23. Chapter XXIII
Of our Complex Ideas of Substances
1. Ideas of particular substances, how made.
The mind being, as I have declared, furnished with a great number of
the simple ideas, conveyed in by the senses as they are found in exterior things, or by reflection on its own
operations, takes notice also that a certain number of these simple ideas go constantly together; which being
presumed to belong to one thing, and words being suited to common apprehensions, and made use of for quick
dispatch, are called, so united in one subject, by one name; which, by inadvertency, we are apt afterward to talk of
and consider as one simple idea, which indeed is a complication of many ideas together: because, as I have said,
not imagining how these simple ideas can subsist by themselves, we accustom ourselves to suppose some
substratum wherein they do subsist, and from which they do result, which therefore we call substance.
2. Our obscure idea of substance in general.
So that if any one will examine himself concerning his notion of pure
substance in general, he will find he has no other idea of it at all, but only a supposition of he knows not what
support of such qualities which are capable of producing simple ideas in us; which qualities are commonly called
accidents. If any one should be asked, what is the subject wherein colour or weight inheres, he would have
nothing to say, but the solid extended parts; and if he were demanded, what is it that solidity and extension adhere
in, he would not be in a much better case than the Indian before mentioned who, saying that the world was
supported by a great elephant, was asked what the elephant rested on; to which his answer was--a great tortoise:
but being again pressed to know what gave support to the broad-backed tortoise, replied--something, he knew not
what. And thus here, as in all other cases where we use words without having clear and distinct ideas, we talk like
children: who, being questioned what such a thing is, which they know not, readily give this satisfactory answer,
that it is something: which in truth signifies no more, when so used, either by children or men, but that they know
not what; and that the thing they pretend to know, and talk of, is what they have no distinct idea of at all, and so
are perfectly ignorant of it, and in the dark. The idea then we have, to which we give the general name substance,
being nothing but the supposed, but unknown, support of those qualities we find existing, which we imagine
cannot subsist sine re substante, without something to support them, we call that support substantia; which,
according to the true import of the word, is, in plain English, standing under or upholding.
3. Of the sorts of substances.
An obscure and relative idea of substance in general being thus made we come to
have the ideas of particular sorts of substances, by collecting such combinations of simple ideas as are, by
experience and observation of men's senses, taken notice of to exist together; and are therefore supposed to flow
from the particular internal constitution, or unknown essence of that substance. Thus we come to have the ideas of
a man, horse, gold, water, etc.; of which substances, whether any one has any other clear idea, further than of
certain simple ideas co-existent together, I appeal to every one's own experience. It is the ordinary qualities
observable in iron, or a diamond, put together, that make the true complex idea of those substances, which a smith
or a jeweller commonly knows better than a philosopher; who, whatever substantial forms he may talk of, has no
other idea of those substances, than what is framed by a collection of those simple ideas which are to be found in
them: only we must take notice, that our complex ideas of substances, besides all those simple ideas they are
made up of, have always the confused idea of something to which they belong, and in which they subsist: and
therefore when we speak of any sort of substance, we say it is a thing having such or such qualities; as body is a
thing that is extended, figured, and capable of motion; spirit, a thing capable of thinking; and so hardness,
friability, and power to draw iron, we say, are qualities to be found in a loadstone. These, and the like fashions of
speaking, intimate that the substance is supposed always something besides the extension, figure, solidity, motion,
thinking, or other observable ideas, though we know not what it is.
4. No clear or distinct idea of substance in general.
Hence, when we talk or think of any particular sort of
corporeal substances, as horse, stone, etc., though the idea we have of either of them be but the complication or
collection of those several simple ideas of sensible qualities, which we used to find united in the thing called horse
or stone; yet, because we cannot conceive how they should subsist alone, nor one in another, we suppose them
existing in and supported by some common subject; which support we denote by the name substance, though it be
certain we have no clear or distinct idea of that thing we suppose a support.
5. As clear an idea of spiritual substance as of corporeal substance.
The same thing happens concerning the
operations of the mind, viz., thinking, reasoning, fearing, etc., which we concluding not to subsist of themselves,
nor apprehending how they can belong to body, or be produced by it, we are apt to think these the actions of some
other substance, which we call spirit; whereby yet it is evident that, having no other idea or notion of matter, but
something wherein those many sensible qualities which affect our senses do subsist; by supposing a substance
wherein thinking, knowing, doubting, and a power of moving, etc., do subsist, we have as clear a notion of the
substance of spirit, as we have of body; the one being supposed to be (without knowing what it is) the substratum
to those simple ideas we have from without; and the other supposed (with a like ignorance of what it is) to be the
substratum to those operations we experiment in ourselves within. It is plain then, that the idea of corporeal
substance in matter is as remote from our conceptions and apprehensions, as that of spiritual substance, or spirit:
and therefore, from our not having any notion of the substance of spirit, we can no more conclude its
non-existence, than we can, for the same reason, deny the existence of body; it being as rational to affirm there is
no body, because we have no clear and distinct idea of the substance of matter, as to say there is no spirit, because
we have no clear and distinct idea of the substance of a spirit.
