Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

tions, consists of volcanic glass; and vol. canic basalt is so common, that no country is destitute of this substance. Immense whin-dykes, as they are called, of this material, intersect even England, itself, and hundreds of miles of roads are formed and repaired therewith, to the great advantage of commerce in many parts thereof, especially in the north.

Considering the immense masses of matter which have been ejected from volcanoes in every age since the deluge, it becomes matter for wonder how these vast volcanic fires are continued in force; but when the magnitude of the sphere is taken into the account, and also the quantity of combustible matter contained in the earth's crust, our wonder ceases. Under certain circumstances, fires, once kindled up to a certain point, convert all surrounding substances into fuel, and thus prey upon every thing at hand; and every eruption causing a larger chasm beneath the crater, introduces atmospheric air, which aids the combustion.

The eruption of a volcano is an escape of a portion of the heated materials from their subterranean furnace to the open day. Hydrogen and sulphur, apart as well as in union, being the most volatile, are first ejected in great quantities; then follow oxygen, carbon, and water in vapour, causing terrific explosions as they come in contact with cold substances; mingled with these are ashes, sand, and masses of fractured minerals; and to these succeed lava of every description, and to the lava succeed all the former substances. Thus are the awful changes rung in peals which astound the vicinity of these mighty mountains of fire, and devastate the regions around.

Sir W. Hamilton has furnished us with a glowing picture of an eruption of Vesuvius, which took place in the year 1779. He says, A fountain of liquid fire arose up to the amazing height of 10,000 feet, the electric fire darting in zigzag lines around amidst columns of smoke, black as night | itself, and attended with thunders so violent, that their concussions fractured the windows even in Naples, a distance of six miles; and the falling matter appeared red-hot when it had descended from this immense elevation, back again to the summit of Vesuvius. Thus was a body of fire formed nearly three miles in diameter, which dealt dismay to thousands of mankind, who, utterly impotent, could only behold and wonder at these stupendous workings of creation without a possibility of controling their operations; and thus shall it be, but in boundless increase,

107.-VOL. IX.

when all the volcanoes of this sphere, in vast eruption, at once burst forth with fire, and "the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat; the earth also, and the works that are therein, shall be burnt up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness."

(To be continued.)

NECESSITY AND CERTAINTY, POSSIBILITY AND CONTINGENCY.

MR. EDITOR. SIR,-It has generally been assumed that there is an important and essential difference between necessity and certainty, that the one has no natural affinity or connexion with the other, and that things may be infallibly certain, which are by no means unavoidably necessary. It must be confessed that the terms are not exactly synomymous; that they do not suggest precisely the same idea: but it does appear to me that necessity and certainty must always meet in the same subject, that their coincidence is always inseparable, and that the existence of the one must always imply the existence of the other. I apply the term necessity to any thing which cannot be avoided, and that of certainty to any thing which will infallibly take place; the former as being applicable only to causation, and the latter to issue. But has any person ever been able to produce a case of absolute certainty, which has not been equally a case of absolute necessity? Or has any person ever been able to produce a case of absolute certainty, that has not been indebted for its certainty to an absolute and unavoidable necessity? Must not every issue be supported by an ade-. quate causation? And is it possible for the one to outstep the limits of the other? As far as my own observation has extended, necessity has always given birth to certainty, and certainty has uniformly proceeded from necessity; and wherever I have been able to predicate the one, I have been always obliged to infer the other.

A mathematical certainty, for instance, is always supported by a mathematical necessity; and thus it is certain that the whole is equal to all its parts, and that the three angles of an equilateral triangle are equal to two right angles, because it is not possible for the whole to be unequal to all its parts, or the three angles of an equilateral triangle to be unequal to two right angles

3 s

Again, a physical certainty must always imply a physical necessity: and thus it is certain, that the perfect organization of the human body is conducive to health; because it is not possible for the perfect organization of the body to be otherwise than conducive to health. A moral certainty must always imply a moral necessity: and therefore it is certain that rectitude of principle must always tend to rectitude of conduct; because it is not possible for rectitude of principle to do otherwise than tend to rectitude of conduct. Now, sir, if any of your numerous correspondents can produce a single case, in either nature or science, in which it will plainly appear that absolute certainty does actually exist, or may even possibly exist, without absolute necessity, then I will renounce my hypothesis as being untenable: but until such a case be actually produced, and certainty be clearly proved to be independent on necessity, I must regard my argument as being founded on truth.

