B 'if'tltijj. }.'».,' ' .. |ii•^ f.r ^\ -f ' -f^ ^^ '. * * \^^' '^^ ^ *:';,» ^ .,o-' ^^ V .0^^ < . , .^ ,0-' '"<2. ' > <<• » ^. aV^, 7 O. r •^ V* :^ - ■" "^ » V^-, ;.,^ '^' ^-T^^i;^^ • V.^ ^ - of ^'^L!^ 2^' ^s.«.%/*->\.^ oA-V .■*•-. ^^-<',\, ^c^ \.>^^\)^ "t/> .^v \V \^ ; ^v^ ^^'>'^^^^ ^- xv^^ ^' "^^ ° \^3C\k^' >^ 0^^ :'A .^^^' •5r .; ..-^^ .^* ^r: ""^^-^y ^^ .00 ■> .■.'% .^ V^^ .-. 'O. 0^ ^^ o.^^ •\^ vOq, , \ ** ^ > V ^^:^4^ //(/ flu /lLf>OCi>i • -^ ^ TEA ELEMENTS OF INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. BY FRANCIS WAYLAND, UkTB PBESIDENT OF BEOWN UNTVESSITY, AUTHOE OP ELEMKMT8 OF MOKAL 8CIEX0E, ETC. ETC. TWELFTH THOUSAND. NEW YORK : SHELDOIsr & COMPANY, PUBLISHERS, 498 & 500 BKOADIYAY. 18 6 6. COLLEGE AND SCHOOL TEXT-BOOKS BY EMINENT PRACTICAL TEIACHERS, THE NOEMAL MATHEMATICAL SEEEES. STODDARD'S JUVENILE MENTAL AEITHMETIC. Price 25 cents. STODDARD'S INTELLECTUAL ARITHMETIC. Price 40 cents. STODDARD'S RUDIMENTS OF ARITHMETIC. Price 56 cents. STODDxVRD'S NEW PRACTICAL ARITHMETIC. Price $1 00. STODDARD & HENKLE'S ELEMENTARY ALGEBRA. Price $1 25. STODDARD & HENKLE'S UNIVERSITY ALGEBRA. Price $2 00. ♦METHOD OF TEACHING AND KEY TO INTELLECTUAL ARITHMETIQ *KEY TO STODDARDS PRACTICAL ARITHMETIC. Price 80 cents. *KEY TO S. & II.'S ELEMENTARY ALGEBRA. Price $1 25. *E:EY TO S. & H.S UNIVERSITY .iLGEBRA. Price $2 00. BULLIONS' SEEIES OP GEAMMAES, ETC. INTRODUCTION TO ANALY T. AND PRAC. ENGLISH GRAMMAR. 50 eta. ANALYTICAL AND PRACTICAL ENGLISH GRAMMAR. $1, 00. EXERCISES IN ANALYSIS AND PARSING. 26 cents. LATIN LESSONS, by Spencer, $1 00 introductory to Bullions' LATIN GRAMMAR. $1 75. ♦LATIN READER. $1 T5. *LATIN EXERCISES. $1 75. CESAR'S COMM. $1 75*. CICERO'S ORATIONS. $1 75. SALLUST. $1 75. ♦LATIN ENGLISH DICTIONARY (with Synonyms). $3 00. GREEK LESSONS. $1 00. GREEK GRAMMAR. $2 00. ♦GREEK READER. $2 50. COOPER'S VIRGIL. $3 00. PEENOH AND GEEMAU. KEETEL'S NEW METHOD OF LEARNING FRENCH. $2 00. PEISSNER'S ELEMENTS OF THE GERMAN LANGUAGE. $1 75. PHYSIOLOGY, LOGIC, ASTEONOMY, ETC. HOOKER'S HUMAN PHYSIOLOGY. $1 75. FIRST BOOK. 80 c^nts. WHATELY'S ELEM. OF LOGIC. $1 75. ELEM. OF RHETORIC, $1 75. THOMPSON'S LAWS OF THOUGHT. $1 75. WAYLAND'S INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. $1 75. BROCKLESBY'S ASTRONOMY. $1 75, *METEOROLOGY. $1 25. ♦BROCKLESBY'S WONDERS OF THE MICROSCOPE. $1 25. PALMERS PRACTICAL BOOJjtKEEPING. $1 00. OLNEY'S SCHOOL GEOGRAMY AND ATLAS (Revised). $2 50. COMSTOCK'S NATURAL PHM>SOPHY. $1 75. CHEMISTRY. $1 75. Also several other Text Books by pood Authors^ for which, see our Catalogue, vhich is furnished gratis. We furnish to Teachers for Examination, postpaid by mail, a copy of anj of the above books not having a * annexed, at half price. Those marked with a * we send on receipt of the prices annexed. Entered accofding to Act of Congress, in the year 1854. by Philips, Sampson & Co. in the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the District of Massachusetts. By Exchange \ Army and Navy Club JANUARY 16 1934 PREFACE. The following pages contain the substance of the Lectjrea which, for several years, have been delivered to the classes in Intellectual Philosophy, in Brown University. Having been intended for oral delivery, they were, in many respects, modified by the circumstances of their origin. Hence, illustrations have been introduced more freely than would other- wise have seemed necessary. In preparing them for the press, however. I was led to consider the class of persons for whose use they were principally designed. I remembered the diffi- culty of fixing definitely in the mind of the pupil the nature and limits of subjective truth ; and therefore allowed my instruc- tions to retain in general the form which they had previously assumed. Whether I have in this respect judged wisely, it is not for me to determine. I have not entered upon the discussion