6. Our ideas of particular sorts of substances.
Whatever therefore be the secret abstract nature of substance in
general, all the ideas we have of particular distinct sorts of substances are nothing but several combinations of
simple ideas, coexisting in such, though unknown, cause of their union, as makes the whole subsist of itself It is
by such combinations of simple ideas, and nothing else, that we represent particular sorts of substances to
ourselves; such are the ideas we have of their several species in our minds; and such only do we, by their specific
names, signify to others, v.g. man, horse, sun, water, iron: upon hearing which words, every one who understands
the language, frames in his mind a combination of those several simple ideas which he has usually observed, or
fancied to exist together under that denomination; all which he supposes to rest in and be, as it were, adherent to
that unknown common subject, which inheres not in anything else. Though, in the meantime, it be manifest, and
every one, upon inquiry into his own thoughts, will find, that he has no other idea of any substance, v.g. let it be
gold, horse, iron, man, vitriol, bread, but what he has barely of those sensible qualities, which he supposes to
inhere; with a supposition of such a substratum as gives, as it were, a support to those qualities or simple ideas,
which he has observed to exist united together. Thus, the idea of the sun,--what is it but an aggregate of those
several simple ideas, bright, hot, roundish, having a constant regular motion, at a certain distance from us, and
perhaps some other: as he who thinks and discourses of the sun has been more or less accurate in observing those
sensible qualities, ideas, or properties, which are in that thing which he calls the sun.
7. Their active and passive powers a great part of our complex ideas of substances.
For he has the perfectest idea
of any of the particular sorts of substances, who has gathered, and put together, most of those simple ideas which
do exist in it; among which are to be reckoned its active powers, and passive capacities, which, though not simple
ideas, yet in this respect, for brevity's sake, may conveniently enough be reckoned amongst them. Thus, the power
of drawing iron is one of the ideas of the complex one of that substance we call a loadstone; and a power to be so
drawn is a part of the complex one we call iron: which powers pass for inherent qualities in those subjects.
Because every substance, being as apt, by the powers we observe in it, to change some sensible qualities in other
subjects, as it is to produce in us those simple ideas which we receive immediately from it, does, by those new
sensible qualities introduced into other subjects, discover to us those powers which do thereby mediately affect
our senses, as regularly as its sensible qualities do it immediately: v.g. we immediately by our senses perceive in
fire its heat and colour; which are, if rightly considered, nothing but powers in it to produce those ideas in us: we
also by our senses perceive the colour and brittleness of charcoal, whereby we come by the knowledge of another
power in fire, which it has to change the colour and consistency of wood. By the former, fire immediately, by the
latter, it mediately discovers to us these several powers; which therefore we look upon to be a part of the qualities
of fire, and so make them a part of the complex idea of it. For all those powers that we take cognizance of,
terminating only in the alteration of some sensible qualities in those subjects on which they operate, and so
making them exhibit to us new sensible ideas, therefore it is that I have reckoned these powers amongst the simple
ideas which make the complex ones of the sort? of substances; though these powers considered in themselves, are
truly complex ideas. And in this looser sense I crave leave to be understood, when I name any of these
potentialities among the simple ideas which we recollect in our minds when we think of particular substances. For
the powers that are severally in them are necessary to be considered, if we will have true distinct notions of the
several sorts of substances.
8. And why.
Nor are we to wonder that powers make a great part of our complex ideas of substances; since their
secondary qualities are those which in most of them serve principally to distinguish substances one from another,
and commonly make a considerable part of the complex idea of the several sorts of them. For, our senses failing
us in the discovery of the bulk, texture, and figure of the minute parts of bodies, on which their real constitutions
and differences depend, we are fain to make use of their secondary qualities as the characteristical notes and
marks whereby to frame ideas of them in our minds, and distinguish them one from another: all which secondary
qualities, as has been shown, are nothing but bare powers. For the colour and taste of opium are, as well as its
soporific or anodyne virtues, mere powers, depending on its primary qualities, whereby it is fitted to produce
different operations on different parts of our bodies.
9. Three sorts of ideas make our complex ones of corporeal substances.
The ideas that make our complex ones of
corporeal substances, are of these three sorts. First, the ideas of the primary qualities of things, which are
discovered by our senses, and are in them even when we perceive them not; such are the bulk, figure, number,
situation, and motion of the parts of bodies; which are really in them, whether we take notice of them or not.
Secondly, the sensible secondary qualities, which, depending on these, are nothing but the powers those
substances have to produce several ideas in us by our senses; which ideas are not in the things themselves,
otherwise than as anything is in its cause. Thirdly, the aptness we consider in any substance, to give or receive
such alterations of primary qualities, as that the substance so altered should produce in us different ideas from
what it did before; these are called active and passive powers: all which powers, as far as we have any notice or
notion of them, terminate only in sensible simple ideas. For whatever alteration a loadstone has the power to make
in the minute particles of iron, we should have no notion of any power it had at all to operate on iron, did not its
sensible motion discover it: and I doubt not, but there are a thousand changes, that bodies we daily handle have a
power to use in one another, which we never suspect, because they never appear in sensible effects.
