEl IV That the alomical phiboph y is more ancit:nl Ihan the Trojan war, and ,,< b .... ODOI _ WI -r _ .. _ . t ......

110< . . . . . . . .

t

-.L4 .... ......,".G, IIooJ (I.

' ., ..... NrwYori,

9

,~) .

is trUly $uth ... httht. ;t is so d""reed, and for so long time,

vi>;.

jusl

Ot

unjUSl, halyo. unholy. 1

And

Aristod~

more than once Iak,,", r>Otice of,his opinion in his Elh;a-.

Thinp honest and full, ,,·hie!> po~tics I •• conv.,.",n! .bou! ha, • .., JH>! • Vl riety .nd unotl1.linly in !httn, thai ,hey $a). , To 41""," Ko<TI and of An... "_ • ...t .

'u.I'

<m'." .. .....

pop"",.f ........ ;"......,. of " ' _.

.. n;",u . . t-bou .... j .

"ok,,,,. oIo!

Cud""",,', .... O=l ~......,;".".- Diorm ... ·..

..,.., __....." n,.,.. mJ ~. "' ... Loeb"

,hriool: 'TIl< quoIirito .01 ini ...... too... "'I .... ",,"" Iit,. lI,a . ""q,." 011 iii. od quos Iosum """"" io" ...." ........ I _ I 6emondo .... ' (lUI ,EJt.t ~ ... ~d r"" "'.......... "m:., .. ~ HoNn

.. ~

.

i""",,,,,,,,, _ .....

\(0100_.

l.!

Mel , Do .... .".. ,Mi., ,I,•• _ /ow.m,.;. .-. ed. W.• ! .. (I, ' " ••• 1l9->4!~ .01, ... p. ' oS), Cud_ .. ....,.,.. ... '.muI. ...., " ; ..!'.. .....- . ...... ~"'rioh~;.d6rio ",,01 io;" . - .Ii.. "...,....... ...."" ;.

' ;."~.

(iMoI., p. }II,). Soc . . . 1M E...W

"01 ;"'t *'*'; o.w.-... ..-. .,.Ntolan indfttionero .. boo .... o:m~ 0...... ju .. . . - """"""" .......... mocioo_ obnuoo«: TIo .... . uunmoo"J ...- til. ....... d .......... SZ .... I0 .... (00< "'"" ...... ). 1"hwai ~ JoMnn .. 1>1>«0 ...... WiIIWn T ..... uooIP_.

..........,.JoUmr. .. _

,; 'I'

ate

tbat seemingly and verbally acl,"(lwkd~ sucb tbinp:as moral good and evil, j\lSt and unjust, tMt contend n(){Withstanding that these a", not by na!\l", (.pVatl), but mmNtM:>n (8wtl), and that the", is nothing naNrally (IT inunutably JUSt or unjust; I shaJJ from bence felch the rise of this ethical disalurse OT enquiry concerning things good and evil, just and unjulil, budabk and mamc:ful 1Upi nov o:)'UOWv "(lI(WV, &"aiwv ...ai dQi"wv (for so I find these: words frequ~ntly used :as synonymous in Plato and othcr ancient authors): demonstrating in the fil'llt plaa::, that if the", be anything It all good Or cvil, JUSt Or unjUSt, the", must of necessity be something naturally and immutably good and JUSt (&tuov ~1Ki!v "ai .iori"'1TOv). hnd from thence I st"U prC>CffI:y him, ,.;thout whid! oatural justice, neither COVCJWItIl nor commands, could possibly oblige anyone. For the will of another doth no more oblige in commands, than our own will in promises and covenmts. To rondude, therefore. things called nlturally good and due arc such things as the intellecrual nlture obliges to immediately, absolutely, md perpetually, and upon no condition of any voluntary action Wt may be done Or amine.:! intervening. But those thinp Wt an: caUcd positivciy good and due arc such as narural justice or the infl!:lIcctua1 nltun: obligeth to accidentally md hypothetically,

'I'

ate

upoo condition of ~ voluntary act of another pt:TSOn invested with lawful authority in romrrwK!ing. And that it is not the tnerrc will of the COIIUlW1dcr that makes Ihese positive things to oblige or bcrorne due but the nature of things appean evidaldy from hence because it is not the volition of every one that obligeth, but of a pt:rson rightly qualified and invested with lawful aumority. And because the libmy of commanding is circumscribed wimin arttin bounds and limits, so mal if any commandCT go beyond the sphere and bounds mat nature IiCI$ him, which an: indifferent things, his commands will nOI al all oblige. s. But if we would speak yet more acVCcd by Jupi,er, bu"hal .. hen they ..ere fixed, he had obliged himoclfro the pi · 'vlng of, ....... , so I do nat think tha, 1M asenc:u of things, and ,I>ow: rnaIMrnati(:ol lnlths which can be kno"", of I........ arc independen' on God. Bu, I think nc •• n:hcleu, that beca ..... God 10 willed and 10 ordered . ther.fore they.,.. immutable and e,ernal.-

Which is plainly to make them in Iheir own nature muuble. BUI whether CaTlesius were in jest or earnest in Ihili business. it matters not, for his ban: authority ought to be no more valued by us lhan the .. 'N;Wiolollo _ _ _ _ _ quod'O"'-, ' "(o..a.-,M..,.......-lT .... 4J6. C5.\I ... >6, ), n.. loy I'im< C , .... i ...... ~IwtIot '" 6'11- ""~ (1Andooo 111'~ 10 thio and "" ........... ,1, •.,tIw.". ....... (loeb ' M'j. P, , : ..

_ .... "''''' _ _ s.,II ....

'I'

ate

In which position of his then: sccms to be these t,,·o things asiCTted: 6rsl WI ollthinp were in pe'perual motion and nothing had any bo:ing (n:u-) bm a possibilily !O be (jim"), which thc said Protoguru thus cxpressed: AU !hingo are made by motion and m"tun: of Ihings together, :and !herdOr. are AM riJhdy said to hIi:. Por II01hin, ;. bul thin, ;. l al .... ys mode.

.,.tty

S«ondly, Ih.u nothing i. mode ahsoluldy, but only n:lalh'cJy 10 someIbing clse, Ifany ........ y lha, ony thing rido ... is or is ",.,de. h. mUSt say, ...! il i..,o '0 oomct/oin" or in ,espee! oho,.... body for we Cln_ .lIirm thalony thing rither ill or ill made absolul.1y in itselfbu! mali"e1y to ........,hinS .Ise.'

3. Now from hence proceeded those known aphorisms of his, n:cordcd both in Plato and AriSlotk, '1 ....1 those thinp ...·hieh appear 10 cve,), one, arc !O him 10 whom they 'pr:u·. And .gain, 'thar eve,), fancy or opinion of c"cry body ""as rrue'. And again, 'ThaI man is the measure of all things whether existing 01" not cxisling.'~ Which sentence sccmcd so prell:y and orgule to him Ih.1 he placed it in thc "cry r""'l of his book, as Ploto tells us.' And indud i. ocnnpriscs in it all the singubriry of his philosophy, the true meaning thereof being this: n(M only that man taken generaUy is the measure of all things (which in ""'"'" sen.., might be affirmed that our o.... n human faculoo are the mca5urc of all things unlO us), but also th •• 'c"cry indiyidual lTlIn is the measure of all bo:ing and truth' respccti"cly to himselr. f or IiO the following words in PIaIO uplain it: You, meaninJ (..ilh Socrates) is .his. 1"'1 .. e"o"ery IhinJ lppcars to!roe. ouch K is to !roe. And .. it oppears to you, such il i. 10 you. both of \IS being oIik ...... n.' • '£0: 10 every cily or commonwealth, the ..me are so to that city or commonwealth SO long >$ they....."..,." wh.~ver

that

things -.n

\0

Again, Whatsoc:,·.. !hings .n y city thinking doth decree \0 be hones!: or di$honest, ju may all he reduced 10 th..., 1"·0 gmeral heads, .. h....cof the one [is] the oa>';ble, ,J-.. other ......, which is .1 .... )". ;o;ncd """ther with !he .. Ell.

