these Terms ought to be explain'd If you 'll say that the Union of my Mind and Body consists in God's willing That upon my Desire to move my Arm the Animal Spirits should betake themselves to the Muscles it is compos'd of to move it in the manner desir'd I clearly understand this Explication and receive it But this is exactly my own Assertion For if my Will determine that of God 't is evident that my Arm is mov'd not by my Will which is impotent of it self but by the Will of God which never fails of its Effect But if it be said The Union of my Mind and Body consists in God's giving me a Force to move my Arm as he has given my Body likewise a Force of making me feel Pleasure and Pain to the end I may be sollicitous for this Body and be concern'd for its Preservation certainly this is to suppose the thing in dispute and to make a Circle No Man has a clear Idea of that Force which the Soul has over the Body or the Body over the Soul nor knows very well what he says when he positively asserts it That Opinion has been embrac'd through Prejudice has been learn'd in Infancy and in the Age of Sense But Understanding Reason and Reflexion have no part in it which is manifest enough from what I have said in the foregoing Treatise But you 'll say I know by my inward Conscience of my Action that I really have this Force and therefore am not mistaken in believing it I answer That when I move my Arm I am conscious to my self of the Actual Volition by which I move it and I err not in believing I have that Volition I have moreover an inward Sense of a certain Effort or Endeavour which accompanies this Volition and it is to believ'd that I make this Endeavour Last of all I grant that I have an inward feeling of the Motion of my Arm at the instant of this Effort which suppos'd I agree to what is said That the Motion of the Arm is perform'd at the instant a Man feels this Effort or has a practical Volition of moving his Arm. But I deny that this Effort which is no more than a Modification or Sensation of the Soul which is given us to make us understand our Weakness and to afford us a confus'd and obscure Sensation of our Strength can be capable of moving and determining the Spirits I deny there is any Analogy or Proportion between our Thoughts and the Motions of Matter I deny that the Soul has the least Knowledge of the Animal Spirits which she imploys to move the Body Animated by her Last of all Though the Soul exactly knew the Animal Spirits and were capable of moving them or determining their Motions yet I deny that with all this she could make choice of these Ductus of the Nerves of which she has no Knowledge so as to drive the Spirits into them and thereby move the Body with that Readiness Exactness and Force as is observable even in those who are the least acquainted with the Structure of their Body For supposing that our Volitions are truly the moving Force of Bodies howbeit that seems inconceivable how can we conceive the Soul moves her Body The Arm for Example is mov'd by means of an inflation or contraction caus'd by the Spirits in some of the Muscles that compose it But to the end the Motion imprinted by the Soul on the Spirits in the Brain may be Communicated to those in the Nerves and from thence to others in the Muscles of the Arm the Volitions of the Soul must needs multiply or change in proportion to those almost infinite shocks or Collisions that are made by the little Bodies that constitute the Spirits But this is inconceivable without admitting in the Soul an infinite number of Volitions upon the least Motion of the Body since the moving it would necessarily demand an innumerable multitude of Communications of Motions For in short the Soul being but a particular Cause and not able to know exactly the degrees of agitation and the dimensions of infinite little Corpuscles which encounter upon the dispersion of the Spirits into the Muscles she could not settle a General Law for the Communication of these Spirits Motion nor follow it exactly if she had establish't it Thus it is evident the Soul could not move her Arm although she had the Power of determining the Motion of the Animal Spirits These things are too clear to be longer insisted on The case is the same with our Thinking Faculty We are inwardly conscious that we Will the Thinking on something that we make an effort to that purpose and that in the Moment of our desire and effort the Idea of the thing presents it self to our Mind but our inward Sensation does not tell us that our Will or Effort produces our Idea Reason does not assure us that it 's possible and only prejudice makes us believe that our desires are the causes of our Ideas whilst we experiment an hundred times a Day that the latter accompany or pursue the former As God and his Operations have nothing sensible in them and as we are not conscious of any thing but our desires that precede the presence of our Ideas so we do not think our Ideas can have any other cause than these desires But view the thing closely and we shall see no force in us to produce them neither Reason nor Conscience giving us any information thereupon I don't think my self oblig'd to transcribe all the other proofs employ'd by the patrons for the Efficacy of Second Causes Because they seem so trifling that I might be thoughts to design to render them Ridiculous And I should make my self so if I gave them a Serious Answer An Author for Example very gravely asserts in behalf of his Opinion Created Beings are true Material