un

It has, I am fully aware, been often asserted, that although neither nature nor science is able to supply one single precedent, yet the scriptures supply examples without number; that the prophetical writings abound with cases in point, and that they do most clearly and unequivocally represent the events which they predict, as being the most unconditional and absolute certainties, and at the very same time, as being altogether unfettered and even connected with any fatal necessity. The truth of this assertion I do most sincerely doubt; and notwithstanding the boldness and frequency with which it is made, it would, I think, be no very feasible undertaking to make out a case in the scriptures, that would either literally express or clearly imply the two opposite propositions in the foregoing assertion. But passing over the fact of the case for the present, I would beg leave to suggest, that if the Holy Scriptures were found to contain axioms of faith that were utterly incompatible with scientific fact and daily observation, as well as repugnant to the plainest and strongest dictates of the human understanding, the discovery would, in my opinion, go a great way in overturning the authority of the word of God. The conclusion, therefore, to which my own reasonings oblige me to come, is, that the opinion that the scriptures, particularly the prophetical writings, do predicate absolute certainty in cases where they deny any fatal or absolute necessity, is not founded on truth; and that those persons who have given such

an interpretation to certain passages of holy writ, have mistaken the true meaning of the word of God.

It has always been the practice of persons, whether private individuals or public bodies, whose interpretations of the scriptures have been at open variance with scientific facts and with mental deductions, to support the authority of their interpretations by telling us, that the thing is above human reason; that to reason upon it would be dangerous, and even impious; and that we are therefore to receive their interpretations of those scriptures, as matters of pious and implicit credence, and not as subjects of open investigation and rational conviction. But, Mr. Editor, it is a happy thing for the cause of truth, and an unspeakable blessing for the church of Christ, that every age has supplied a few of those noble spirits, who have dared to dispute the plenitude of human authority,-who, in matters of religious belief would call no man master, and who would always regard with a distrustful shyness every interpretation of the holy scriptures that would not easily quadrate with the dictates of reason, and the analogy of scientific fact and common observation.

One of the most popular arguments that have been adduced in support of the foregoing theory, is the following:-May not some things be certain to the divine Being, which are not certain to us? To this I would reply, that the point now under consideration, is not the evidence of certainty, but certainty in the abstract: and is a question not of evidence, but of fact. That one being may be certain, and another be not certain, of the same thing, is far beyond all dispute, since a larger share of evidence may be within the reach of the one, than is accessible to the other; but at the same time, it must be equally clear that no being, human ör divine, can be absolutely certain of an uncertain thing: and if only one single being in existence be absolutely certain of any fact, the certainty of that fact is fully established; for if the thing be certain, it is not possible for any ignorance of the fact to invalidate its certainty. Certainty in knowledge, is a very different thing from certainty in fact. The former cannot exist without the latter, inasmuch as it is founded upon it, but the latter may exist without the former; that is, as far as created beings are concerned. Certainty in the event itself, is antecedent to and independent of all knowledge or mental certainty of the event. A knowledge, or

a mental certainty of the event, presup- | poses and demonstrates its existence, but it has no influence whatever upon the certainty of the event in re, nor any share in its organization.

The far-famed sophism, that argues a certainty from a possibility, may claim just a passing notice in this place. It has been argued, that since you are at this moment actually reading what my mind has indited and my pen has inscribed, it was always certain that at the present time you would be so employed. It is not, indeed, a matter of surprise, to hear illiterate persons talking at such a rate; but to me it is more than marvellous to hear a learned doctor gravely propound such a sophistical proposition in the name of argument. In a plain statement of the case, it would amount simply to this: that since you are at this very moment actually reading what my mind has indited and my pen has inscribed, it was always possible that at this moment you should be so employed; at the same time, it was always possible that at the present moment you should not be so employed; that prior to this moment both propositions were equally possible; that since you are at the present moment actually reading what my pen has written, one of the possibilities is become a fact, and consequently an absolute certainty, and the other possibility is become totally annihilated.

Every thing which does not imply a contradiction is possible; and yet all those things, every one of which singly is equally possible, cannot possibly co-exist, because such a supposition would imply a contradiction. Two opposite things, each of which alone is equally possible, are utterly incapable of co-existence, because they would of necessity exclude each other. Thus it may be safely argued that prior to the creation of the present world, its future existence was possible; and that its future nonexistence was then equally possible: but its existence and its non-existence at the same time, are utterly incompatible; but since the world has been actually created, the non-existence, or rather the noncreation, of this world, is become absolutely impossible. Arguing from the possibility of a thing to its certainty and actual existence, is, I conceive, the leading fallacy of the Berkleyan theory. But over what a tremendous precipice must we leap, if we would pursue these premises to their utmost conclusions? The actual production of all abstract possibilities, is, to say the very best that can be said of it, a gross

|

and palpable solecism; such a supposition, even after deducting from it all the contradictions of opposite possibilities, would of necessity imply the entire exhaustion of Divine fecundity; an eternal cessation of the operations of the Almighty, -the absolute annihilation of the Deity himself. If every thing were actually done, which is abstractedly possible, then it would inevitably follow, that even God himself could effect nothing more.