(,-6'.,.,_... .,.... """-i ...... ..t I¥¥oa-'" ~,,",,'" &4It .~ ~ .....h.

'" u... ""'" h""", "=...... _<W-I"",. J"Id·h ,-" ~ ~ n.· ...... ~• .. Io!""" ~!'b ..... /qI/•• 6· ... (W..I5"~

,.,..«

ni .!'b ~.4oa. /I 61 ~~

'I'

ate

.. nsible. 'The ocrues han ....,h rwntt • these, .;ght, hcarinl, tastinz, lUChinl, pleuura, pains, desires, fcars, Ind others innumcn.bIt without names, bul lIWIy lhat h... nama. The SCIUib~ kind doth INwer and COI",espond to nory OM of ...... To .....ipn.u IIWIner of roIou ..... 10 tM MarinI roundl, and to the other om... other oensibleo, th.,...., ofkin tv !hem . . . Whm theref= the .ye, and oomc other thinK .n:oJosoo.H to it, meet together, they bqet whiten, lItd • «"~ ~

1'It~ 1.,J61).

"

••"',

;tllIl'

that Moschus the physiologer, that Iamblichus mentions in the Life of Pythagoras, whefe he affirms that Pythagoras, Jiving some time at Sidon in Phocnecia, convened with Ihe prophetS that were the sua:o:uon of Mochus Physiologer, and was instI'\Icted by them. 'He converwd with the Prophets thaI were the sUCQ"Ssors of Mochus lOd other Phoenician pricsu;.'lJ And "'hat can be more certain than thai both Mochus and Moschus the Ph~ician and phiJosop~ "'lOS no other than Moses, the Jewish lawgiver, as Aroc-rius rightly guesses: 'It seems that it ought 10 be read Moschu .. unless they h.ad rather Tad it Mochus or Moses.'lIi Wherefm-e according 10 the ancient mdition, Moschus or M()I;CS the Phoenician being the first aUlhor of the atomical philosophy, it ought to be calLed neither Epicurian nor Democritica.l, but Moschical or MOSltica1. J. It must be acknowledged that neilhn of Ihese IWO flUTlOll. and renowned philosophe .... Plato and Aristotle, had the good hap to be righlly and thoroughly instructed in this ancient Ph~ician lOd Moschical or Mouical philosophy. Protagoras so much abusing il to Kepticism and the tlking aw;ly of the natural discrimination of good lOd evil, might probably beget a prejudia: in PlalO against it, though he doth rIIH confule Ihe physiological part of it in all his Tlu:QtUrvs, ...t.ere good occasion was offered him. And yet in his 71",.. .... he hath a little smallering of it/' where he endc::.'·ours 10 resolve the differenca of the fOllr dements, fire, air, wa ter, earth, into the different geometrical figures of their inocnsible p:ms, making the small panicles of the earth 10 be cubical, by rcuon of their solidity and mobilily, bUI Ihe ~re, pyramidal, 'It is reasonable that thaI figute which hath the smalest basis, should be attributed 10 that body which is ID05t moving, cutting and piercing,.lI And tl\;ll he doth not mean mystically in this bUI physically, appcan from his own explication of it concerning the insensible parts, 'These cubes and pyramids in the earth and the fire can only be pcroci ..ed by the mind and understanding, sina:: the single

~ (I'

"

i>

,.

ol.UDo;"";"'''"''''''''

,oil _~ .... 11 .... 010.,0 .... ...,; ,.",. I,,,, 0. i.if., ...-. Gibn (J...i'''pooI ,98' Caol_1I> AI", ' ..... fino pubIMn oflunbtido .. •• _ _ "ppm,od of lIMo ""' 1>", _ .. bo ..... _ .. M-.

H rol;" H AI.

-1" '" 11»1.....

r-"nL

r~ (.uOO), ("00 •• 001 hoo ' ,,1. .. .. diorm' b- 'd ........ ' ..1)· J......... c.. ... ' ... ( J _ Oous ..., ,~ .. -7~ ) _ .. _""""" r....di. ph] .s .....U · ' ....... . n 'n phiS t ' " ...... ......,.j ... _ =""Y .... He _ "",,- .. tho Ef ooI.....u..,; ll<Joo., ~ .fI" , .. M. ""'-'l • .,;..........

__

/liW,j.-, .. _

.. '" 016,.,...

.. __..,.. ,H'.,H·

_i , '. ' .

_1< ... _ . 'ro. _ _ c..,-...

,...t,.. ..... ;,. ,,,». ....

~ ,._, _~I_,..;-...;(_,n.._

....

,~

1_

those sensible qualities into figures, siu, and motion of particles, nIX only attributing il to Democrilus, but also making it lh~ ITI05I g~ly reOOvtd physiology before his time: Democriru5 and lII05I of the Phy.ioIogon commit. 1""" absurdity in this, in that they moIr.~ all omlll: to be ..... th, ..hid> is. thinl at 61'SI oishI plainly impoa>blc. Mo.."","Cf, thcy do no! dininpish belw;"t the ubjcclJ ~

10.u the IICII .... and !host: which are propel and peculiar to the ~~nl _ .pan. F",. ""'lfnitudc and figutt, "","'ness and <mOOthneso., oharpnea. and bluntnas. ",hich bnceI~",,!IH:se common obi:.!s' bUI it is no! deceived about wIouB, nor the ht:arinl about $!>Undo. But _ of tht """;'n, pbys;ologistJ r.r.... lhex proper objects 10 the common wui/i., .. Democritus. who as for ,,'hi,e and blad, makes ..... or th"", to consist in " " ' ' ' ' _ and TUII"dncs. (n ...... "'). the o ,.< "

Aristotlol: there: roncludes this di5<XIurse with twO general arguments >.pinS! Iha1 philosophy (that made the Knlible qualities 10 be propcorly senurions in us, and nlXhing else in the oo)ects without us bUI nu.gnirude, filS"re. sile of pam and motion) in mis manner: Th:at there: ;. :0""" """

.. •f:> .Ii .-; ~. u..u , - .n;. ,,,. ,.;. 60i .... old~,_, '''' .Ii 60i ' ok 6oi ...... , ... ..;. ,.;. ioi "" 6oi ...... ".r..", :v-~ 06T, TO ••,,6. d; . ! j ' . • qiIn., TIj • .It 60i ..... ok Bid...........,. 6",..10: ... d;"'P"·j . "'1" ....t;; TO oi»; oW;> ""JOT ,oil ~ ........ .u,a It iJ/.... r.dJjJ.,..Ii IW """' "llIw. oj ,.;. )"IIrif• .oj .li _ "', Koi """"iop;- i>h' nI It ...... mI -v,.... nM, rdlon;, ..-_ .. ~ .Ii """" b ......,.,\ h~ .Ii"""'(_'. ", )8).

' ."7·c being, is su pposed to be such a thing as ', thlt ic should bc: fTtt from mixtu.., Ind pas$ion. for thi. end, .. Anaugo"," t. r-.....;..... Not . _

--,

• '"''"''''' «i>o. tw .. '"'~..,;. ,ooh~

, •

6'",,,

j ..

pwpO;,

....