Formal Final Causes why must not they likewise be Efficient or Efficacious I fancy I should give the World little satisfaction if to answer this Gentlemans Question I should stand to explain so gross an Ambiguity and show the difference between an Efficacious cause and that which the Philosophers are pleas'd to call material Therefore I leave such arguments as these to come to those which are drawn from Holy-Writ ARGUMENT VII The Defenders of the Efficacay of Second Causes commonly alledge the following Passages to support their Opinion Let the Earth bring forth Grass Let the Waters bring forth the moving Creature that hath Life and Fowl that may fly c. Therefore the Earth and Water by the Word of God receiv'd the Power of producing Plants and Animals Afterwards God Commanded the Fowls and Fishes to multiply Be fruitful and multiply and fill the Waters in the Seas and let Fowl multiply in the Earth Therefore he gave them a Power of begetting their like Our Saviour in the fourth Chapter of St. Mark says the Seed which falls on good Ground brings forth
judging of things with an unwarrantable rashness For we often judge that the Objects whereof we have Idea's exist and likewise that they altogether resemble their Idea's when yet it often falls out that the Objects are neither like their Idea's nor do they exist at all The Existence of a thing does no ways follow from our having an Idea of it much less does it follow that the thing is perfectly like the Idea which we have thereof It cannot be concluded from GOD's giving us such a sensible Idea of Magnitude upon the presentation of a six Foot-rule to our Eyes that this Rule has the same Extension as it is represented to us by that Idea For first All Men have not the same sensible Idea of this same measure since all Men have not their Eyes disposed in the same manner Again The same Person has not the same sensible Idea of a six Foot-rule when he beholds it with his left Eye as when he views it with his right as has been already said Finally It often happens that the self-same Person entertains quite different Idea's of the same Objects at different times according as they are suppos'd nearer or farther off as shall be explain'd in its proper place It is then nothing but prejudice grounded upon no good reason to think we see Bodies according to their real Magnitude for our Eyes being not given us for any other purpose than the security of our Body they discharge their Duty admirable well in giving us such Idea's of Objects as are proportion'd to its magnitude But the better to conceive what ought to be our judgments concerning the Extension of Bodies from the Report of our Eyes let us imagine GOD to have created in Epitomie out of a portion of matter of the bigness of a small Globe an Heaven and Earth and Men upon this Earth with all other things the same proportion being observ'd as in this Grand World These little Men would see each other and the parts of their Bodies as likewise the little Animals which were capable of incommoding them Otherwise their Eyes would be useless to their preservation It is manifest then from this Supposition these little Men would have Idea's of the magnitude of Bodies quite different from ours since they would look upon their little World which would be but a Ball in our account as stretch'd out into infinite spaces just as we do in respect of the World in which we are Or if this is not so easie to be conceiv'd let us suppose GOD had created an Earth infinitely vaster than this which we inhabit so that this new Earth should be to ours what ours would be to that we have spoken of in the fore-going Supposition Let us moreover conceive GOD Almighty to have observ'd in all the parts which went to the Composition of this New World the very same proportion he has done in those which make up Ours It is plain that the Inhabitants of this latter World would be Taller than the space betwixt our Earth and the most distant Stars we can discover And this being so it is manifest that if they had the same Idea's of Extension of Bodies as our selves they would be able to discern some of the parts of their own Bodies and and would see others of a prodigious unweildiness so that 't is ridiculous to think they would see things in the same Bigness as they are seen by us It is apparent in these two Suppositions we have made that the Men whether of the Great or Little World would have Idea's of the Magnitude of Bodies very different from ours supposing their Eyes to furnish them with Idea's of the Objects round about them proportion'd to the Magnitude of their own Bodies Now if these Men should confidently affirm upon the Testimony of their Eyes that Bodies were of the very same bigness whereof they saw them it is not to be doubted but they would be deceiv'd and I suppose no Man will make a question of it And yet it is certain that these Men would have as Good Reason to justifie their Opinion as we have to defend our Own Let us acknowledge then from their Example That we are very uncertain of the Magnitude of Bodies which we see and that all which can be known by us concerning them from the Testimony of Sight is only the mutual Relation there is between Them and Us. In a word that our Eyes were never given us whereby to judge of the Truth of things but only to give us notice of such as might either molest or profit us in something or other But 't is not thought sufficient for Men to credit their Eyes only in order to judge of Visible Objects They think they