three dialogues-第21章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


quantity　of　Matter　has　been　demonstrated　to　be　proportioned　to
the　gravity　of　bodies。　And　what　can　withstand　demonstration？

　　　　　。　Let　me　see　how　you　demonstrate　that　point。

　　　　　。　I　lay　it　down　for　a　principle；　that　the　moments　or
quantities　of　motion　in　bodies　are　in　a　direct　compounded　reason
of　the　velocities　and　quantities　of　Matter　contained　in　them。
Hence；　where　the　velocities　are　equal；　it　follows　the　moments　are
directly　as　the　quantity　of　Matter　in　each。　But　it　is　found　by
experience　that　all　bodies　（bating　the　small　inequalities；
arising　from　the　resistance　of　the　air）　descend　with　an　equal
velocity；　the　motion　therefore　of　descending　bodies；　and
consequently　their　gravity；　which　is　the　cause　or　principle　of
that　motion；　is　proportional　to　the　quantity　of　Matter；　which　was
to　be　demonstrated。

　　　　　。　You　lay　it　down　as　a　self…evident　principle　that　the
quantity　of　motion　in　any　body　is　proportional　to　the　velocity
｛242｝　and　　taken　together；　and　this　is　made　use　of　to
prove　a　proposition　from　whence　the　existence　of　　is
inferred。　Pray　is　not　this　arguing　in　a　circle？

　　　　　。　In　the　premise　I　only　mean　that　the　motion　is
proportional　to　the　velocity；　jointly　with　the　extension　and
solidity。

　　　　　。　But；　allowing　this　to　be　true；　yet　it　will　not
thence　follow　that　gravity　is　proportional　to　；　in　your
philosophic　sense　of　the　word；　except　you　take　it　for　granted
that　unknown　；　or　whatever　else　you　call　it；　is
proportional　to　those　sensible　qualities；　which　to　suppose　is
plainly　begging　the　question。　That　there　is　magnitude　and
solidity；　or　resistance；　perceived　by　sense；　I　readily　grant；　as
likewise；　that　gravity　may　be　proportional　to　those　qualities　I
will　not　dispute。　But　that　either　these　qualities　as　perceived　by
us；　or　the　powers　producing　them；　do　exist　in　a　；　this　is　what　I　deny；　and　you　indeed　affirm；　but；
notwithstanding　your　demonstration；　have　not　yet　proved。

　　　　　。　I　shall　insist　no　longer　on　that　point。　Do　you　think；
however；　you　shall　persuade　me　that　the　natural　philosophers　have
been　dreaming　all　this　while？　Pray　what　becomes　of　all　their
hypotheses　and　explications　of　the　phenomena；　which　suppose　the
existence　of　Matter？

　　　　　。　What　mean　you；　Hylas；　by　the　？

　　　　　。　I　mean　the　appearances　which　I　perceive　by　my　senses。

　　　　　。　And　the　appearances　perceived　by　sense；　are　they　not
ideas？

　　　　　。　I　have　told　you　so　a　hundred　times。

　　　　　。　Therefore；　to　explain　the　phenomena；　is；　to　shew　how
we　come　to　be　affected　with　ideas；　in　that　manner　and　order
wherein　they　are　imprinted　on　our　senses。　Is　it　not？

　　　　　。　It　is。

　　　　　。　Now；　if　you　can　prove　that　any　philosopher　has
explained　the　production　of　any　one　idea　in　our　minds　by　the　help
of　；　I　shall　for　ever　acquiesce；　and　look　on　all　that
hath　been　said　against　it　as　nothing；　but；　if　you　cannot；　it　is
vain　to　urge　the　explication　of　phenomena。　That　a　Being　endowed
with　knowledge　and　will　should　produce　or　exhibit　ideas　is　easily
understood。　But　that　a　Being　which　is　utterly　destitute　of　these
faculties　should　be　able　to　produce　ideas；　or　in　any　sort　to
affect　an　intelligence；　this　I　can　never　understand。　This　I　say；
though　｛243｝　we　had　some　positive　conception　of　Matter；　though　we
knew　its　qualities；　and　could　comprehend　its　existence；　would　yet
be　so　far　from　explaining　things；　that　it　is　itself　the　most
inexplicable　thing　in　the　world。　And　yet；　for　all　this；　it　will
not　follow　that　philosophers　have　been　doing　nothing；　for；　by
observing　and　reasoning　upon　the　connexion　of　ideas；　they
discover　the　laws　and　methods　of　nature；　which　is　a　part　of
knowledge　both　useful　and　entertaining。

　　　　　。　After　all；　can　it　be　supposed　God　would　deceive　all
mankind？　Do　you　imagine　He　would　have　induced　the　whole　world　to
believe　the　being　of　Matter；　if　there　was　no　such　thing？