~ s if it .... ere all noth ing but men: sensalion Or passion from Ih e body. When:as sense i!Self is bUI the passi,'c pcr~ption of some individual malc,;,:!! forms, but to know Of understand, is actively to compn:hend 3 Ihing by somc .bt;rracl, flft, and uni'-ersal reasonings ('ario"n) from when the mind, 'as il wen: looking down'. >s Rocthius cxpresseth il. 'upon the indi" muals below iI, ,-iews and understands them '.'o But sense wh ich 1;0 flal and gro'-elling in the ind i,·iduals. and is stupidly fixed in the maler;"l form, is not able to rise up or os«nd 10 an .bt;lract uni"ersal nOlion _ For which ause ;1 ne,-er affirms or denies any thing of its object, beause (os Aristotle obsfnCi) in all affirmation and negalion al leasl, lhe predicate is .l ......y. uni,·ersol. The eye which is plac>:d in a level with the se;t, and touches Ihe sur&cc of iI, Clnnot take any brg~ prospect upon lhe sea, much less see the whole amplitude of iL But an eye elevaled to a hi gher station, and from Ihen~ looking down, may comprehcll5i'dy "iew the whole sea al on~, or al least ... much of il IS is within our horkon. The .bstract uni,-crsal reasons ( ralj~" .. ) .n: 1n.1 higher "'Iion of Ihe mind from ...·hence looking down upon individual things, il hath. commanding yin' of Ihem. and IS it were a prion' comprehends or knows Ihern. But sense which eith .... lie:!; in the same Ie "d wilh thaI p:lrlicular .runerial obj.ect ,,-h ieh ;t pcrcci,-cs, o r rather under it and bo:neath ;1, cannol emerge 10 any knowledge or trulh cooccming;1. 3. Sense is bUI • sl;ghl and 5up1"-'''' ' tho .... n;p.c:..• ~ ....., Ioobn, .so..-. fmm ""'''. b)" ~... !'..... diotioopiohH all til< ,h'" aoIoius. th.y aK !t>upptn tho, , _ tht """ 11... _1 ... .. . Yeo do I ..... , . . . ,,- 110 .. _ . - . . . - "",Id ____ ,

............... tjt./ptho,they .........'

"" .............. ;. ...........I ob r.c.","_ oed . .... inld and evil, honest and dishonest. Other things it perceives by and through the orpn. of the body: as for example:, by the sense of loucb the soul percci~es nDlhing but the hardness ofthlt which is hard, and the softness of that which is soft, and the like. But essence, and what hardness and softness is, and their contrariety to one another, and again, the CSSCTlce of contrariety itself, the soul alone by itself discoursing endeavours to judl{C of. Wherefore there is this difference " f1" yo •

~.;,n/pw> 6tto .... i« ~ . . . '" ,.0 ........ ~ oIrii_ 4. (.........

_""5- b""KD""". ,. oIi ,o..,~ .....'''' """""""" (.........

n,u",,,, "1').

6.

'I'

ate

Ixfw«n those Ihings Ihal rome: into lilt &QuI by Ihe passion& of Ihe body, and thQ5( things Ihat aris:SCd), then there could be no such thing al all as any absolute truth (IT knowledge. BUI that hypothesis of his, as we have a1rndy showed, plainly OOntndicts and confutes itself. FOT that which pronounces WI our sensible ideas of things ~ fantulical and relative, must n...ds M somc1hing in US superior to sen"', that is, nO{ relative or

r""tastical,

bUI

that judges what rally md absolutely is and is not.

l . BUI w strike this buriness horm, I sllall in the Ills! place funher observe that sense «'.. .I-sJl.-'-""G"">il _ ....

, .659) ..... hi l . - ~A_(1.cIncIooo, ...... io hilS"", k ]; . "."", .. r.U ..ilf'Ioio AHo_(J ........ 6I. )· s..I(I -- I

£.-.,, 0........

.... . _

w~

Book

IV

Chapler I I. Having hirh~rro showed IMrsen"" or passion from corporeal thinp exislenl "ithoul the soul ill nO!: inlellection Or knowledge, SO IMI bodies Ihemsel" 6 an nOI kno"" or understood by sense, il must needs follow from hence that knowledge is an inward and active energy of the mind iw:lf, and the dillpbying of its own inruol~ ,igour from within, wheTeby il doth conquCT (Kpouiv). masler. and command its ob;ecu. and 50 begetS a clear, senne, victorious, and satisfactory sense wilhin iw:lf. Whm:fon though it be vulgarly conceived thot kno,.-Iedge :arises from Ihe force of Ihe rhing known ,cling upon thaI which kno ..'s from without, yel contrariwise il ill most cemin, 10 UK Bocthius' "pression, that inrd1enion and knowledre do nol arise (rom 1M fOftt and acti",;'y of !he thing known from w;rhour. upon thar which knows. bul from the innrd po"""'. """"r and OO.w.;.t CooI...-wdI ....... l""'r ~Ioo. . c:.n.....n .• tItp .. • ~ I~._J a;. ....' .. /*- ~ "NoJ_ It /6s>; ","" II _ b)" U . ........ and H. M
, ,

,,

"

reflecting inwardly upon itself and comprehendin~ them under those inteUigible ideas or reasonings (r..I;" ..... ) of its own, which it prolTUdcs from within itself. So that the mind or intellect may well be caJled (though in another sense than Prot:l.goru meant il) 'the measure of all things' (TO pirpo~ I'!tivrwv) , s. For tke soul having an innate cognosciti~e po~r unin naUy (which is nmhiog else but a pow"r of raising objective ideas .. ithin itself; and intelligible reasons of any thin!!") it must need. be IfJ"Inr..
n 'VI

ate

Knse is in perceiving that which is exettdingly sensibt.. (_.....--

.... ~,...;.,~ ~"""""" (ArioIoIIo. - . ; , . ~ on ... H . T,,'

" "H:''IObtOis'' M_ .. ,q6.0 . ' 7). u..rl ...... _ "

Com.,...}oM

Und"

' ''-.' (7lt r- W,y of A'....... DWiot K _••• in

',w" 1'14";"'. ed. U

. "'_

1

'" C· d.

s......·w. "'_ ""', "" boicl'>t .,.. ofs........,.j opthizing ,,;th the body, seems to perceive corporeal things, as prestnt and rcally existing witbout it, then the)" are ailed sensations (aiuOri/lara). But when the passin afftaion. of Ihe soul are Iookw upon nOI as things really existing without Ihe mind, bU I only as pictures of sensible thin]{S in the mind, or more crass or corporeal cogitalions, then Ihey arc called phantasms (,pavtM/oIara) or imaginations. But these phantasms and iCltsarions being =ll y Ihe same thin]{S, as " 'e ... id before, both of them being passions or afftnions in lhe 50\11, cau~d by SOme local motions in the body. and the difference bctwttlt them being only accidental. insomuch thot phantasms may be: changw into iCltsarions. and sometimes also sensalions into phantaSms, Ihcrcforc allthc:sc passi,'c perccptions of Ihe soul may be: called in general phanwms (4'avtaopara). But the Icti"e pcrccptions "'hich ri.., from the mind it..,lf without the body, are commonly ailed cona:plions of thc mind (V()~/lara). And so we have the !'1m species of pcm:pti"e cogit:ltions. the one phanwms and Ihe other conceptions of the mind. S. Now Ihat all Our pcrccpti"e cogit:l1ions are not ph.ntasms, as many contend. but Ihlt then: is another species of perccpti,'c cogit:llions distilKl from them, arising from tile acti"e vigour of the mind itself, which we thercforc call conceptions of the mind, i. dcmonsuably cvidml from hence; because phantosJru are nothing else: but sensible ideos, images o. pictures of out" ",rd obiccts, such as .re cau""d in the soul by sense. Whence it (0110,,'5, Ih>1 nothing is the object of fmcy (ity lhan any mechanisms or ••M-movers (au/""",/SI) that ,,1:1"( e\'ff y(1 produttd by human an. Wherefore the true form of an animal, if "'e a[[end only t(l the mechanism of the body (for we must ocknowlclge so"",thing clso: not only in men but also in brutes, if they ha"e ""y cogiurioo besides mechanism. which is a substance of another nature, or I cogiutive being united {(I the body)" is an idea that includes mlny rel.ti"e and 1gicallK>ti(lns in it, and thcrefort could never be sumped upon the soul by sen&ct_, Iik< Iknty Mo... 6m;.d

110. Co ...... _ _ _ ....... b ............ """"I

.-......... Iocb>!: . ..... 1.

U A ","uO« .. rho ........ .,of ..... I01.,.,r. Sr< PIa!D, T_)Ob I. ...... Wo I. In c..-... , .. ..,.. 110. ........ " t.o.t;.. ..... ..-ft...t _ mo .... io • ...;.. of , .. "",u ~ h• ......tm., C>ct_ . !I........... dftrtl, to ~ - . . .