are to be trusted farther even to judge of those which are Invisible Because there are some things which they cannot see they conclude they do not exist attributing to their Sight a Penetration in a manner Infinite This is an Impediment which prevents their discovering the real Causes of abundance of Natural Effects For that they ascribe them to Imaginary Faculties and Qualities is often meerly for want of discerning the True which consist in the different Configurations of these Bodies They see not for Instance the little parts of Air or Flame much less those of Light or of a matter still more fine and subtil And upon this score they are ready to believe they are not in being at least conclude them void of force and action They betake themselves to Occult Qualities or Imaginary Faculties to explain all the Effects whereof those Imperceptible parts are The True and Natural Cause They had rather have recourse to the horror of a Vacuum to Explain the Elevation of water in the Pump than impute it to the Gravitation of the Air. They chuse to ascribe the Flux and Reflux of the Sea to the Qualities of the Moon rather than to the pressure of the Atmosphere that is to the Air which surrounds the Earth and the Elevation of Vapours to the Attractive Faculties of the Sun than to the simple Motion of Impulse caused by the parts of the Subtil Matter which it continually diffuses abroad They look upon those as Men of trifling and impertinent Thought who have recourse only to the Flesh and Blood in accounting for all the Motions of Animals Likewise for the habits and the Corporeal Memory of Men And this partly proceeds from the Conception they have of the littleness of the Brain and its incapacity thereupon to preserve the Traces of an almost infinite number of things lodg'd in it They had rather admit though they can't conceive how a Soul in Beasts which is neither Body nor Spirit Qualities and Intentional Species for the Habits and Memory of Men or such like things notwithstanding they have no particular Notion of them in their Mind I should be too tedious should I stand to reckon up all the Errors we fall into through this Prejudice There are
incident to the Corporeal World which is an Opinion sufficiently now receiv'd among Men of Letters But let their Opinion about it be what it will that matters not much since it seems much easier to conceive that a Body drives another when it strikes it than to comprehend how Fire can produce Heat and Light and educe from the power of matter a substance that was not in it before And if it be necessary to acknowledge that God is the True Cause of the different Communications of Motion by a much stronger reason we should conclude that none but He can Create and Annihilate real Qualities and substantial Forms I say Create and Annihilate For it seems to me at least as difficult to educe from matter a substance that was not in it or to reduce it into it again whilst yet there nothing remains of it as to create it or Annihilate it But I stick not to the Terms And I make use of those because there are no other that I know of which express without Obscurity and Ambiguity the changes suppos'd by the Philosophers to arrive every moment by the force of second Causes I had some scruple to set down here the other Arguments which are commonly urg'd for the Force and Efficacy of natural Causes For they appear so weak and trifling to those who withstand Prejudices and prefer their Reason before their Senses that I can scarce believe methinks that Reasonable Men could be perswaded by them However I produce and answer them since there are many Philosophers who urge them ARGUMENT I. If second Causes did not Operate say Suarez Fonseca and some others Animate things could not be distinguish'd from Inanimate since neither one nor the other would have an inward principle of their Actions ANSWER I answer that Men would have the same sensible proofs that have convinc'd them of the distinction they make between things Animate and Inanimate They would still see Animals do the same Actions as eat grow cry run bound c. and would discern nothing like this in Stones And this one thing makes the vulgar Philosophers believe that Beasts live and that Stones do not For we are not to fancy that they know by a clear and distinct view of Mind what is the Life of a Dog 'T is their Senses which regulate their Decisions upon this Question If it were necessary I could prove here that the principle of the Life of a Dog differs not from the principle of the Motion of a Watch. For the Life of Bodies whatever they be can consist but in the Motion of their Parts And we may easily judge that the same subtil matter which causes the Fermentation of the Blood and Animal Spirits in a Dog and which is the principle of his Life is no perfecter than that which gives Motion to the Spring of a Watch or which causes the Gravitation in the Weights of a Clock which is the principle of their Life or to speak as others do of their Motion It behoves the Peripateticks to give those whom they stile Cartesians a clear Idea of what they call the Life of Beasts Corporeal Soul Body which Perceives and Desires Sees Feels Wills and then we shall clearly resolve their Difficulties if after that they shall persist in raising them ARGUMENT II. It were impossible to discover the Differences or Powers of the Elements So that Fire might refrigerate as Water and nothing would be of a settled and fix'd Nature ANSWER I answer That whilst Nature remains as it