Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

rejected. On the contrary, Mr. Smith himself, whose logical precepts on this subject I have now been endeavoring to illustrate and enforce, has frequently indulged his curiosity in speculations about uses or advantages; and seems plainly to have considered them as important objects of philosophical study, not less than efficient causes. The only caution to be observed is that the one may not be confounded with the other.

Between these two different researches, however, there is, both in physics and ethics, a very intimate connexion. In various cases, the consideration of final causes has led to the discovery of some general law of nature; and, in almost every case, the discovery of a general law clearly points out some wise and beneficent purposes to which it is subservient. Indeed, it is chiefly the prospect of such applications which renders the investigation of general laws interesting to the mind.*

* As the main purpose of this section is to combat the logical doctrine which would exclude the investigation of final causes from natural philosophy, I have not thought it necessary to take notice of the sceptical objections to the theological inferences commonly deduced from it. The consideration of these properly belongs to some inquiries which I destine for the subject of a separate essay. On one of them alone I shall offer at present a few brief remarks, on account of the peculiar stress laid upon it in Mr. Hume's Posthumous Dialogues.

:

"When two species of objects," says Philo, " have always been observed to be conjoined together, I can infer, by custom, the existence of one wherever I see the existence of the other and this I call an argument from experience. But how this argument can have place, where the objects, as in the present case, are single, individual, without parallel, or specific resemblance, may be difficult to explain. And will any man tell me, with a serious countenance, that an orderly universe must arise from some thought and art, like the human, because we have experience of it? To ascertain this reasoning, it were requisite that we had experience of the origin of worlds; and it is not sufficient, surely, that we have seen ships and cities arise from human art and contrivance. Can you pretend to show any similarity between the fabric of a house, and the generation of the universe? Have you ever seen nature in any such situation as resembles the first arrangement of the elements? Have worlds ever been formed under your eye; and have you had leisure to observe the whole progress of the phenomenon, from the first appearance of order to its final consummation? If you have, then cite your experience, and deliver your theory."

This celebrated argument appears to me to be little more than an amplification of that which Xenophon puts into the mouth of Aristodemus, in his conversation with Socrates, concerning the existence of the Deity. "I behold," says he, "none of those governors of the world, whom you speak of; whereas here, I see artists actually employed in the execution of their respective works." The reply of Socrates, too, is in substance the same with what has been since retorted on Philo, by some of Mr. Hume's opponents. "Neither, yet, Aristodemus, seest thou thy soul, which, however, most assuredly governs thy body: although it may well seem, by thy manner of talking, that it is chance and not reason which gov

erns thee."

Whatever additional plausibility Philo may have lent to the argument of Aristodemus is derived from the authority of that much abused maxim of the inductive logic, that "all our knowledge is entirely derived from experience." It is curious, that Socrates should have touched with such precision on one of the most important exceptions with which this maxim must be received. Our knowledge of our own existence as sentient and intelligent beings, is, as I formerly endeavored to show, not an inference from experience, but a fundamental law of human belief. All that experience can teach me of my internal frame, amounts to a knowledge of the various mental operations whereof I am conscious; but what light does experience throw on the origin of my notions of personality and identity? Is it from having observed a constant conjunction between sensations and sentient

CONCLUSION OF PART II.

In the foregoing chapters of this Second Part, I have endeavored to turn the attention of my readers to various important questions

beings; thoughts and thinking beings; volitions and active beings; that I infer the existence of that individual and permanent mind, to which all the phenomena of my consciousness belong? Our conviction that other men are, like ourselves, possessed of thought and reason; together with all the judgments we pronounce on their intellectual and moral characters, cannot, as is still more evident, be resolved into an experimental perception of the conjunction of different objects or events. They are inferences of design from its sensible effects, exactly analogous to those which, in the instance of the universe, Philo would reject as illusions of the fancy.*

But leaving for future consideration these abstract topics, let us, for a moment, attend to the scope and amount of Philo's reasoning. To those who examine it with attention it must appear obvious, that, if it proves any thing, it leads to this general conclusion, that it would be perfectly impossible for the Deity, if he did exist, to exhibit to man any satisfactory evidence of design by the order and perfection of his works. That every thing we see is consistent with the supposition of its being produced by an intelligent author, Philo himself has explicitly acknowledged in these remarkable words: "Supposing there were a God, who did not discover himself immediately to our senses; would it be possible for him to give stronger proofs of his existence, than what appear on the whole face of nature? What, indeed, could such a Divine Being do, but copy the present economy of things; render many of his artifices so plain, that no stupidity could mistake them; afford glimpses of still greater artifices, which demonstrate his prodigious superiority above our narrow apprehensions; and conceal altogether a great many from such imperfect creatures?" The sceptical reasonings of Philo, therefore, do not, like those of the ancient Epicureans, hinge, in the least, on alleged disorders and imperfections in the universe, but entirely on the impossibility, in a case to which experience furnishes nothing parallel or analogous, of rendering intelligence and design manifest to our faculties by their sensible effects. In thus shifting his ground from that occupied by his predecessors, Philo seems to me to have abandoned the only post from which it was of much importance for his adversaries to dislodge him. The logical subtilties, formerly quoted about experience and belief, (even supposing them to remain unanswered,) are but little calculated to shake the authority of principles, on which we are every moment forced to judge and to ' act, by the exigencies of life. For this change in the tactics of modern sceptics, we are evidently, in a great measure, if not wholly, indebted to the lustre thrown on the order of nature, by the physical researches of the two last centuries.