"

...

!pn.,._.

,.

.bool, and making many p,trticular views, s«s now one fixed liur, and Ihen another; now the moon, then thc sun; hcre a mounuin, Ihere a vancy; al (lIIC lime: a river, al aoothcr a sea. particular ~egclablcs and animals One after aoother, But it
~

upon it. And therc:fore when it finds or meets with insensible obiens any foot5teps Or resl:mblan
.-.

~~'~ ... "iI!! .... _ pbroiClboOme other individ!W triangle which I had d"where _n, just in the .. me manncr as when I ""'ked upon a piaure, that idea of. man'. face in gencral, Or of thai particular friend, that was occasionally excited Ihereby, "'lIS not my innlte idea, .... an idea thlt sprung wholly from the activity oflhe mind, bur was formerly impressed upon the soul, from individ .... l sensible objects no'" !"elmmbered or C1lled 10 mind. I "r Ihat mis C1nnot possibly be true, becallSC' Ihcr. nc'"cr was any material Or sensible straight line, triangle, cin:le, that we .. w in all our li,'es, that was mathematically exact, but even "n" it"lf, "' least by the help (If mitnsible things il not merely ani6cial from institution or instruction, or of "'ught thingo, butluch as ..,rings originally from natun: itself. II . BUI thai there is an intell igible idea of a mangle inwardly uencd from Ihe mind itself, distinct from the phantasm or sensible idea that is oUlwvdly impressed from the maleriill obj.ect, ..ill yel funhc:r appear from lhat .. hich f"UO ..... For the mind ronsiders firsl thc gmerieal ",lIure of iI, thaI it is a plain figun:, and Ihot 0 plain figun: is the termino!i<Jn "f 0 plain superficirs. Which superficies is nothing dse but mc:n: latitude without profundity, for plain figures an: no OIheno'ise ronceived by geometricians. Now, it is «rlain that this idea of 0 l uper6cies, which geornetricians have, ..... ne,'cr imprimed upon their minds by Gense from any malerial obiects, then: being no such thing any when: existing without the mind, as latitude "'ilhout profundity. And therefon: it must needs arise: from tile: act;'·;ty ofllle: mind itself. And the idea of a plain IUperficies, that is, such a superficies 1$ to all whose pan. a str:aight line may be acc:ommodaled as well as the idea "r. s""ight line, must needs be activdy ucited from the mind also. Apin, il considers the differcna: betwixt 0 triangle and other plain figures, that it is included in and terminated by Ihree s""ight lines jDined togt:ther in three poinlS. Wh ich s""ight lines ioined together being the extremities of lhose lines, ha"e neither longitude, latitude, nor profundilY in them. Whith nuthemaUcaI ideas., in lib manner of a line ..ithout lalitude or profundity, " 'en: never imprnscd upon EuO( passively or consequentially, but as it were prOIeptically, and not with an ISOI:nding, but .... ith a descending pelocption. Whereby the mind first reflening upon iw:lf and its own ideas. vinual1y comained in itli own omniform cognoscitivc po .... er, and thence descending OO .. n...'ard, comprehen
' ....

s... ....... p, sS,

.. l'1ooo, TIwt ..... , s>-O. Aloo '-.',...

". 'II

ate

CoNumUrr ruru l ud imm~laMr morality intelligible ideas, the ~bstra "'''''7

F",;,," >"tfRl, th.cn is no need of Iny other faculty than that of the imari""tion, whereby"", ... minded t"'t ....mi. of th.. ..,.t h...., -..ttimcs .x~itcd on" thing • L~ ' • _In 9l;..."" ....... "",;ioes" 1~ ....... _ ad ... .. . ,,, So in"Wid du, tI .. ran. ..... _ in", . .. ,;.. qIlI.Lldoo_ ...... <jll Ii . - ........... . - .... in .. _ (0,.... pI'! yht ....... pp, ' 7-,1: d. Eo,rW W..... YOI. • I' >0). " c..!-.h~".-,,,""'o/'1)eeca ,...~;d " " _... oifone"'_._~ 'Iiud""_ ; ,Iorio .. .-..enttio _in ... .;,.. sppd\ttiotI ..... pa- _ hoc, lJo. U..... ""I·i .,... . . - .iII~ _ino do fIIIN'" tttllOI. oed do _ _ Ii tb. " . oinI ...... "'""" "I .... ....... """'... --.1_ poca. I . ,,~ Y .... ""'"""" 11 t ••• "Ill;';' h;' fount< ubjo:iliot., ((:SM ... 1111

H;

anything" tQ Knse,"" nxh any fun he. in the knm.-le:dge Qf the nature of thin", but only in makinS Ulie of commoo nama to express !iCveral individ""l. by ~t oncc_ t6. Whell'forc, a1thugh there be alrcad)' ellQUgh said to pnwe that in the: undcnl2nding of individual ~nalthings, besides IieT1K and the Knsible phantasms from them, thell' all' a~ intelligible: ideas and uni>'ersal notions ("'I ...." .. ) exened from the mind itself, by .. hich alone they arc compll'hended. Yft otillto make this business delll" , and also to demoom-ate that the knowledse of universal axiomatical truth and scimrifial theorems is a thing ",h;"b doth nOl passi>'ely result from sense, but from the :H:IU11 rtrength and vil""r of the intelk-ct il$l:lf comprehending i(5 Q..-n intelligible ideas, we will hen: propo:o;e that one JeOOlCtrical theorem COIlcc:ming l triangle:; that it hath three angles equal 10 t1O'O right angles, and oon~ide .... hat the subject Qf il is lcicnrifically (btl.,., c tMughl thot one could not so much as on"" do il.).O Thot is, tMt nl) mat.ria1 thing remain.d on. mom
' '"' ' ' "" .....,,..... .... "".0 ¥ ,IJI_ ..m.;; 1Y""'. 001' (............ M,,.,.pi<J ,.,00 fl. ,. ........... go.-;-,,,,, Of..,.,... ~

Kai}lio,o.; ~"ix""", Notq< ......... m... I'loo>. .. """ ....... (6') 01..,...-." III ..... ojp<jUh ..,.. ..... &CCl, and r.,UJMI of Ihings, distilKt from the individuals thai exist ...·ithmJl us, is all one IS if one should say that there is in the uni .. trse above the orb ofma!ltt and body, anotlle. superior orb of intellectual beinr, thai oomp",hends its o...·n immediaTe objects, that is the immutable "'MMI and ideas of things with itself, by ... hich il understands and knows all thinp without itself. S." And yet, notwithstandinl, though these things nisi only in the mind, they arc not lherc:fore mtf"C firmrnlS oflhc undcl"$tandinr. For if the subjects of all ~ntifica1lhrorems ...·c"' nothinl bUI figmrnts, then aU m.nh and knowkdge that is built upon Ihem .... ould be a mm: fictitious thing. And if truth itself and the intdlecmal nalu", be fictitious things, then what can be real o r solid in the worldl BUI it is C\'idrnt that thourh the mind think. of thrsc things at plcasu,"", )'CI Ihcy are not .. no_,",w'OLB •• ia_H'

T~ '- """'• . If I , _ ~ ...1,oW •.,.::tl ,.;~ OJ • , i . , t,";. ooli:u i.Uk. offmm. (w,,) ofthinr' IS when he says 'There i. no generation of the essence ofa sphere',J that is, it is • thing [hOI is not made, but always is. And d&ewhen: he pronounce. uni"cf$Zlly of the uo", 'The forms of mater~1 things ue without generation and corrup[ion',S< and, 'That none makes the form u "'" ~""". _""" l'e power in the soul superior to outward sense, and of a distinct nature from iI, which i. the power of knowing or und erstanding, Wt is, an .cti~e exertion from the mind itself. And therefore hu this gnnd P"' elll,nence abm-. sense, thaI it is no idiopath y, nOl a Imr. pri>'lI!., a rel.live, seeming, and fantaStical thing, but the romp",hension of thlot which absolulely IS and IS NOT . .. "H ri

a..."