is that is to say whilst the Laws of the Communication of Motions remain constantly the same it is a Contradiction that Fire should not burn or separate the Parts of certain Bodies Fire cannot refrigerate like Water unless it becomes Water for Fire being only Fewel whose Parts have been violently agitated by an invisible surrounding Matter as is easie to demonstrate it is impossible its Parts should not Communicate some of their Motion to approaching Bodies Now as these Laws are constant the Nature of Fire its Virtues and Qualities are unchangeable But this Nature and these Vertues are only Consequences of the General and Efficacious Will of GOD who does all in all things Therefore the Study of Nature is in all respects false and vain when we look for other true Causes than the Wills of the ALMIGHTY I confess that we are not to have recourse to God or the Universal Cause when we require the Reason of particular Effects For we should be ridiculous to assert for Instance That GOD dries the Ways or Freezes the Water in the River We must say The Air dries the Earth because it moves and bears off the Water with it that dilutes it Or that the Air or the subtil Matter Freezes the River in Winter because at that time it communicates not sufficient Motion to the Parts that constitute the Water In a Word we must if we can assign the Natural and particular Cause of the Effects propos'd to Examination But because the Action of these Causes consists in the moving Force which actuates them which moving Force is the Will of GOD which create them we ought not to say they have in themselves a Force or Power to produce any Effects And when in Reasoning we are at last arriv'd to a general Effect of which we seek the Cause 't is no good Philosophy to imagine any other than the general And to feign a certain Nature a first Moveable and universal Soul or some such Chimera whereof we have no clear and distinct Idea would be to argue like an Heathen Philosopher For Example when we are ask'd whence it comes that some Bodies are in motion or that the agitated Air communicates its Motion to the Water or rather whence proceeds the mutual Protrusion of Bodies Motion and its Communication being a general Effect on which all others depend we cannot answer I do'nt say like Christians but Philosophers without ascending to God who is the Universal Cause Since 't is His Will that is the moving Force of Bodies and that regulates the Communication of their Motions Had he will'd there should be no new Production in the World he would not have put its Parts in motion And if hereafter He shall will the Incorruptibility of some of the Beings he had made he shall cease to will the Communication of Motions in point of those Beings ARGUMENT III. 'T is needless to Plow to Water and give several preparatory Dispositions to Bodies to fit them for what we desire from them For GOD has no need of preparing the Subjects on which he Works ANSWER I answer That GOD may do absolutely all he pleases without finding any Dispositions in the Subjects he works upon But he cannot do it without a Miracle or by Natural ways that is by the General Laws of the Communication of Motions which he has constituted and which he almost always follows in his Actings GOD never multiplies his Wills without Reason
her Infant the Mother is the cause of the Sin and the Father has no part in it Yet St. Paul teaches us that by Man came sin into the World He does not so much as speak of the Woman Therefore c. ANSWER David assures us that his Mother conceiv'd him in iniquity and the Son of Syrach says Of the Woman came the beginning of Sin and by her we all dy Neither of them speak of Man St. Paul on the contrary says that by Man Sin entred into the World and speaks not of the Woman How will these Testimonies accord and which of the two is to be justify'd if it be necessary to vindicate either In discourse we never attribute to the Woman any thing peculiar to the Man wherein she has no part But that is often ascrib'd to the Man which is proper to the VVoman because her Husband is her Master and Head We see that the Evangelists and also the Holy Virgin call Joseph the Father of Jesus when she says to her Son Behold thy Father and I have sought thee sorrowing Therefore seeing we are assur'd by Holy Writ that Woman has subjected us to Sin and Death it is absolutely necessary to believe it nor can it be thrown upon the Man But though it testifies in several places that 't is by Man that Sin enters into the World yet there is not an equal necessity to believe it since what is of the Woman is commonly attributed to the Man And if we were oblig'd by Faith to excuse either the Man or the Woman it would be more reasonable to excuse the former than the latter However I believe these forecited passages are to be litterally explain'd and that we are to say both the Man and Woman are the true causes of Sin each in their own way The Woman in that by her Sin is communicated it being by her that the Man begets the Children and the Man in that his Sin is the cause of Concupiscence as his action is the cause of the fecundity of the Woman or of the communication that is between her and her Infant It is certain that 't is the Man that impregnates the Woman and consequently is the cause of that communication between her Body and the Child's since that communication is the Principle of its Life Now that Communication not only gives the Child's Body the dispositions of its Mother's but also gives its Mind the