10. Powers thus make a great part of our complex ideas of particular substances.
Powers therefore justly make a
great part of our complex ideas of substances. He that will examine his complex idea of gold, will find several of
its ideas that make it up to be only powers; as the power of being melted, but of not spending itself in the fire; of
being dissolved in aqua regia, are ideas as necessary to make up our complex idea of gold, as its colour and
weight: which, if duly considered, are also nothing but different powers. For, to speak truly, yellowness is not
actually in gold, but is a power in gold to produce that idea in us by our eyes, when placed in a due light: and the
heat, which we cannot leave out of our ideas of the sun, is no more really in the sun, than the white colour it
introduces into wax. These are both equally powers in the sun, operating, by the motion and figure of its sensible
parts, so on a man, as to make him have the idea of heat; and so on wax, as to make it capable to produce in a man
the idea of white.
11. The now secondary qualities of bodies would disappear, if we could discover the primary ones of their minute
parts.
Had we senses acute enough to discern the minute particles of bodies, and the real constitution on which
their sensible qualities depend, I doubt not but they would produce quite different ideas in us: and that which is
now the yellow colour of gold, would then disappear, and instead of it we should see an admirable texture of
parts, of a certain size and figure. This microscopes plainly discover to us; for what to our naked eyes produces a
certain colour, is, by thus augmenting the acuteness of our senses, discovered to be quite a different thing; and the
thus altering, as it were, the proportion of the bulk of the minute parts of a coloured object to our usual sight,
produces different ideas from what it did before. Thus, sand or pounded glass, which is opaque, and white to the
naked eye, is pellucid in a microscope; and a hair seen in this way, loses its former colour, and is, in a great
measure, pellucid, with a mixture of some bright sparkling colours, such as appear from the refraction of
diamonds, and other pellucid bodies. Blood, to the naked eye, appears all red; but by a good microscope, wherein
its lesser parts appear, shows only some few globules of red, swimming in a pellucid liquor, and how these red
globules would appear, if glasses could be found that could yet magnify them a thousand or ten thousand times
more, is uncertain.
12. Our faculties for discovery of the qualities and powers of substances suited to our state.
The infinite wise
Contriver of us, and all things about us, hath fitted our senses, faculties, and organs, to the conveniences of life,
and the business we have to do here. We are able, by our senses, to know and distinguish things: and to examine
them so far as to apply them to our uses, and several ways to accommodate the exigences of this life. We have
insight enough into their admirable contrivances and wonderful effects, to admire and magnify the wisdom,
power, and goodness of their Author. Such a knowledge as this, which is suited to our present condition, we want
not faculties to attain. But it appears not that God intended we should have a perfect, clear, and adequate
knowledge of them: that perhaps is not in the comprehension of any finite being. We are furnished with faculties
(dull and weak as they are) to discover enough in the creatures to lead us to the knowledge of the Creator, and the
knowledge of our duty; and we are fitted well enough with abilities to provide for the conveniences of living:
these are our business in this world. But were our senses altered, and made much quicker and acuter, the
appearance and outward scheme of things would have quite another face to us; and, I am apt to think, would be
inconsistent with our being, or at least well-being, in this part of the universe which we inhabit. He that considers
how little our constitution is able to bear a remove into parts of this air, not much higher than that we commonly
breath in, will have reason to be satisfied, that in this globe of earth allotted for our mansion, the all-wise
Architect has suited our organs, and the bodies that are to affect them, one to another. If our sense of hearing were
but a thousand times quicker than it is, how would a perpetual noise distract us. And we should in the quietest
retirement be less able to sleep or meditate than in the middle of a sea-fight. Nay, if that most instructive of our
senses, seeing, were in any man a thousand or a hundred thousand times more acute than it is by the best
microscope, things several millions of times less than the smallest object of his sight now would then be visible to
his naked eyes, and so he would come nearer to the discovery of the texture and motion of the minute parts of
corporeal things; and in many of them, probably get ideas of their internal constitutions: but then he would be in a
quite different world from other people: nothing would appear the same to him and others: the visible ideas of
everything would be different. So that I doubt, whether he and the rest of men could discourse concerning the
objects of sight, or have any communication about colours, their appearances being so wholly different. And
perhaps such a quickness and tenderness of sight could not endure bright sunshine, or so much as open daylight;
nor take in but a very small part of any object at once, and that too only at a very near distance. And if by the help
of such microscopical eyes (if I may so call them) a man could penetrate further than ordinary into the secret
composition and radical texture of bodies, he would not make any great advantage by the change, if such an acute
sight would not serve to conduct him to the market and exchange; if he could not see things he was to avoid, at a
convenient distance; nor distinguish things he had to do with by those sensible qualities others do. He that was
sharp-sighted enough to see the configuration of the minute particles of the spring of a clock, and observe upon
what peculiar structure and impulse its elastic motion depends, would no doubt discover something very
admirable: but if eyes so framed could not view at once the hand, and the characters of the hour-plate, and thereby
at a distance see what o'clock it was, their owner could not be much benefited by that acuteness; which, whilst it
discovered the secret contrivance of the parts of the machine, made him lose its use.