　　　　　。　That　every　epidemical　opinion；　arising　from
prejudice；　or　passion；　or　thoughtlessness；　may　be　imputed　to　God；
as　the　Author　of　it；　I　believe　you　will　not　affirm。　Whatsoever
opinion　we　father　'　on　Him；　it　must　be　either　because　He　has
discovered　it　to　us　by　supernatural　revelation；　or　because　it　is
so　evident　to　our　natural　faculties；　which　were　framed　and　given
us　by　God；　that　it　is　impossible　we　should　withhold　our　assent
from　it。　But　where　is　the　revelation？　or　where　is　the　evidence
that　extorts　the　belief　of　Matter？　Nay；　how　does　it　appear；　that
Matter；　；　is　thought　to　exist　by　all　mankind；　or　indeed；　by
any　except　a　few　philosophers；　who　do　not　know　what　they　would　be
at？　Your　question　supposes　these　points　are　clear；　and；　when　you
have　cleared　them；　I　shall　think　myself　obliged　to　give　you
another　answer。　In　the　meantime；　let　it　suffice　that　I　tell　you；
I　do　not　suppose　God　has　deceived　mankind　at　all。

　　　　　。　But　the　novelty；　Philonous；　the　novelty！　There　lies
the　danger。　New　notions　should　always　be　discountenanced；　they
unsettle　men's　minds；　and　nobody　knows　where　they　will　end。

　　　　　。　Why　the　rejecting　a　notion　that　has　no　foundation；
either　in　sense；　or　in　reason；　or　in　Divine　authority；　should　be
thought　to　unsettle　the　belief　of　such　opinions　as　are　grounded
on　all　or　any　of　these；　I　cannot　imagine。　That　innovations　in
government　and　religion　are　dangerous；　and　ought　to　be
discountenanced；　I　freely　own。　But　is　there　the　like　reason　why
they　should　be　discouraged　in　philosophy？　The　making　anything
known　which　was　unknown　before　is　an　innovation　in　knowledge：
and；　if　all　such　innovations　had　been　forbidden；　｛244｝　men　would
have　made　a　notable　progress　in　the　arts　and　sciences。　But　it　is
none　of　my　business　to　plead　for　novelties　and　paradoxes。　That
the　qualities　we　perceive　are　not　on　the　objects：　that　we　must
not　believe　our　senses：　that　we　know　nothing　of　the　real　nature
of　things；　and　can　never　be　assured　even　of　their　existence：　that
real　colours　and　sounds　are　nothing　but　certain　unknown　figures
and　motions：　that　motions　are　in　themselves　neither　swift　nor
slow：　that　there　are　in　bodies　absolute　extensions；　without　any
particular　magnitude　or　figure：　that　a　thing　stupid；　thoughtless；
and　inactive；　operates　on　a　spirit：　that　the　least　particle　of　a
body　contains　innumerable　extended　parts：　　these　are　the
novelties；　these　are　the　strange　notions　which　shock　the　genuine
uncorrupted　judgment　of　all　mankind；　and　being　once　admitted；
embarrass　the　mind　with　endless　doubts　and　difficulties。　And　it
is　against　these　and　the　like　innovations　I　endeavour　to
vindicate　Common　Sense。　It　is　true；　in　doing　this；　I　may　perhaps
be　obliged　to　use　some　；　and　ways　of　speech　not　common。
But；　if　my　notions　are　once　thoroughly　understood；　that　which　is
most　singular　in　them　will；　in　effect；　be　found　to　amount　to　no
more　than　this。　　that　it　is　absolutely　impossible；　and　a　plain
contradiction；　to　suppose　any　unthinking　Being　should　exist
without　being　perceived　by　a　Mind。　And；　if　this　notion　be
singular；　it　is　a　shame　it　should　be　so；　at　this　time　of　day；　and
in　a　Christian　country。

　　　　　。　As　for　the　difficulties　other　opinions　may　be　liable
to；。　those　are　out　of　the　question。　It　is　your　business　to　defend
your　own　opinion。　Can　anything　be　plainer　than　that　you　are　for
changing　all　things　into　ideas？　You；　I　say；　who　are　not　ashamed
to　charge　me　。　This　is　so　plain；　there　is　no
denying　it。

　　　　　。　You　mistake　me。　I　am　not　for　changing　things　into
ideas；　but　rather　ideas　into　things；　since　those　immediate
objects　of　perception；　which；　according　to　you；　are　only
appearances　of　things；　I　take　to　be　the　real　things　themselves。

　　　　　。　Things！　You　may　pretend　what　you　please；　but　it　is
certain　you　leave　us　nothing　but　the　empty　forms　of　things；　the
outside　only　which　strikes　the　senses。

　　　　　。　What　you　call　the　empty　forms　and　outside　of　things
seem　to　me　the　very　things　themselves。　Nor　are　they　empty　or
incomplete；　otherwise　than　upon　your　supposition　　that　Matter
｛245｝　is　a