,oIl,~

"""m .... b'" 0/6, "'" ~., "'006""",01 IoJ: 'f"w; f ..,AoI,.a.u.-. 6" .MOl nWnW,

,~ ~

-ollp'" (Sor """'.... enas il wc"' • high and unpardonable pruumption thus 10 "emu", 10 measu", the divine omnipolena, if then ~"' nOl: on absolule aruinty of~ truth of clear intellection., .. beinl nodting else bUI the immutable wisdom of God participated and imparted 10 us, And if il be absolutely impossible even to omnipolena:, that ronrradictories should be true logether, then omnipoltna: illiClf a nnot make any liuch faculrics as drall dearly understand tltat which if false to be true, sina: tlte essence offalschood ronliisu in nothing ebe but non-intelligibiliry. But if they wiU say that il is not impossible Ihat ronrradictories should be true, because our faculties, ...·hich nuke us Ihink so, may be fabc 0.",,1 ,Jeu:iyc us in ncry Lhin~, the ,tnT,.,..,ry U>l' '''''IUCIlt;C flUm hena: will be ru1'6J1tI'O V) only, as sense is, but in that which is (TO ov) and 'whose evidence and certainty is no extrinsical and bolTOwed thing, but .... tive and intrinsical to itsc:lf'. For ifknowledge have no inward KPIT~PIOV [criterion] of its own, but the cenalnty of aU truth and knowledge depend. upon an arbitrary peculiar make of faculties, which is not a thing knowable in itself, neither can wre be any assurance of it given but ",'hat is extrinsical by testimony and revelation (inartificial argumntrary, it is plainly derogatory to it to SUPP'* that God cannot make any creature that can possibly ha" e any analn knowledge of God's 0"'''' existence, or any thing more than a bare credulity of the same , t,.. Wherefore sina it cannot he denied but every clear apprehension is an entity, and the es.cna of truth is nothing but dur intelligibility,n those philosophers mUSt I distribution of Ihings, Ihal allthinp that ~, are ci'.... by na.ure. or art. or chance, Ihey imagine thaI the crea.eu. and rnDeap of dust or atoms, of several figures and magnitudes, variously agitated up and down. So d"l1 these things which we look upon as such real things .... ithoU! us, ore IIO! properly Ihe modifications of bodies themselves, but several mod;fica!ions, passions, and affections of our own souls. 10. Neither ore lhese passive and sympathetical energies of the ...... 1, when it acts confusedly with the body and the pleasures resulting from them, such real and substantial things as those thaI orise from the pure noetical energies of the soul itself intelleclually and morally. For since the mind and intellccr is in itself a more real and substantiallhing, and fuUer of entity than maner md body, those things which arc the pure offipring of the mind (voii ycvYl/l'0roj and sprout from the soul iuclf, mUSI needs be more real and subsllmial than tMK Ihings w~.ich blo!i!iom from the body, or from the soul enfeebled by it, and &lumbering in it. II . Whenforc tlul phiLosopher professing md understanding 10 c;onfutc Atheists, and Ul show, 'that all Atheists, though they pretend 10 wit never SO much, are but bunglers at reason and sorry phiLosophers'." He nOI wilhuul ause fetches his discourse from hence, that 'They that thus infccl men'. minds with impiety and atheism, make that "'hiell is the first ause of all ~nel'llrion and corruption to be the last thing in the universe, and that which is the 1asltU be the first. From hence proc«ds Iheir error concerning the being of God.'''' That is, Ihey make mind and soul IU be the laslthing, md body and mallCT to be Ihe first. This therefore is the ooly course and method which this philosopher p.ooccds in 10 confute the atheists, to show, 'that mind and soul,;n thee order of the uni.·crse. arc hcfure body, and nO! postemr to ii, mind Ind IOu] being that which rule in the universe and body that which is rlJlcd md ordered by il'."' And Ihen is no phenomenon in the world bUI my be solved from this hypothesis. Nuw Ihis he demunsrnt.tcs, nen flOm local mutiun, because body and matter has no oclf-moving power, lIld therefore it is nlO.-.,d IIld dctennined in its motion by a higher principle, .......1 or mind. Which ;argument is further improved by the author of Wt e~ceUent philosophical treatise, BooIr; 11, chapter 2. 92

.. A" .."I,.r-".t"'lo(u""I9.... .. h io _

dar

"";ct,

...

iWd .• I9'L """ '.. . nor determinffi b), inevitable necessity in .. hatsoe"er we do. 1kcallSC' we prai"" and disprai"", commend lI1d blam~ mon for th~ir actings, much omerwi"" Ihan We do inanimate beings or brute animals . Wilen "'e blame or commend • dock or IUlOmaton, we do ;t so as not imputing 10 thaI . U1QtlUton its being th~ cm"" of its 0"'" mo"ing well or ill, agreeably or disagreeably to the end it was design~d for, this being ascribed by us only to the anificer. But when we blame a man for .ny wiekffi actions, as for taking .ny another man's life, either by perjury or by wilful murdCT, we blame him not only as doing otherwi"" than ought to h..'e been dooe, but at"" th.n he might have done, and that it was possible f(lr him 10 ha,'~ .,-oidcd iI, SO thaI he was himself the cau"" oftbe evil thc"",f. We d(l nut impute the evil of aU men 's wicked actions 10 God the creator and "",ktr (If them, after the 5allIe manner as we d(lthe f.ults (If. clock or " .. teh .. hony to the .... tchm.ker, All men's words at least free God from the blame of wickffi actions, pronouncing (/ OW ""' _ _ Au' " . ' 11".

,;,

,.

. ,.

' ....."' 9 " ......... (Plo-. M_

"".Ii . . . ,'" ¥

~. '0. ............ .

." 'VI

ate

Off·ulIJill

mankind hov~ ah""ys had a strong presage of punishments 10 be inflicted by Ihe Deily afTer deaTh. And Th~ ScripTUre assures us that there is a oolemn day of judgement appointed, in ,,-hich God "in conspiCllously, palpably, and notoriously rend~r to ~very one IttOrding to his work. or actions pasl. And mat th~se punislumnts in Hell, after death, .... iII respect only me fUlure, and arc no otherwise designed tkan 15 illrical and medicinal, in ordn to the curing or r«Ov~rinJ of the deceased souls pWlished, as some have imagined (from ",h~nce Ih~)" infer that mere can be no eternal punishments) i!I neither agreeable to Scripture nor sound reason. But if all actions be necessary, Ihere SttIIlS to be no more reason why there should be a day of judge men I appointed. to punish men for murders and adultery, injustice and intrmperancc, than for agues and fe~ers, palsies and lethargies. Hence it is mat mo~lis(S., loolcing upon men's free and voluntary actions as bJamc,worthy in I peculiar sense, have called. th~ evil of Ihem "'diu", OI/p#l, an evil of fault, in way of dislinction from tIwse other n........"')· evils which ore withoul fault, thaI is of " 'hich me doer him§clf was not prop¢rly t~ cause. Con«ming which G«ro mus _ HIK lilli Ptrvf pttuliar only to God Almighty - 110 that he i. the only Klf-determining Being, and tIM: actions of all crealUres "~re by his d ecrees from all eternity made Il"O""SJry" The reasons a1Jegttl why there should be no lueh Ihing in nature uisling anywl\en:, IS a oonlingentliberty or freewill, are cl1iefly such IS these. First, because nothi ng con mo'''' itself, bul quU:flliJ """"fJ.. ,"~wl'" ,.;u, [whatever is ""'vw iI; """-w by oornething eisel, tlM: ..ero.., wluuoever is n..,,'eII is moved by something el"., which mo,-eth nc:c,mrily. Secondly, because though it should be gnnted that tlM:re i. something self-active, or moving from itself, yo-l nmhing can change itself, or act upon itself, or determine its o .... n action_ Since the same thing connCSS Ipin.' him. and .he ..,n.'~ of Arc:opogll$ 100.1( to cond~n him to drink poison" And all." .hI: AmC manner (uith .his ...... Orig~n) will;. be n that, he must determiM himself conlinrmtly, or fonuilously, or ausclcssly, il heinl all one 10 him which he look, n-or could there be my knowledse u ".IUI. [from causest· befOKhand which of tItcsc twenty ..·ould =tainly be tUen. BUI if)"ou will soy lhere was some hidden, nm .. nly detenninltinll in this case, then if the nial should be milk I hundred times oVer and Over apin, or by I hundred se,·era) pl'rsons, there is no re;liOII why We mUSI not allow that all of them must needs take the some SUi""" every time, lhal ill ather the fi ....t, or »e
r...... il>< Sbri< .....i _ i. "",...., ,.";,,,... or . 0", use thei, own narural right and essentiol privilel{e, or property of acring 1m6rt.{XJ~ tnryXaw;r U it happmeth, Or any way, without ruson. Lastly, as for this schobstic definition of f""''''iII, rio:. that it is, after 011 things put, bnides the mlilion iw.lf, even the lUI practical jud",ment in the lI0II1 roo, an indifferency of not doing or of doing this or lhat. This is . n UpsWI thing, which the ancient peripatCtics, U Alennder ll and othen, "'eTc unacquainted Wilh, their aa:o<Jnl thermf being Ihis, 1M! amo~ 1UpIWTWuI the same Ihinp being circumStlnt, lhe Arne impressions being ..... de upon men from withoUI, 011 IMI they ~ passive 10 being lhe same, yet Ihey may, T1<XWilhSlllnding, ael differenlly. The losl practical judgement also, u according 10 these, being that which u men .re not merely passive 10, so is it really the same thing with the /kNMwIr;, the " 'ill, or volition.