of many of the topics which have called into exercise the acumen of the ablest meta- physicians. Intended to serve the purposes of a text-book, it was necessary that the volume should be compressed within a compass adapted to the time usually allotted to the study of this science in the colleges of our country. I have, therefore, attempted to present and illustrate the important truths in intel- lectual philosophy, rather than the inferences which may be drawn from them, or the doctrines which they may presuppose. These may be pursued to any length, at the option of the teacher. If I have not entered upon these discussions, I hope that I have prepared the way for their more ample and truthful develop- ment. IV PREFACE. It has been my desire to render this work an aid to mentaJ improvement. For this purpose, I have added practical sug- gestions on the cultivation of the several faculties. Earnest- minded young men frequently err in their attempts at self-im- provement. It has seemed to me, therefore, that a work of this kind would be manifestly imperfect, did it not, directly as well as indirectly, aid the student in his efforts to discipline . and strengthen his intellectual energies. In order to encourage more extensive reading upon the sub- ject than can be furnished in a text-book, I have added refer- ences to a number of works of easy access, specifying the places in which the topics treated of were discussed. In this labor, I have availed myself of the assistance of my former pupils, Mr. Samuel Brooks, now instructor in Greek, in this University, and Mr. Lucius W. Bancroft, of Worcester, Mass. To these gentlemen the student is indebted for whatever benefit he may derive from this feature of the work. For the many imperfections of this volume, the author con- soles himself with the reflection, that it has been written and prepared for the press under the pressure of other important and frequently distracting avocations. In the humble hope that it may, nevertheless, facilitate the study of this interest, ing department of human knowledge, it is, with diffideiifle, submitted to the judgment of the public. Brown University, Sept 14; 1854. PREFACE TO THE PRESENT EDITION. It was my design, soon after this volume was published, to subject it to a thorough revision, and make such cor- rections in the text as were evidently needed. I found myself, however, unable at the time to accomplish my intention, in consequence of several other unexpected and imperative obligations ; and, subsequently, bj reason of a long period of imperfect health. I have devoted to this work the first leisure that I have been able to command ; and have corrected the text with all the attention in my power. I hope that I have improved it. In this labor I have been greatly assisted by the aid of another. Some time since, I received from an anonymous friend a copious list of valuable corrections, of which I have freely availed myself I take this method of express- ing my sincere gratitude, to my unknown benefactor ; and I beg him to receive my thanks for his . careful reading of the text, and for his many valuable suggestions. Most of these I have thankfully adopted. F. WAYLAND. Peotidbnce, R. I., May^ 1865. CONTENTS. fNTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS, -. . . 9 CHAPTEE I. THE PERCEPTIVE EACULTIES. Section I. — Of our Knowledge of Matter and IVIind, c . 16 Section n. — The Perceptive Powers in general, 28 Section rH. — Of our Mode of Intercourse with the External Woild, . 32 Section rV.—The Sense of SmeU, . 41 Section v. — The Sense of Taste, 46- Section VI. — The Sense of Hearing, 50 Section Vn. — The Sense of Touch, 59 Section Vm. — The Sense of Sight, 63 Section IX. — Acquired Perceptions, , 77 Section X. — The Nature of the Knowledge which we acquire by the Perceptive Powers, • . 