Another concession extorted from Philo by the discoveries of modern science is still more important. I need not point out its coincidence with some remarks in the first part of this section, on the unconscious deference often paid to final causes by those inquirers who reject them in theory; a coincidence which had totally escaped my recollection when these remarks were written. I quote it here, chiefly as a pleasing and encouraging confirmation of the memorable prediction with which Newton concludes his Optical Queries; that "if Natural Philosophy, in all its parts, by pursuing the inductive method, shall at length be perfected, the bounds of Moral Philosophy will be enlarged also."

* This last consideration is ably stated by Dr. Reid. (See Essays on the Intellectual Powers, pp. 631, 632. 4to. edit.) The result of his argument is, that "according to Philo's reasoning, we can have no evidence of mind or design in any of our fellow-men."-At a considerable earlier period, Buffer had fallen into the same train of thinking. Among the judgments which he refers to common sense, he assigns the first place to the two following: "1. Il y a d'autres êtres, et d'autres hommes que moi au monde. 2. Il y a dans eux quelque chose qui s'appelle vérité, sagesse, prudence," &c. &c. (Cours de Sciences, p. 566. Paris, 1732.) I have already objected to the application of the phrase common sense, to such judgments as these; but this defect in point of expression, does not detract from the sagacity of the author in perceiving, that in the conclusions we form concerning the minds and characters of our fellow creatures, (as well as in the inferences drawn concerning the invisible things of God from the things which are inade,) there is a perception of the understanding implied, for which neither reasoning nor experience is sufficient to account.

relating to the human understanding: aiming in the first place, to correct some fundamental errors in the theories commonly received with respect to the powers of intuition and of reasoning; and, secondly, to illustrate some doctrines connected with the groundwork of the inductive logic, which have been either overlooked or misapprehended by the generality of preceding writers. The bulk to which the volume has already extended, renders it impossible for me now to attempt a detailed recapitulation of its contents;-nor do I much regret the necessity of this omission, having endeavored in every instance, as far as I could, to enable the intelligent reader to trace the thread of my discussions.

In a work professedly elementary, the frequent references made to the opinions of others may, at first sight, appear out of place; and it may not unnaturally be thought that I have too often indulged in critical strictures, where I ought to have confined myself to a didactic exposition of first principles. To this objection I have only to reply, that my aim is not to supplant any of the established branches of academical study; but by inviting and encouraging the young philosopher, when his academical career is closed, to review with attention and candor his past acquisitions, to put him in the way of supplying what is defective in the present system of education. I have accordingly entitled my book, Elements-not of Logic or of Pneumatology, but-of the Philosophy of the Human Mind; a study which, according to my idea of it, presupposes a general acquaintance with the particular departments of literature and of science, but to which I do not know that any elementary introduction has yet been attempted. It is a study, indeed, whereof little more perhaps than the elements can be communicated by the mind of one individual to that of another.

In proof of this, it is sufficient here to hint, (for I must not at present enlarge on so extensive a topic,) that a knowledge of the general laws which regulate the intellectual phenomena is, to the logical student, of little practical value, but as a preparation for the study of himself. In this respect the anatomy of the mind differs essentially from that of the body; the structure of the former (whatever collateral aids may be derived from observing the varieties of genius in our fellow-creatures) being accessible to those alone

"A purpose, an intention, a design," says Philo, "strike everywhere the most careless, the most stupid thinker; and no man can be so hardened in absurd systems, as at all times to reject it. That nature does nothing in vain, is a maxim established in all the schools, merely from the contemplation of the works of nature, without any religious purpose; and from a firm conviction of its truth, an anatomist, who had observed a new organ or canal, would never be satisfied till he had also discovered its use and intention. One great foundation of the Copernican system is the maxim, That nature acts by the simplest methods, and chooses the most proper means to any end; and astronomers often, without thinking of it, lay this strong foundation of piety and religion. The same thing is observable in other parts of philosophy: and thus all the sciences lead us almost insensibly to acknowledge a first intelligent Author; and their authority is often so much the greater, as they do not directly profess that intention."