These manifest and numerous discrepances between abstract possibility and actual existence, let in an innumerable swarm of contingencies of every species; or rather, they open a door to the mysterious, fluctuating, and immeasurable empire of probability; where, like a massive and mighty pendulum, it hangs in portentous suspension over the fate of man, and travels at every successive vibration from the very margin of certainty to the verge of absolute impossibility; or back from the verge of impossibility, on to the margin of absolute certainty. Possibility, in the way of accommodation, may be improperly predicated of all certainties, and all actual existencies, inasmuch as their certainty and actual existence clearly demonstrate their possibility; but possibility, in strict propriety of application, belongs exclusively to abstract possibilities; only it must always be kept in mind, that in every instance, possibility may be predicated both negatively and positively. Here then we come to the final conclusion, which is, that it is only between the alternatives of negative and positive possibilities, that probability can hold its fickle reign. But while we contemplate the creatures of probability, who will come forward, and define their nature, or analyze their composition, or take their geometrical form and dimensions? They refuse to submit themselves to the authority of rule, or the process of measurement :-they shrink from the touch, and vanish from the sight; they are ever flitting on the wing; they are ever changing in their form; they ride on the fiery Pegasus of the will, are created by every volition of the mind, and flung in myriads from every scintillation of the human fancy.

Contingencies are identified with moral agency, either human or divine; and every attempt to subject them to the regular and uniform proportions of physical cause and effect, is nothing better than a libel on human liberty, and on the moral character of the Governor of the world.Contingency spurns the mechanical operations of necessity and certainty, and

soars into a loftier region: and as she | arising from its intricate nature, and spreads her ample wings, and pursues others from the necessity of avoiding, her eccentric way, she describes a tract as as much as possible, technical terms, unlike the regular concatenation of physical which, granting they were universally cause and effect, as the course of the understood, would afford clearer ideas royal eagle is from the flight of an auto- than any other, of what is meant to be maton, or the sailing of a balloon. conveyed. Clearness and perspicuity, however, we shall endeavour to attain, and if any information be communicated, a spirit of candid inquiry excited, or the thoughts led from this curious and exquisite casket, to the immortal spark it contains,-Reader! our wishes are sa

The doctrine of chances has, I conceive, no real bearing upon the subject in hand it is built upon the principles of numerical certainty; which, however numerous, diversified, and intricate they may be, operate by fixed laws, and are as regular and inevitable in their consequences as the process of a mathematical demonstration, or the ordinary connexion of physical cause and effect.

PHILEXCOGITATOR.

Margate, Sept. 5, 1827. (To be continued.)

ESSAYS ON PHYSIOLOGY, OR THE LAWS OF ORGANIC LIFE, ESPECIALLY AS MANIFESTED IN ANIMATED BEINGS.

By W. MARTIN, Hammersmith. ESSAY I.-Division of Natural Bodies, and general Laws of Organic Life. How delightful a task is it, to every well regulated mind, to investigate the wonders of nature? "To look through nature, up to nature's God," is indeed worthy the philosopher and Christian. In the workmanship of the Almighty, we behold, wherever we turn our eyes, boundless proofs of His wisdom and beneficence; and whatever part we make the subject of our study, in that we find ample cause for gratitude and praise.

Pre-eminent, however, among the works of creation, and affording to the contemplative inquirer, the highest intellectual pleasure, is the race of beings animated and living. The animal frame is indeed an inexhaustible mine for research,-it forms of itself a world, through which the eye of science ranges with admiration, and regards with delight the wonders unfolded by the diligence of the inquirer.

If we consider the animal frame as it respects either its mechanism, or the curious and complicated structure composing it, or, diving more deeply into the mysteries of nature, endeavour to elucidate and explain the laws by which it is governed, we shall find more than sufficient to claim our attention, and excite our interest.

In essays on the present subject, adapted for general perusal, there are many difficulties to surmount, some

tisfied!

"

All natural objects with which we are acquainted, and which constitute, this globe and all upon its surface, are divided into two distinct groups or families, viz. the organic, and the inorganic, and these are distinguished by laws, which draw a marked line of separation between them, furnishing data, at once simple and positive, and enabling us to determine immediately to which family to refer any object we view. The organic family comprehends all bodies endued with vitality;the inorganic, those not possessing this principle;-to the former group, therefore belong animals and plants ;to the latter, all other bodies cognizable by our senses:

1

いま

Animals are natural bodies, organized, living, and sentient. Vegetables are natural bodies, organized and living, but not sentient-all other bodies are neither organized, nor living, nor sentient. It is therefore to the laws of organic life, that our observations are to be confined.