Chapter \'ll But this scholaslic philosophy is nunifestly absurd, and mere ..::holastic jargon. For 10 atlributc the act of intellection and perception to the facully ofunder1tanding, and acts of volil;"" to Ihe faculty of will, or 10 say th., it is the understanding that understandeth, and the wil1tlult wil!eth - Ihis is 011 onc as if one should say that thc faculty of walking ""'lketh, and the faculty of speaking spea.keth, or IMI the musical facullY pl.yeth • Ie....., upon the lute, or sings this or that tune. More.,,·cr, since it is generally agreed upon by 011 philosophers, tMI MI~"n S""/ I"P!Osisonlm, whatsoever actS is. SUbsiSlenllhing, Iherefore by this kind of Language Ire th~ twO faculties of understandinS and will nude 10 be two SlipfWnl~, two subsistent things, two agenu, and 110'0

of".'", I,.,;

II .... ' 1 _ _ Pi -..t.ocdo h •

A,

Oo".'!

.h ... _"'Ikjo .. _ _ ~ _

s..-"! . _ II7 . Cad_"-'~"'_"TJS,

.,...w. ........

f -

.,.,

•

....., .......

(P.111) .

'VI

ate

OflrurDill

persons, in the ...... 1. Agreeable to ",'hieh are these forms of speech commonly u5ed by scholastics, that the understltnding propounds to the wil~ represents to the will, ollurQ and invites the will, and the wiU eitht:r follows the understanding, or else refuses to comply with its dictates, ncrcising its own libcny. Whence is thai inexuiable confusion and unintelligibk nonsense, of the will's both firsl moving the understanding, and also the understanding first moving thc will, and Ihis in an infinite and endless circuil. So that this facully of ...ill must needs be suppoocd to mo,·c understandingly, (lr knowingly of ",hal it doth, and Ihe foculty of undemanding to move wiUingly, OT not wilhout ..ill. Wh
br

ate

Offtufl'ill in opposition 10 pri"~le obscurily, and hing in cornel'S. P~xcdlen'y o~u others, superiority, viclory, and SUCttSS - in opposition to being worsled or foiled, left behind, outdone, and djgppoinled . Securily. in opposition (0 anxiety, and fear of losing whatsoevu;"" pulchrilude, in opposition to ugliness., and deformity. Knowlcd"" and lruth, in opposilion 10 the evil. of ignonncc, folly, and error. since nO man would willingly be foo~sh, nO man would err or be mistaken. Liberty, in opposirion to restraint, bondll"" sc:rvility, to be subje(:1 10 oonunand5 and prohibitions. l • BUI above all th=, and such like Ihings. Ihe soul of man h~th in il pavtw;ta fl, a certain ~Iicinatioo, presage, ~m, and odour of one _mllm !'IICOV, the ruling, I{Ovcming, commanding, determining principle in us. For here, or nowhere else:, is to be found the TO i",' 'ill"" and the TO alh~0tlDIm,.., Kif-power, or such a libeny of will as whereby men deser.'e pmK Or dispraise, commendation or blame. Th i. hcg", ilonic of the 50ul is a thing that was much taken nOli« or by the Greek philosophers. after Aristotle, and to th is is ascribed by them the original of thooic moral evils thaI dcscrvc blame and pun ishment, Thus the learned Origcn, Na", fila (uil{l
,M"

opvngnted m

nal

Offrmpjlf it seems blMh rational and pious to concei,'c lhal the best: of all beings. who is tumtlally good md ~,should always act aJrttably to its o ...·n nalure, md !herefnre ...ill !he besl, md OO1lsequendy make Ihe world in thc best: manner that it was capable or. Some indeed will needs p~nd"1 Ih.1 God does nIlt always do Ihe besl, becou"" IMY suppose Ihis to be m essential freedom and libeny in him, 10 be indiffemu 10 will atm the better or !he WOrR:r. Which is all one as to !Oay he is indiffc rent to act either, acrordinl to his own wisdom and goodnCS!l, or not . But none ofthesc men, nor my alheists neither, were e'-cr yet able to show how the workmanship of God in m y part of !he world, or in their own bodies, could have been mended in the least thing that is. Nor can God's providtntt in the govemnmlt of rational creatures be suspected nnlto be tM best, by m y wl\o belie'-e that M hath appointed a day wherein he will judlt' the "" orld in righTeousness, and without respect of pers[on,j "'nder to evfery] man accordjing] to hi, works. When Mscs tells us of God pronouncing of everything thaI he made, that it was 'IC~ ~1t1 vtry IOH (Gen. 1.31 ), we aJ"C to undcntand the meaning to be, thO! it"'0\5 the besl, the Hebrews having no olher W;ly 10 express the superlative. Notwithstanding which, arbitrary md contingenl liberty is not quite excluded from !he Deily by us, there beinl many cases in which there is no besl, bUI a gmt scope and latitude for Ihings to be detmnined either this w'y, or that ..... y, by the arbitrary will and pleasure of God A.lmighty. A.. for instana:, !he world being s upposed to be finite (as it ean nil moll: be infinite than it could be eternal), that it should be just of sucb a bigness, and nIlt a jot less or bigger, i. by the arbitrary appoinlment of God, since nil man can with reason affirm Ihat il was absolutely best that it sl\ould h[a]ve been so much as an inch or hair'sbreod!h bigger or lesser !hm it is. The number of the stan musl need s be either even or odd, bue il cannot be said that either of them is absolutely in ilKlf the besl nOr yet Ihat the number of those nebulose .tllkl( [Staf1;j, that appear to our sight as.mall as pind ust, sl\ould be just so many as they arc, and neither one more or Jess. So likewU;c the number of created angds and human soul., or that every One of uS had a being and I consciousness of ou rselves, must needs be delennJn.ed by the arbitrary will and pleasure of the Deity , wl\o can obliterate and blot "

.. .... 01 ~ 'cs, neC' mlC of liberty, .. hidl is man 'l po:rfection. The flC\llty offrttWiU is good. .. he.wy men lin' adnnccd abo~c ,he low condition of brute animals. ,,'1'10 a", under I """ i~y of foIlowin, lIM:ir fancies..., ,, '., and appetiles 10. JeftIWII good only, 0' a good of pri""'tC ..elfish utility, lhey hlvin, no JCIIK of thll good of honesty, and .ilf'oICOllinal whidl is of I diffcm. t kind from il. Bin this flClllty bein, thaI which ill pro~. 10 crcalUru, and 10 im~rfttl beinp only, hath I mi;nU1'( of creamrely "ukMtl Ind im~.fection, in it; and therefore is liable 10 be abused, 10 all lhereby 10 beCOlrlC 10 OUrKh'H the Clu"" of 1Hl' own bond~ and servitude. Whereas lrue liberty, wh ich is I state of vin"", holme., and rightnl\lsneu (a communiClted Divine ~rfttlion or panieipation of lhe Divine na!U re) can llC\'o:r be abused .