who can retire into the deepest recesses of their own internal frame: and even to these presenting, along with the generic attributes of the race, many of the specific peculiarities of the individual. The truth is, that on this subject every writer, whose speculations are at all worthy of notice, must draw his chief materials from within; and that it is only by comparing the conclusions of different writers, and subjecting all of them to the test of our personal experience, that we can hope to separate the essential principles of the human constitution from the unsuspected effects of education and of temperament; or to apply with advantage to our particular circumstances, the combined results of our reading and of our reflections. The constant appeal which, in such inquiries, the reader is thus forced to make to his own consciousness and to his own judgment, has a powerful tendency to form a habit, not more essential to the success of his metaphysical researches, than of all his other speculative pursuits.

Nearly connected with this habit, is a propensity to weigh and to ascertain the exact import of words; one of the nicest and most difficult of all analytical processes; and that upon which more stress has been justly laid by our best modern logicians, than upon any other organ for the investigation of truth. For the culture of this propensity, no science is so peculiarly calculated to prepare the mind as the study of its own operations. Here the imperfections of words constitute the principal obstacle to our progress; nor it is possible to advance a single step, without struggling against the associations imposed by the illusions of metaphorical terms, and of analogical theories. Abstracting, therefore, from its various practical applications, and considering it merely as a gymnastic exercise to the reasoning powers, this study seems pointed out by nature, as the best of all schools for inuring the understanding to a cautious and skillful employment of language as the instrument of thought.

The first two chapters of this Part relate to logical questions, on which the established opinions appear to me to present stumbling-blocks at the very threshold of the science. In treating of these, I have canvassed with freedom, but, I hope, with due respect, the doctrines of some illustrious moderns, whom I am proud to acknowledge as my masters; of those, more particularly, whose works are in the highest repute in our British Universities, and whose errors I was, on that account, the most solicitous to rectify. For the space allotted to my criticisms on Condillac, no apology is necessary to those who have the slightest acquaintance with the present state of philosophy on the Continent, or who have remarked the growing spread, in this island, of some of his weakest and most

I use the word temperament, in this instance, as synonymous with the idiosyncrasy of medical authors; a term which I thought might have savored of affectation if applied to the mind; although authorities for such an employment of it are not wanting among old English writers. One example, directly in point is quoted by Johnson from Glanville. "The understanding, also, hath its idiosyncrasies, as well as other faculties."

exceptionable theories. On various controverted points connected with the theory of evidence, both demonstrative and experimental, I trust with some confidence, that I shall be found to have thrown considerable light in other instances, I have been forced to content myself with proposing my doubts; leaving the task of solving them to future inquirers. To awaken a dormant spirit of discussion, by pointing out the imperfections of accredited systems, is at least one step gained towards the farther advancement of knowledge.

It is justly and philosophically remarked by Burke, that "nothing tends more to the corruption of science than to suffer it to stagnate. These waters must be troubled before they can exert their virtues. A man who works beyond the surface of things, though he may be wrong himself, yet he clears the way for others, and may chance to make even his errors subservient to the cause of truth.”—(Inquiry into the Sublime and Beautiful, part i., sec. xix.)

The subsequent chapters, relative to the Baconian logic, bear, all of them, more or less, in their general scope, on the theory of the intellectual powers, and on the first principles of human knowledge. In this part of my work, the reader will easily perceive, that I do not profess to deliver logical precepts, but to concentrate, and to reflect back on the philosophy of the mind, whatever scattered lights I have been able to collect from the experimental researches to which that philosophy has given birth. I have aimed, at the same time (and I hope not altogether without success,) to give somewhat more of precision to the technical phraseology of the Baconian school, and of correctness to their metaphysical ideas.

Before concluding these speculations, it may not be improper to caution my readers against supposing, that when I speak of the Baconian school, or of the Baconian logic, I mean to ascribe entirely to the Novum Organon the advances made in physical science, since the period of its publication. The singular effects of this, and of the other inestimable writings of the same author, in forwarding the subsequent progress of scientific discovery, certainly entitle his name, far more than that of any other individual, to be applied as a distinguishing epithet to the modern rules of philosophizing: but, as I have elsewhere observed, "the genius and writings of Bacon himself were powerfully influenced by the circumstances and character of his age: nor can there be a doubt, that he only accelerated a revolution which was already prepared by many concurrent causes." (Outlines of Moral Philosophy, first printed in 1793.)—My reasons for thinking so, which rest chiefly on historical retrospects, altogether foreign to my present design, I must delay stating till another opportunity.

To this observation it is of still greater importance to add, that, in contrasting the spirit and the utility of the new logic with those of the old, I have no wish to see the former substituted, in our

« AnteriorContinuar »