13. Conjecture about the corporeal organs of some spirits.
And here give me leave to propose an extravagant
conjecture of mine, viz., That since we have some reason (if there be any credit to be given to the report of things
that our philosophy cannot account for) to imagine, that Spirits can assume to themselves bodies of different bulk,
figure, and conformation of parts--whether one great advantage some of them have over us may not lie in this,
that they can so frame and shape to themselves organs of sensation or perception, as to suit them to their present
design, and the circumstances of the object they would consider. For how much would that man exceed all others
in knowledge, who had but the faculty so to alter the structure of his eyes, that one sense, as to make it capable of
all the several degrees of vision which the assistance of glasses (casually at first lighted on) has taught us to
conceive? What wonders would he discover, who could so fit his eyes to all sorts of objects, as to see when he
pleased the figure and motion of the minute particles in the blood, and other juices of animals, as distinctly as he
does, at other times, the shape and motion of the animals themselves? But to us, in our present state, unalterable
organs, so contrived as to discover the figure and motion of the minute parts of bodies, whereon depend those
sensible qualities we now observe in them, would perhaps be of no advantage. God has no doubt made them so as
is best for us in our present condition. He hath fitted us for the neighbourhood of the bodies that surround us, and
we have to do with; and though we cannot, by the faculties we have, attain to a perfect knowledge of things, yet
they will serve us well enough for those ends above-mentioned, which are our great concernment. I beg my
reader's pardon for laying before him so wild a fancy concerning the ways of perception of beings above us; but
how extravagant soever it be, I doubt whether we can imagine anything about the knowledge of angels but after
this manner, some way or other in proportion to what we find and observe in ourselves. And though we cannot but
allow that the infinite power and wisdom of God may frame creatures with a thousand other faculties and ways of
perceiving things without them than what we have, yet our thoughts can go no further than our own: so impossible
it is for us to enlarge our very guesses beyond the ideas received from our own sensation and reflection. The
supposition, at least, that angels do sometimes assume bodies, needs not startle us; since some of the most ancient
and most learned Fathers of the church seemed to believe that they had bodies: and this is certain, that their state
and way of existence is unknown to us.
14. Our specific ideas of substances.
But to return to the matter in hand,--the ideas we have of substances, and the
ways we come by them. I say, our specific ideas of substances are nothing else but a collection of a certain
number of simple ideas, considered as united in one thing. These ideas of substances, though they are commonly
simple apprehensions, and the names of them simple terms, yet in effect are complex and compounded. Thus the
idea which an Englishman signifies by the name swan, is white colour, long neck, red beak, black legs, and whole
feet, and all these of a certain size, with a power of swimming in the water, and making a certain kind of noise,
and perhaps, to a man who has long observed this kind of birds, some other properties: which all terminate in
sensible simple ideas, all united in one common subject.
15. Our ideas of spiritual substances, as clear as of bodily substances.
Besides the complex ideas we have of
material sensible substances, of which I have last spoken,--by the simple ideas we have taken from those
operations of our own minds, which we experiment daily in ourselves, as thinking, understanding, willing,
knowing, and power of beginning motion, etc., co-existing in some substance, we are able to frame the complex
idea of an immaterial spirit. And thus, by putting together the ideas of thinking, perceiving, liberty, and power of
moving themselves and other things, we have as clear a perception and notion of immaterial substances as we
have of material. For putting together the ideas of thinking and willing, or the power of moving or quieting
corporeal motion, joined to substance, of which we have no distinct idea, we have the idea of an immaterial spirit;
and by putting together the ideas of coherent solid parts, and a power of being moved, joined with substance, of
which likewise we have no positive idea, we have the idea of matter. The one is as clear and distinct an idea as the
other: the idea of thinking, and moving a body, being as clear and distinct ideas as the ideas of extension, solidity,
and being moved. For our idea of substance is equally obscure, or none at all, in both; it is but a supposed I know
not what, to support those ideas we call accidents. It is for want reflection that we are apt to think that our senses
show us nothing but material things. Every act of sensation, when duly considered, gives us an equal view of both
parts of nature, the corporeal and spiritual. For whilst I know, by seeing or hearing, etc., that there is some
corporeal being without me, the object of that sensation, I do more certainly know, that there is some spiritual
being within me that sees and hears. This, I must be convinced, cannot be the action of bare insensible matter; nor
ever could be, without an immaterial thinking being.
16. No idea of abstract substance either in body or spirit.
By the complex idea of extended, figured, coloured, and
all other sensible qualities, which is all that we know of it, we are as far from the idea of the substance of body, as
if we knew nothing at all: nor after all the acquaintance and familiarity which we imagine we have with matter,
and the many qualities men assure themselves they perceive and know in bodies, will it perhaps upon examination
be found, that they have any more or clearer primary ideas belonging to body, than they have belonging to
immaterial spirit.
17. Cohesion of solid parts and impulse, the primary ideas peculiar to body.
The primary ideas we have peculiar
to body, as contradistinguished to spirit, are the cohesion of solid, and consequently separable, parts, and a power
of communicating motion by impulse. These, I think, are the original ideas proper and peculiar to body; for figure
is but the consequence of finite extension.
18. Thinking and motivity the primary ideas peculiar to spirit.
The ideas we have belonging and peculiar to spirit,
are thinking, and will, or a power of putting body into motion by thought, and, which is consequent to it, liberty.