Q UpltT X\'III

I now pro< .d 10 _,,'Cr all lhe argumcnu or objections made aplnsl this I'ac:uIly of the ~' rjJI'~ or aUreoeOOaIO ~, thil; P# ,.m/.I, or pD'iJl In which words ~ doth It once cndo:>"our 10 t:r.uuIUK and ronve:y the poison of .theism, and yn 10 to do it cnJii]y, as that if he be charJaI with it, he might have some lftITIinr iublmu"" or ~.I4ioo1. He aith fil'$( WI it is rirhd y infCfKd tMe is lOme fil'$( ttemal mover, which Ioob vtry wtLL, but then he doth not stand 10 this, but contradicts it immcdiau.ly af~rWll'd in denyinl that lhen: ;. any nemal immoveahlc mover, or any other nemal mover, t!un iuc:h as was itKlfbefore R'IO\-~ by IOIM'thinr tlte, which is all one as to Sly that then: was no first mo'"er. But one thinr moved another fivm nernity, without any hqinninr, any fint mo~er, any unmo,'ed stlf-mo~ed movu." For the fim mover, if then: be indttd any such, must n«ds be an unmoved mo"er, .. hich .,.. not ilSt]f before ....,..ed or acted by anothtt, but a stlf-movinr mClVu. BUI Ihis wt..ok Irlument th", at OIK'C. Slnkinl apinst: contingttlCy, and the: heinl of a God boI:h toStthtr, and which pretends 10 be III malhc:marial dcmonOlr.uion iI evidently the ~ cI"IioWi piece of rid~1ous nonstnK that cvc:r .... wrinen . For if then: be moIion in the corporal world, as there is, and no pari of il could eVer move itself, then must there of MC$ity be some unmoved or stlf-moving thin, as the fil'$t ClUIit thenof, IOmcthing which cuuld mo'"< or ~ from itself wilhout beinll' moved or ao;led upon by I rI01her. BecaUK if nothinll" al aLL could move: Or &CI by il$tlr, bUI only u il Willi moved or acted upon by another then could not motion or IClion ever lx-gin, or ever have romc into the world . BUI since then: is motion in the corporeal world. and no part of it could moVc ;tRlf, it mUit nffds eithcr ori,inal!y pto(led from a fint unmoved or IItlf-moving mo,'er and ClUK. or else: .LL of il ...... "e from lIOlhinl, and be produced without a ClUIit. Bullhc tnlth is Ihis, liuollhc:se unlikilful phiJosophers apply that 10 all heinl wiuot:50tvu, .. h ich is the property of body only, tlw il QUlnot moVe itldf, nor othc ....isc mo,'e t!un as it is Clused 10 move by IOmtlhin, dst without it; as it ClllIIOI $lOp it$ motion neither, "'hm it ;. ......,. ;"'PI d upon il (it brinl wholly of. paNive natun:), and from hmcc il afforded an undeniable demonstration 10 us., that ~ is mmc incorporaJ heinl. and IOrntIhinl unmovo:>ble. or Itlf-m.ovii1g and sdflaing, u tht firsl aUK of all moI:ion and action , ...hich in iuelf nor

.. ·""'_ ... _w·.· ,.... _ " ,

;

. t ._,.

_,,;, . _ _ ; ' tlTlS _ .... t I _ ...... _'-""'_,.; i:a _ _ ........ _ " ....... _ t l _ · ,.,mI_. SOOTls. ...... ,.... ,. '99

Offrull>ill

being moved nor aaed by mod'leT, can cause body to move locally, md did at first imprus such quantity of motion upon m. oorpornJ universe as oow theR' is in it. u

Chapter

XIX

Apin, it is obj«ted, that though it should be granted there was 50melhing ""If-mo"ing md ""If-acti"e, and which ,,";os not merely passive to another thing without it, acting upon it, yet (or all that, it is noc pos.sibk that anything should determine itself, act;"eIy chmge itself, or act upon itselfbeause one and the gme thing cannot be both agent and ~tient at onoe. To "'hich I reply, first thll there is no necessity rut .. hal actcth from itself should al"lI)"S act uniformly, Or without any diffen:nce or change. Thai in U5, which moves lhe members of our body by cogitarion or will, doth not alway. do it alike, but determinelh illlelf diffen:ndy Ihen:in, acting somerimts on One member IiOffiClim"" on anotlteT, moving SOI1lC-+ times this "";IY sometimes that ""y md with roon: or less oelerity md strength, md sometimes arresting motion apin . So that nothing can be moR' pbin thilll rut, by determining illlelf differendy, it doth a.=rd+ ingly detcmline the motion orthe body. And it is t'Omrary to the verdict of our inward sense 10 affi rm that, when we thu. mon ou r body and members arbitrarily and at pleasure, no onc motion of our finger, no nicUlion of our eyelids, no word spoken by our tongutc could ~CT possibly h....: been otherwise than it "-as at that time, but that it "-as necessarily so determined, by a succ:cssi,'c chain of caUKS, from an eternity, or at least from the beginning of the world, much Jess, as Mr Hobbes further dogmatizes, that theR' is no one action, how casual or contingent .... ver il ..,.,m, 10 the au.ing whereof did not II onoe concur L• • 16 WI1"tsOever IS .n 'tntm "'"",,•. That which determineth itsdf and changeth itself may be said to act upon itself, and consequenrly to be bolh agent and ~tient. Nuw though this cannot poUibly belong tu a body which nen . moves itself, but is

.. HaIf._·'. . . . . . N....-,..."or"du," ..... ......... ", .. B t:

. Of ~.oJ

TII< ' · t

.-""""""f"",, '........

·;, IO ... bu>dTIS"" . ..... s.

p • .., . TIl;' io _

.................. .

;cf p. ,60, .. , . , _

'VI

ate

Offrw»ill es5mlially trCPOKivrrrov, al .....ys mo,'cd by ~thing elK widlO\J! ii, yet: nothing hinde~ but that what is by naNre amo-Ki",/rov, selfmoving and Klf-aai"e, may also dctermine its own motion or acti,;ty. and 00 the ".me be ".id 10 be both agmt and patK:n!. We arc: Ct " -_' ... A.. ,; ' ~ . . . . .; • u. .. ~ ,~.o o,. So< M. I'W>.lIT1oQ; 10 pass Wt the same motives

,.

OffrurPilI

and reasons have not the same effect upon different men, nor yet upon the $lime man at different times. Wherefore thi. is but one of the vulgw errors; that men are merely passi"e to the ap~annces of good, :and to their own practical judgements.

Ch~pter XX II

Aoother argu"",n t for the natural necessity of ill actions much used by the Stoia was this, that OOOllV avaiTlOv, nothing can be ...·;thout. calISe, and wha~ver hath a callSC: must of neor:ssiry co"", to ~. Mr Hobbes think. to improwe this argu""'nt into a demonslntion afler this manner . Nothing can come to pass withou t a sufficient cause, :and • sufficient callSC: is that to which nothing is needful [{} prod uce the effect, wherefore every sufficient callSC: must needs be: a necns:uy cause, or produce the effect necessarily." To .... hich chiWish argumentation the reply is easy, that a thing may have sufficient power, or ..... m nothing of POWCT IleCCSSary to emble it to produce an effect, which yet may ha"e power also or freedom not to produriooiom.