The phenomena manifested by all organic bodies, result apparently from an inherent power, a power innate in the structure of the body itself, and producing all the characters of animal and vegetable life. This power, whatever it may be, is generally termed the "vital principle?" but vital principle is an expression calculated only to cover our ignorance respecting the abstract nature of the cause of these phenomena, or effects, perpetually and uniformly associated to the structure of organic matter. This principle must, from its very essence, remain for ever enveloped in mystery;-facts proclaim its existence, and with this we must rest content. We shall perhaps, however, be able to form a more accurate idea of what is implied by the term, vital principle,' and consequently of the distinction between organic and inorganic matter, by a more close comparison of these two families.

Inorganic matter › is simple in its form,

without fixed shape or determinate parts, and homogeneous in its composition. Incapable of growth, or of increasing by powers within itself, each particle, endued with a vis inertiæ, (if the phrase be allowable,) exists unchanged, and unchanging, except by foreign agents, mechanical or chemical. Each part too, of an inorganic mass, is independent of the other parts, to which it is united only by the force of affinity or aggregation; and when such a part is separated from the rest, it differs only in size from the mass to which it no longer adheres.

On the contrary, organized beings have fixed, determinate, and essential parts ;their mechanism is complicated, and consists of an union of solids and fluids;— indeed, this union of solids and fluids is essential to the constitution of organic matter. Inorganic matter, it is true, is penetrated by water, but this does not form a necessary and essential part; nor can the water of crystallization be adduced as forming, in its chemical relationship to a salt, a union similar to that existing between the solids and fluids of organic bodies. The state, too, of organic bodies, is constantly varying, either by the accession and assimilation of fresh parts, or by the change and removal of others; and these operations are carried on by powers innate in the being itself. Besides, organic bodies, without the intervention of foreign chemical or mechanical agents, have only a limited period of organic existence; or, in other words, these powers after continuing for an indefinite period in activity, cease. The body, no longer endowed with organic life, by a peculiar process becomes decomposed; the nature of its elementary principles is changed; it no longer maintains its definite form, but becomes in fact inorganic matter. Having touched upon the points in which the characteristic differences of organic and inorganic bodies consist, let us direct our attention more particularly to the results of the vital principle, or, in other words, to the phenomena manifested by organic life.

There exists, then, as we have previously pointed out, in the embryo of every plant or animal, from the first moment of its being, however minute, however inactive, a power capable of developing, in succession, the destined phenomena of life. Hence, the plant or animal is enabled to attract, to appropriate, and assimilate particles of extraneous matter, thereby not only increasing in magnitude, but at the same time

communicating to those very particles a power before unpossessed. Nor is this all, the work of addition and assimilation is not alone carried on, but particles, originally a portion of the organic frame, are thrown off, and losing the essential characters of vitality, are rendered simply inorganic. But to the agency of this power, there are certain bounds and laws, by which it is confined, and directed in its course and results. These are Magnitude, Form, Structure, Composition, and Duration.

With respect to Magnitude, it is to be observed, that both in plants and animals, there are certain restrictions to each particular species. As a sample of its kind, a determinate size is allotted, and although, perhaps, one animal may be somewhat larger than another of the same species, or one tree somewhat taller than another, still, this forms no objection. For example, the dog equals not in size the elephant, nor will the rose ever attain to the magnitude of the oak; there are limits beyond which they never pass, limits to which the gigantic elephant and the fluttering insect, the towering cedar and the humble violet, are equally restricted. To this determinate magnitude, animals, and plants arrive by a growth slow or rapid, according to species or influencing circumstances, and, having attained it, remain for a certain period stationary. There is also, between every part-between the stem and the roots, the limbs and the trunk-a due and relative proportion.

But as it regards form also, as well as magnitude, there is given to every species a definite rule. Hence, by its external characters, an animal or a plant may at once be recognized, or assigned to its respective order or genus;-for individual variations, it will be recollected, are merely trivial, and interfere not with the general plan; and although many organized beings undergo in various stages of their existence a variety of changes in size and figure, yet these, however complicated or numerous, are fixed and determinate, and all pave the way for the assumption of the destined forms of the individual. Hence, may we predict with certainty, that from the small egg of the moth, or butterfly, shall burst forth the destructive caterpillar, that this in turn shall appear a dormant chrysalis, and this, in due season, throwing off the shroud that envelops it, come forth in elegance and beauty, and beat with new-found wings the summer air, and flit from flower to flower.

With respect to Structure, also, the

« AnteriorContinuar »