For, as body cannot but communicate its motion by impulse to another body, which it meets with at rest, so the
mind can put bodies into motion, or forbear to do so, as it pleases. The ideas of existence, duration, and mobility,
are common to them both.
19. Spirits capable of motion.
There is no reason why it should be thought strange, that I make mobility belong to
spirit; for having no other idea of motion, but change of distance with other beings that are considered as at rest;
and finding that spirits, as well as bodies, cannot operate but where they are; and that spirits do operate at several
times in several places, I cannot but attribute change of place to all finite spirits: (for of the Infinite Spirit I speak
not here). For my soul, being a real being as well as my body, is certainly as capable of changing distance with
any other body, or being, as body itself; and so is capable of motion. And if a mathematician can consider a
certain distance, or a change of that distance between two points, one may certainly conceive a distance, and a
change of distance, between two spirits; and so conceive their motion, their approach or removal, one from
another.
20. Proof of this.
Every one finds in himself that his soul can think, will, and operate on his body in the place
where that is, but cannot operate on a body, or in a place, an hundred miles distant from it. Nobody can imagine
that his soul can think or move a body at Oxford, whilst he is at London; and cannot but know, that, being united
to his body, it constantly changes place all the whole journey between Oxford and London, as the coach or horse
does that carries him, and I think may be said to be truly all that while in motion: or if that will not be allowed to
afford us a clear idea enough of its motion, its being separated from the body in death, I think, will; for to consider
it as going out of the body, or leaving it, and yet to have no idea of its motion, seems to me impossible.
21. God immoveable, because infinite.
If it be said by any one that it cannot change place, because it hath none,
for the spirits are not in loco, but ubi; I suppose that way of talking will not now be of much weight to many, in an
age that is not much disposed to admire, or suffer themselves to be deceived by such unintelligible ways of
speaking. But if any one thinks there is any sense in that distinction, and that it is applicable to our present
purpose, I desire him to put it into intelligible English; and then from thence draw a reason to show that
immaterial spirits are not capable of motion. Indeed motion cannot be attributed to God; not because he is an
immaterial, but because he is an infinite spirit.
22. Our complex idea of an immaterial spirit and our complex idea of body compared.
Let us compare, then, our
complex idea of an immaterial spirit with our complex idea of body, and see whether there be any more obscurity
in one than in the other, and in which most. Our idea of body, as I think, is an extended solid substance, capable of
communicating motion by impulse: and our idea of soul, as an immaterial spirit, is of a substance that thinks, and
has a power of exciting motion in body, by willing, or thought. These, I think, are our complex ideas of soul and
body, as contradistinguished; and now let us examine which has most obscurity in it, and difficulty to be
apprehended. I know that people whose thoughts are immersed in matter, and have so subjected their minds to
their senses that they seldom reflect on anything beyond them, are apt to say, they cannot comprehend a thinking
thing, which perhaps is true: but I affirm, when they consider it well, they can no more comprehend an extended
thing.
23. Cohesion of solid parts in body as hard to be conceived as thinking in a soul.
If any one says he knows not
what it is thinks in him, he means he knows not what the substance is of that thinking thing: No more, say I,
knows he what the substance is of that solid thing. Further, if he says he knows not how he thinks, I answer,
Neither knows he how he is extended, how the solid parts of body are united, or cohere together to make
extension. For though the pressure of the particles of air may account for the cohesion of several parts of matter
that are grosser than the particles of air, and have pores less than the corpuscles of air, yet the weight or pressure
of the air will not explain, nor can be a cause of the coherence of the particles of air themselves. And if the
pressure of the aether, or any subtiler matter than the air, may unite, and hold fast together, the parts of a particle
of air, as well as other bodies, yet it cannot make bonds for itself, and hold together the parts that make up every
the least corpuscle of that materia subtilis. So that that hypothesis, how ingeniously soever explained, by showing
that the parts of sensible bodies are held together by the pressure of other external insensible bodies, reaches not
the parts of the aether itself; and by how much the more evident it proves, that the parts of other bodies are held
together by the external pressure of the aether, and can have no other conceivable cause of their cohesion and
union, by so much the more it leaves us in the dark concerning the cohesion of the parts of the corpuscles of the
aether itself: which we can neither conceive without parts, they being bodies, and divisible, nor yet how their parts
cohere, they wanting that cause of cohesion which is given of the cohesion of the parts of all other bodies.