,,,.~

Offrtt~1

Apin ir is objeaed mar me suppollirion oflibeny of will is inconsi.nem wim Divine graa: and will nea:ssarily infer PeLogianism.91 Bur rhe falsiry of mis may appear from hence, mlr rhose I ngels which by rheir right use of liberty of win stood ...·hen others by the abuse of il fell, toough by that ~ ~beny of will they might slill possibly continue wimout falling, yet for all mit it would not be impossible for them 10 fall, unless IDey had aid and assistance of Divine gnce to secure them from it. Wht-""fore it is commonly con~ved thlt IS, notwithstanding that liberty of will by which it is """"ible for them ne ,-cr to foil, they had need of Divine graa: to sccu.., them agains! a possibility of falling, and that they a.., now by Divine grate 6xed and con6rmed in such a sute as that they can never faU . Much mo.., is the aid and assistance of o;,-ine gnce necessary bolh for the reoo"cry of lapsed souls and for their pcrsuer.mce. The uR of their own freewill is necessarily mjuired, for God, who made uti ""itoout oul1ltlv,,", will not ... '-c US witoout oul1lth· ... _ We ."" to 'strive to enter in It the straight gate','111 '0 fight me good fight,,"10 and 10 run I good nce,101 we a", to purge ourselves from .n unclnnlleSS of flesh and spirit, to.! ..e a"" 10 'keep ourselves in the "we of God,.!OJ He was an unregcnerlted JXTiOIl who in rhe parable had but One IIknt giHn him and is condemned for a slothful sen.. nt, beca~ he did not by the use of his frttwill impro'-e thlt rakn! which he had reaived and ""tum to his IlWiter his own with usur)', which had he done mO"" would hIve been superadded. Our own endeavours and activity of freewiU • .., insufficienr withoul Ihe addition and ilSSistanee of Divine grace, for it is God ...·hieh worhlh in US both to will and to do,l00 'by grace ye are ""ved',lDI 'and by me grace of God I om wh.t I ,m,

,.

... ,c...;,,-.. '$.0"_

'I'

ate

Offruwill

Chapter XXVlI Then: is :mmher witty objection nude by a modem writer asserting a fatal nKUSity of all aetions, that whtn:os libtrty of will is introduced to sal"e a phenomenon of a d.y of judgement, and the justice of God in inflicting punishment upon men after this life for their actions p.1St, this will by no mans ..,...·e their tum. I Gay continlC'ncy will no mon: sal"e th is pherK>l1M:non than n«usit)', For it is no more just that men should bt damnw to all eternity for. mere chance or contingency, th:m th.t they should for necessity. T o damn men for their continlC'nt frecwilled actions is aU OOe OS if one should bt damned for throwing such. CIst of a die. Men could no more help contingency th:m necusity. Whcn:f""" the matter can be resoh'w into nothing c\sl: but God's absolute po ...er, and his arbitr:lry :md u=untable will, ... hi ch by n:ason of bis omnipotence malt •• tlut to bt JUSt whatsOC"er he will do. It seems he thinl« not 6t to damn men to eternity but &uch os wen: necessitated to do wicked actions before, bill he might h"'e done OI.herwi..: if he had thought good by hi. ab!;olute po ...er. To :mSWer this, no nun shall bt damned for the contingency of any action ... here thcfC' YI'U no diffen:nce of ben.r or wor.." a pc:rfect ~""lity :md one thing os much eligible os tile other; then: can be no fault nor blame in this cose OS YI'U Gaid btfon:, But where there is an in~ua1il)' ofbtncr or WOrK, • divcrsity of gwd, honesty, and duty on one h:md, :md "'05",,1 pin :md pleosure on Ihe other, men having. power hcfC' Oyer thcmseh'cs to intend :md exen themsch-es in resisting their ..,nsual appc:titcs:md cnden'ouring more :md more by degrees to comply with the dicutes of conscience opposed to them. If at the end of their livC$ they bave run their course OS that they have suffered them..,lves.t lost to be quite foilw and vanquished by the ..."....,r, it is jun that th~ should fall lihort of the priu SCI before them, that they should lose. the em ..... :md receive shame, disgracc, and punishment . Men shall not bt damned for the cost of a die or such a fonuitous contingency. But for their not using rut power which they ha"c oVer themselves to promote themselves towards the good of honesty :md also for their abusing that power, by actively determining :md fixing the"""l.·.,. in vicious habits.

".

Glossary This glotsary lisllI Cudwonh's unfamiliar I~rminology and U5a"",. BUI il i.....onh noting thaI sonM: of the earliest recorded usages of 00. conlemporary conceplual vocabulary occur in Cud .... onh (I~rms such as consciousness, r~tributin, p"yc!\ology, ..,If-determinalion).' a.c:ucangular ambage angulo.silY annected anvilling .podictical .poretical appulse aplitude alJut~

a"ersalion Canesius celerity circumslant COJiubility CUf'lJlion COJII05citi,'~

acutc-angkd (triangle) circumlocution; obscure bngw~ angularity linked working at an anvil ('an.-il' u..,d as "erb) dtmonslJ~ble, cenain full of doobu and objections pressure. impaa, dri"ing against fimess, suitability slurp, subtle .,..,. .I0Il

o..an_

,,,,,d

incidental; circumjacent capable of being t!\ought affinity. connection cogniti,'~

T_ .. ' ,,,-,

' 7M ', ,6t, '1So lao-,. 111' ,

' .... ,1It. ...; _ ... """'.

n;.,. u...... _~4'

n·

'

.

' _ ~ 6po.; _ "''''''

........... '1' n-';

M

,,>. __ ... n . .,.;, ' ... . ...

,10, ,III.

~ !1..~>!::1.

~ .... (J>__ Soyd ... iw.)m, ~

..

,-

' Ll- ' ...

. . . . ... . ... . ......... I]..I'>=iL ,. . . . ". " • .."

'

t ; t . . ....

,;, ,,

'SO-

.•I "

•. Foo,,.._ '" o.

~._

'/1'_

ofOdloom

" "' !J

""-..,n..... .. .. .... -~~

\I ....... ....... ~' "

,t,

!, .,; .. Zria, ~ . -(".. ....

' ;

.,

. . . .o

.

..

Cambr id gr Tex,s in ,he HislOr y of P hilO5Op h ~­ Tilin ,u~H.lml i~ I~ >trW. Ih,!uT Antoine Arnauld .nd PicNe Nicole

V....,., Bu""' ...) Boyle A Fry( £~,.iry

u". 1M

lAtir #r I~t Arl ./ 11Iidi.., (wi",d

11)- Jill

V"". ,1y RmiwJ N.I .... •/ N.", .. (edited b)"

Edward B. D .... ond Miduocl H unte,) eon ..:ay 1U J>rT.n,ln ./Ikt Mf1l Arilol . d M WrJI Pk,l.,.,.; (tdi«d by Allison P. Couder, and Taylor Cont) Cudworth A T".,iM E'mul • ..J '_toik AI.nlU; (edited by 52r.1h H ullOn) D' wnes M uil.iN.... Fins Pka....,ky, ..ith from the ()jjt" .... .,.J R"oo (rili,riI.ru. an introduction by john Conin","",) Kant 1U M#.,.yoin ./ M ...1t (edited by Mory G . CSO!" ";th I n introduction b)' Rose. Sulijnrl) La MClIn. M ......... AI.- ul OIj ... II'ril"',. (editril by Ann Thorn ..... ) Leibni>. N.", £SUp ... 11. __ U""",,.J;., (edi,ed by P.... Rfmmn' ond jonathan Hennen) NictzSdM: 11_•. All T.. H .... _ (n:aru;b,ed by R_1- Hollinrd>l< " ith on introd....:non by R>eIwd &hlclll) Schlei.. ",ochcr 0" R.Iit....: S,.«At1 I. ill C..(u",1 o..,itm (rilited by Richard Ctooter)

e""",,,,;..,

..,Icction.

'VI

ate

Copyrighted material

Copyrighted material

CAMJlRIDGE UN IYE Il S ITV PR ESS