dispositions of her Mind Therefore we may say with St. Paul that by one Man sin entred into the world and nevertheless by reason of that communication we may say that Sin came from a Woman and by her we all dye and that our Mother has conceiv'd us in Iniquity as is said in other places of Scripture It may be said perhaps that though Man had not sinn'd yet Woman had produc'd sinful Children for having her self sinn'd she had lost the Power God gave her over her Body and thus though Man had remain'd Innocent she had corrupted the Brain and consequently the Mind of her Child by reason of that communication between them But this surely looks not very probable For Man whilst righteous knowing what he does cannot give the Woman that wretched fecundity of conceiving sinful Children If he remains Righteous he wills not any Children but for God to whom Infant Sinners cannot be well pleasing for I suppose not here a Mediator I grant however that in that case the Marriage had not been dissolv'd and that the Man had known his Wife But it is certain that the Body of the Woman belong'd to her Husband since it was taken out of his and was the same Flesh. Duo in carne una It is moreover certain that Children are as much the Fathers as the Mothers Which being so we can't be persuaded that the Woman would have lost the Power over her Body if her Husband had not sinn'd as well as she For if the Woman had been depriv'd of that Power whilst the Man remain'd Innocent there had been this Disorder in the Universe that an upright Man should have a corrupt Body and sinful Children Whereas it is against Order or rather a contradiction that a just God should punish a perfectly Innocent Man And for this reason Eve feels no involuntary and rebellious Motions immediately after her sin as yet she is not asham'd of her Nakedness nor goes to hide her self On the contrary she comes to her Husband though naked as her self her Eyes are not yet open'd but she is still as before the absolute Comptroller of her own Body Order requir'd that immediately after her Sin her Soul should be disturb'd by the rebellion of her Body and by the shame of her own and her Husband's nakedness for there was no reason that God should any longer suspend on her behalf the Laws of the Communication of Motions as I have said in the seventh Article But because her Body is her Husband 's who is as yet Innocent she is not punish'd in this Body but this punishment is deferr'd till the time that he should eat himself of the Fruit which she presented him Then it was they both began to feel the rebellion of their Body that they saw they were naked and that shame oblig'd them to cover themselves with Fig-leaves Thus we must say that Adam was truly the cause of Original Sin and Concupiscence since it was his Sin that depriv'd both himself and his Wife of their power over their Body by which defectiveness of power the Woman produces in the Brain of her Child such tracks as corrupt its Soul at the very instant of its Creation OBJECTION against the Twelfth Article 'T is but random divining to say the communication between the Mother's and the Infant 's Brain is necessary or useful to the conformation of the foetus For there is no such Communication between the Brain of an Hen and that of her Chickens which notwithstanding are perfectly and compleatly form'd ANSWER I answer that in the seventh Chapter of the Second Book I have sufficiently demonstrated that Communication by the use I make of it in explaining the Generation of Monsters as also certain natural Marks and Fears deriv'd from the Mother For 't is evident that a Man who swoons away at the sight of a Snake because his Mother was frighted with one when she bore him in her Womb could not be subject to that Infirmity but because formerly such Traces had been imprinted on his Brain as these which open upon seeing a Snake and that they were accompany'd with a like Accident And herein I am no Diviner for I do not venture to determine wherein that Communication precisely consists I might say it was perform'd by those Fibres which the Foetus shoots into the Matrix of the Mother and by the Nerves wherewith that part is very probably fill'd and in saying so I should no more divine than would a Man who had never seen the Engines call'd La Samaritaine in affirming
there were Wheels and Pumps to raise the Water Nevertheless I can't see why divining is not sometimes allowable provided a Man sets not up for a Prophet and speaks not in too positive a strain I rather think he is permitted to speak his Thoughts whilst he pretends not to be Infallible nor Lords it unjustly over others by dogmatical Decisions or by the help of Scientifick Terms 'T is not always divining to speak of things which are not visible and which contradict Prejudices If so be we speak no more than we easily conceive and which readily makes its way into the mind of others who desire to understand Reason I say then that supposing the general Laws of the Communication of Motions such as they are there is great Probability that the particular Communication of the Mother's Brain with that of her Infant is necessary to form its Body in a requisite manner or at least is necessary to give the Brain of the Infant certain dispositions which ought to vary according to different Times and Countries as I have explain'd in the same Chapter I confess there is no Communication between the Brain of an Hen and that of a Chicken in the Egg which nevertheless is perfectly well form'd But