24. Not explained by an ambient fluid.
But, in truth, the pressure of any ambient fluid, how great soever, can be
no intelligible cause of the cohesion of the solid parts of matter. For, though such a pressure may hinder the
avulsion of two polished superficies, one from another, in a line perpendicular to them, as in the experiment of
two polished marbles; yet it can never in the least hinder the separation by a motion, in a line parallel to those
surfaces. Because the ambient fluid, having a full liberty to succeed in each point of space, deserted by a lateral
motion, resists such a motion of bodies, so joined, no more than it would resist the motion of that body were it on
all sides environed by that fluid, and touched no other body; and therefore, if there were no other cause of
cohesion, all parts of bodies must be easily separable by such a lateral sliding motion. For if the pressure of the
aether be the adequate cause of cohesion, wherever that cause operates not, there can be no cohesion. And since it
cannot operate against a lateral separation, (as has been shown), therefore in every imaginary plane, intersecting
any mass of matter, there could be no more cohesion than of two polished surfaces, which will always,
notwithstanding any imaginable pressure of a fluid, easily slide one from another. So that perhaps, how clear an
idea soever we think we have of the extension of body, which is nothing but the cohesion of solid parts, he that
shall well consider it in his mind, may have reason to conclude, That it is as easy for him to have a clear idea how
the soul thinks as how body is extended. For, since body is no further, nor otherwise, extended, than by the union
and cohesion of its solid parts, we shall very ill comprehend the extension of body, without understanding
wherein consists the union and cohesion of its parts; which seems to me as incomprehensible as the manner of
thinking, and how it is performed.
25. We can as little understand how the parts cohere in extension, as how our spirits perceive or move.
I allow it is
usual for most people to wonder how any one should find a difficulty in what they think they every day observe.
Do we not see (will they be ready to say) the parts of bodies stick firmly together? Is there anything more
common? And what doubt can there be made of it? And the like, I say, concerning thinking and voluntary motion.
Do we not every moment experiment it in ourselves, and therefore can it be doubted? The matter of fact is clear, I
confess; but when we would a little nearer look into it, and consider how it is done, there I think we are at a loss,
both in the one and the other; and can as little understand how the parts of body cohere, as how we ourselves
perceive or move. I would have any one intelligibly explain to me, how the parts of gold, or brass, (that but now
in fusion were as loose from one another as the particles of water, or the sands of an hour-glass), come in a few
moments to be so united, and adhere so strongly one to another, that the utmost force of men's arms cannot
separate them? A considering man will, I suppose, be here at a loss to satisfy his own, or another man's
understanding.
26. The cause of coherence of atoms in extended substances incomprehensible.
The little bodies that compose that
fluid we call water, are so extremely small, that I have never heard of any one, who, by a microscope, (and yet I
have heard of some that have magnified to ten thousand; nay, to much above a hundred thousand times),
pretended to perceive their distinct bulk, figure, or motion; and the particles of water are also so perfectly loose
one from another, that the least force sensibly separates them. Nay, if we consider their perpetual motion, we must
allow them to have no cohesion one with another; and yet let but a sharp cold come, and they unite, they
consolidate; these little atoms cohere, and are not, without great force, separable. He that could find the bonds that
tie these heaps of loose little bodies together so firmly; he that could make known the cement that makes them
stick so fast one to another, would discover a great and yet unknown secret: and yet when that was done, would he
be far enough from making the extension of body (which is the cohesion of its solid parts) intelligible, till he
could show wherein consisted the union, or consolidation of the parts of those bonds, or of that cement, or of the
least particle of matter that exists. Whereby it appears that this primary and supposed obvious quality of body will
be found, when examined, to be as incomprehensible as anything belonging to our minds, and a solid extended
substance as hard to be conceived as a thinking immaterial one, whatever difficulties some would raise against it.
27. The supposed pressure brought to explain cohesion is unintelligible.
For, to extend our thoughts a little
further, that pressure which is brought to explain the cohesion of bodies is as unintelligible as the cohesion itself.
For if matter be considered, as no doubt it is, finite, let any one send his contemplation to the extremities of the
universe, and there see what conceivable hoops, what bond he can imagine to hold this mass of matter in so close
a pressure together; from whence steel has its firmness, and the parts of a diamond their hardness and
indissolubility. If matter be finite, it must have its extremes; and there must be something to hinder it from
scattering asunder. If, to avoid this difficulty, any one will throw himself into the supposition and abyss of infinite
matter, let him consider what light he thereby brings to the cohesion of body, and whether he be ever the nearer
making it intelligible, by resolving it into a supposition the most absurd and most incomprehensible of all other:
so far is our extension of body (which is nothing but the cohesion of solid parts) from being clearer, or more
distinct, when we would inquire into the nature, cause, or manner of it, than the idea of thinking.
28. Communication of motion by impulse, or by thought, equally unintelligible.
Another idea we have of body is,
the power of communication of motion by impulse; and of our souls, the power of exciting motion by thought.
These ideas, the one of body, the other of our minds, every day's experience clearly furnishes us with: but if here
again we inquire how this is done, we are equally in the dark. For, in the communication of motion by impulse,
wherein as much motion is lost to one body as is got to the other, which is the ordinariest case, we can have no
other conception, but of the passing of motion out of one body into another; which, I think, is as obscure and
inconceivable as how our minds move or stop our bodies by thought, which we every moment find they do. The
increase of motion by impulse, which is observed or believed sometimes to happen, is yet harder to be
understood. We have by daily experience clear evidence of motion produced both by impulse and by thought; but
the manner how, hardly comes within our comprehension: we are equally at a loss in both. So that, however we
consider motion, and its communication, either from body or spirit, the idea which belongs to spirit is at least as
clear as that which belongs to body. And if we consider the active power of moving, or, as I may call it, motivity,
it is much clearer in spirit than body; since two bodies, placed by one another at rest, will never afford us the idea
of a power in the one to move the other, but by a borrowed motion: whereas the mind every day affords us ideas
of an active power of moving of bodies; and therefore it is worth our consideration, whether active power be not
the proper attribute of spirits, and passive power of matter. Hence may be conjectured that created spirits are not
totally separate from matter, because they are both active and passive. Pure spirit, viz., God, is only active; pure
matter is only passive; those beings that are both active and passive, we may judge to partake of both. But be that
as it will, I think, we have as many and as clear ideas belonging to spirit as we have belonging to body, the
substance of each being equally unknown to us; and the idea of thinking in spirit, as clear as of extension in body;
and the communication of motion by thought, which we attribute to spirit, is as evident as that by impulse, which
we ascribe to body. Constant experience makes us sensible of both these, though our narrow understandings can
comprehend neither. For, when the mind would look beyond those original ideas we have from sensation or
reflection, and penetrate into their causes, and manner of production, we find still it discovers nothing but its own
short-sightedness.
29. Summary.
To conclude. Sensation convinces us that there are solid extended substances; and reflection, that
there are thinking ones: experience assures us of the existence of such beings, and that the one hath a power to
move body by impulse, the other by thought; this we cannot doubt of. Experience, I say, every moment furnishes
us with the clear ideas both of the one and the other. But beyond these ideas, as received from their proper
sources, our faculties will not reach. If we would inquire further into their nature, causes, and manner, we
perceive not the nature of extension clearer than we do of thinking. If we would explain them any further, one is
as easy as the other; and there is no more difficulty to conceive how a substance we know not should, by thought,
set body into motion, than how a substance we know not should, by impulse, set body into motion. So that we are
no more able to discover wherein the ideas belonging to body consist, than those belonging to spirit. From whence
it seems probable to me, that the simple ideas we receive from sensation and reflection are the boundaries of our
thoughts; beyond which the mind, whatever efforts it would make, is not able to advance one jot; nor can it make
any discoveries, when it would pry into the nature and hidden causes of those ideas.
30. Our idea of spirit and our idea of body compared.
So that, in short, the idea we have of spirit, compared with
the idea we have of body, stands thus: the substance of spirits is unknown to us; and so is the substance of body
equally unknown to us. Two primary qualities or properties of body, viz., solid coherent parts and impulse, we
have distinct clear ideas of: so likewise we know, and have distinct clear ideas, of two primary qualities or
properties of spirit, viz., thinking, and a power of action; i.e., a power of beginning or stopping several thoughts or
motions. We have also the ideas of several qualities inherent in bodies, and have the clear distinct ideas of them;
which qualities are but the various modifications of the extension of cohering solid parts, and their motion. We
have likewise the ideas of the several modes of thinking viz., believing, doubting, intending, fearing, hoping; all
which are but the several modes of thinking. We have also the ideas of willing, and moving the body consequent
to it, and with the body itself too; for, as has been shown, spirit is capable of motion.
31. The notion of spirit involves no more difficulty in it than that of body.
Lastly, if this notion of immaterial
spirit may have, perhaps, some difficulties in it not easily to be explained, we have therefore no more reason to
deny or doubt the existence of such spirits, than we have to deny or doubt the existence of body; because the
notion of body is cumbered with some difficulties very hard, and perhaps impossible to be explained or
understood by us. For I would fain have instanced anything in our notion of spirit more perplexed, or nearer a
contradiction, than the very notion of body includes in it; the divisibility in infinitum of any finite extension
involving us, whether we grant or deny it, in consequences impossible to be explicated or made in our
apprehensions consistent; consequences that carry greater difficulty, and more apparent absurdity, than anything
can follow from the notion of an immaterial knowing substance.
32. We know nothing of things beyond our simple ideas of them.
Which we are not at all to wonder at, since we
having but some few superficial ideas of things, discovered to us only by the senses from without, or by the mind,
reflecting on what it experiments in itself within, have no knowledge beyond that, much less of the internal
constitution, and true nature of things, being destitute of faculties to attain it. And therefore experimenting and
discovering in ourselves knowledge, and the power of voluntary motion, as certainly as we experiment, or
discover in things without us, the cohesion and separation of solid parts, which is the extension and motion of
bodies; we have as much reason to be satisfied with our notion of immaterial spirit, as with our notion of body,
and the existence of the one as well as the other. For it being no more a contradiction that thinking should exist
separate and independent from solidity, than it is a contradiction that solidity should exist separate and
independent from thinking, they being both but simple ideas, independent one from another: and having as clear
and distinct ideas in us of thinking, as of solidity, I know not why we may not as well allow a thinking thing
without solidity, i.e., immaterial, to exist, as a solid thing without thinking, i.e., matter, to exist; especially since it
is not harder to conceive how thinking should exist without matter, than how matter should think. For whensoever
we would proceed beyond these simple ideas we have from sensation and reflection, and dive further into the
nature of things, we fall presently into darkness and obscurity, perplexedness and difficulties, and can discover
nothing further but our own blindness and ignorance. But whichever of these complex ideas be clearest, that of
body, or immaterial spirit, this is evident, that the simple ideas that make them up are no other than what we have
received from sensation or reflection: and so is it of all our other ideas of substances, even of God himself.