it ought to be observ'd that the Chicken is farther advanc'd in the Egg when the Hen lays it than the Foetus when it descends into the Matrix which may well be concluded since there goes less time to the hatching Chickens than there goes to the bringing forth Whelps though the Belly of the Bitch being very hot and her Blood in perpetual motion the Whelps should be sooner form'd than the Eggs hatch'd were not the Chickens farther advanc'd in their Eggs than the Whelps in their Cicatricles Now there is great probability that the formation of the Chicken in the Egg before it was laid was effected by the communication I am speaking of I answer in the second place that the growth of the Body of Fowls is possibly more conformable to the general laws of Motion than that of four-footed Animals and that so the communication of the Females Brain with that of her young ones is not so necessary in Fowls as in other Animals For the reason that makes that communication necessary is probably the remedying the defect of these general Laws which in some particular Cases are insufficient to regulate the Formation and Growth of Animals I answer lastly there is no such necessity to the preservation of the Life of Birds that they should have so many particular Dispositions in their Brain as other Animals They have Wings to fly harm and to secure their feed and have no need of all that particular Mechanism which is the principle of the cunning and docility of some domestick Creatures Therefore the old ones need not instruct their young in many things as they breed them nor capacitate them to be taught many afterwards by giving them a disposition of Brain that 's fit for Docility Those who breed young Dogs for the Game sometimes find those which naturally set meerly from the instruction they receiv'd from their Damm who often us'd to set with them in her Belly There is a great difference almost always observable in the breed of these Creatures some of which are much more Docil and Tractable than others of the same Species But I do not think there ever was a Fowl that taught any thing extraordinary to her young that a Hen for Example ever hatch'd a Chicken who could do any thing but what they all do naturally Birds then are not so tractable or capable of Instruction as other Animals The Disposition of their Brain is not ordinarily capable of many Changes nor do they act so much by Imitation as some domestick Animals Young Ducks which follow an Hen don't stay for her Example to take the Water and the Chickens on the contrary never betake themselves to swim though hatch'd and led by a Duck that loves the Water But there are Animals that easily and readily imitate the uncommon Motions which they see others do However I do not pretend that much stress is to be laid on these last Reflections since they are not necessary to establish my Opinion Second OBJECTION against the Twelfth Article 'T is likewise divining to affirm That the Mother before her Sin might have any intercourse with her Embryo there being no necessary relation between our Thoughts and Motions happening in our Brain And therefore that Communication between the Mother's and the Infant 's Brain is useless ANSWER It is evident That without this Communication the Infant was incapable of having any Commerce with its Mother or the Mother with her Infant without a particular Miracle Now before the Sin Order requir'd That the Mother should have notice of all the Corporeal wants of her Infant and that the Infant should resent its Obligations to its Parents Therefore since all things were in Order before the Sin and that God acts always agreeably to Order the Mother and the Child had some Commerce by means of this Communication To understand wherein this Commerce may have consisted it must be remembred That the Connexion of the Tracks of the Brain with the Ideas of the Soul may be several ways effected either by Nature or by the Institution of Men or some other way as I have shewn how in the Second Book In beholding a Square or the Look of a Person suffering any Pain the Idea of a Square or of an afflicted Person rises in the Mind This is common to all Nations and the Connexion between these Ideas and these Traces is natural When an Englishman hears pronounc'd or reads the Word Square he has likewise the Idea of a Square but the Connexion which is between the Sound or the Letters of that Word and its Idea is not natural nor is it general with all the World I say then That the Mother and her Infant must naturally have had a Correspondence between them upon all the things that could be represented to the Mind by natural Connexions That if the Mother for Instance had seen a Square the Infant would have seen one too and that if the Infant had imagin'd any Figure he would have likewise excited the Traces of the same Figure in the Imagination of his Mother But they would have had no Commerce together about things of a purely Spiritual Nature nor even about Corporeal things whenever they conceiv'd them without the help of the Senses and Imagination The Mother might have thought on GOD have heard or read the Word Square or the like and yet the Child not have discover'd what were her Thoughts thereof unless in Tract of Time she should have setled a new Commerce of intellectual Ideas with it much what the same with that of Nurses when they teach their Children to speak I explain and prove these things One would think I had sufficiently prov'd them by the Explication I gave of the Cause of