33. Our complex idea of God.
For if we examine the idea we have of the incomprehensible Supreme Being, we
shall find that we come by it the same way; and that the complex ideas we have both of God, and separate spirits,
are made of the simple ideas we receive from reflection: v.g. having, from what we experiment in ourselves, got
the ideas of existence and duration; of knowledge and power; of pleasure and happiness; and of several other
qualities and powers, which it is better to have than to be without; when we would frame an idea the most suitable
we can to the Supreme Being, we enlarge every one of these with our idea of infinity; and so putting them
together, make our complex idea of God. For that the mind has such a power of enlarging some of its ideas,
received from sensation and reflection, has been already shown.
34. Our complex idea of God as infinite.
If I find that I know some few things, and some of them, or all, perhaps
imperfectly, I can frame an idea of knowing twice as many; which I can double again, as often as I can add to
number; and thus enlarge my idea of knowledge, by extending its comprehension to all things existing, or
possible. The same also I can do of knowing them more perfectly; i.e., all their qualities, powers, causes,
consequences, and relations, etc., till all be perfectly known that is in them, or can any way relate to them: and
thus frame the idea of infinite or boundless knowledge. The same may also be done of power, till we come to that
we call infinite; and also of the duration of existence, without beginning or end, and so frame the idea of an
eternal being. The degrees or extent wherein we ascribe existence, power, wisdom, and all other perfections
(which we can have any ideas of) to that sovereign Being, which we call God, being all boundless and infinite, we
frame the best idea of him our minds are capable of: all which is done, I say, by enlarging those simple ideas we
have taken from the operations of our own minds, by reflection; or by our senses, from exterior things, to that
vastness to which infinity can extend them.
35. God in his own essence incognisable.
For it is infinity, which, joined to our ideas of existence, power,
knowledge, etc., makes that complex idea, whereby we represent to ourselves, the best we can, the Supreme
Being. For, though in his own essence (which certainly we do not know, not knowing the real essence of a pebble,
or a fly, or of our own selves) God be simple and uncompounded; yet I think I may say we have no other idea of
him, but a complex one of existence, knowledge, power, happiness, etc., infinite and eternal: which are all distinct
ideas, and some of them, being relative, are again compounded of others: all which being, as has been shown,
originally got from sensation and reflection, go to make up the idea or notion we have of God.
36. No ideas in our complex ideas of spirits, but those got from sensation or reflection.
This further is to be
observed, that there is no idea we attribute to God, bating infinity, which is not also a part of our complex idea of
other spirits. Because, being capable of no other simple ideas, belonging to anything but body, but those which by
reflection we receive from the operation of our own minds, we can attribute to spirits no other but what we
receive from thence: and all the difference we can put between them, in our contemplation of spirits, is only in the
several extents and degrees of their knowledge, power, duration, happiness, etc. For that in our ideas, as well of
spirits as of other things, we are restrained to those we receive from sensation and reflection, is evident from
hence,--That, in our ideas of spirits, how much soever advanced in perfection beyond those of bodies, even to
that of infinite, we cannot yet have any idea of the manner wherein they discover their thoughts one to another:
though we must necessarily conclude that separate spirits, which are beings that have perfecter knowledge and
greater happiness than we, must needs have also a perfecter way of communicating their thoughts than we have,
who are fain to make use of corporeal signs, and particular sounds; which are therefore of most general use, as
being the best and quickest we are capable of. But of immediate communication having no experiment in
ourselves, and consequently no notion of it at all, we have no idea how spirits, which use not words, can with
quickness, or much less how spirits that have no bodies can be masters of their own thoughts, and communicate or
conceal them at pleasure, though we cannot but necessarily suppose they have such a power.
37. Recapitulation.
And thus we have seen what kind of ideas we have of substances of all kinds, wherein they
consist, and how we came by them. From whence, I think, it is very evident,
First, That all our ideas of the several sorts of substances are nothing but collections of simple ideas: with a
supposition of something to which they belong, and in which they subsist: though of this supposed something we
have no clear distinct idea at all.
Secondly, That all the simple ideas, that thus united in one common substratum, make up our complex ideas of
several sorts of substances, are no other but such as we have received from sensation or reflection. So that even in
those which we think we are most intimately acquainted with, and that come nearest the comprehension of our
most enlarged conceptions, we cannot go beyond those simple ideas. And even in those which seem most remote
from all we have to do with, and do infinitely surpass anything we can perceive in ourselves by reflection; or
discover by sensation in other things, we can attain to nothing but those simple ideas, which we originally
received from sensation or reflection; as is evident in the complex ideas we have of angels, and particularly of
God himself.
Thirdly, That most of the simple ideas that make up our complex ideas of substances, when truly considered, are
only powers, however we are apt to take them for positive qualities; v.g. the greatest part of the ideas that make
our complex idea of gold are yellowness, great weight, ductility, fusibility, and solubility in aqua regia, etc., all
united together in an unknown substratum: all which ideas are nothing else but so many relations to other
substances; and are not really in the gold, considered barely in itself, though they depend on those real and
primary qualities of its internal constitution, whereby it has a fitness differently to operate, and be operated on by
several other substances.