86 Section XI. — Conception, 103 CHAPTER II. CONSCIOUSNESS, ATTENTION AND REFLECTION. Section I. — Consciousness, 110 Section n.— Attention and Reflection, . . . . 119 CHAPTER III. ORIGINAL SUGGESTION, OR THE INTUITIONS OF THE INTELLECT. Section I. — The Opinions of Locke, ...,...' 18G Section II. — The Nature of Original Suggestion, 136 Section HI. — Ideas occasioned by Objects in a State of Rest, . . . 142 Section IV. — Suggested Ideas occasioned by Objects in the Condi- tion ©f Change, 150 Section V. — Suggested laeas accompanied by Emotion, 168 VIII CONTENTS. CHAPTER IV. ABSTBAGTIOM, . • • • 177 CHAI^TER V, MEMORY. SecjtionI. — Association, of Ideas, •• 202 Bkction n. — The Nature of Memory, 223 BrctionIIL — ^^ The Importance of Memory, . 246 Section IV. — The Improvement of Memory, • 254 CHAPTER Vr. REASONING. Section I. — The Nature and Object of Reasoning, and the Manner in which it proceeds, 279 Section IT. — The different Kinds of Certainty at "which we arrive by Reasoning, 307 Section in. — Of the Evidence of Testimony, . . . . 317 Section IV. — Other Forms of Reasoning, 338 Section V. ; — The Improvement of the Reasoning Powers, 34^. CHAPTER VII. IMAGINATION. Section I. — Nature of the Imagination, 351 Section II. — Poi^ic Imagination, . . .' 367 Section III. — On the Improvement of Poetic Imagination, .... 370 Section IV. — Philosophical Imagination, ... - • . . 377 CHAPTER VIII. TASTE. Section L — The Nature of Taste, 387 Section II. — Taste considered Objectively. Material Qualities as Objects of Taste, . 392 . Sfif^TiON in. — • Immaterial Qualities as Objects of Taste, 408 Section IV. — The Emotion of Taste ; or Taste considered Subjec- tively, 408 APPENDIX. Note to pai xtrl, 102, .421 Note to page 115, I 425 INTRODUCTION. DEFINITION OF THE INTELLECTUAL POWERS Intellectual Philosophy treats of the faculties of the human mind, and of the laws by which they are governed. The only forms of existence which, in our present state we are capable of knowing, are matter and mind. It is the mind alone that knows. When, therefore, we cognize matter, the otject known, and the subject which knows, are numerically distinct. When, on the other hand, we cog- nize mind, the mind which knows and the mind which ia known are numerically the same. The mind knows, and the mind is the object of knowledge. 1. The mind becomes cognizant of the existence and qual- ities of matter, that is, of the world external to itself, by means of the Perceptive faculties. It knows not what matter is, or what is the essence of matter, but only its qualities ; that is, its power of affecting us in this or that manner. When we say, '^ This is gold," we do not pretend to know what the essence of gold is, but merely that there is something possessed of certain qualities, or powers of cre- ating in us certain affections. 2. In a similar manner we become acquainted with the energies of our own mind. We are not cognizant of the mind itself, but only of the action of its faculties or sensi- bilities. When we th'«ik, remember, or reason; when we 10 INTRODUCTION. are joyful or sad, when we deliberate or resc ve, we knoTf that these several states 3f the mind exist, and that they are predicated of the being whom I denominate I, or myself. The power by which we become cognizant to ourselves of these mental states is called Consciousness, When, by an act of volition, a particular mental state is made the object of distinct and continuous thought, the act is denominated Reflection. 3. An idea of perception or of consciousness terminates aa soon as another idea succeeds it. It is perfect and complete within itself, and is not necessarily connected with anything else. I see a ball either at rest or in motion ; I turn my eyes in another direction and perceive a tree or a house ; in a moment afterwards they are both violently thrown down. I am conscious of several separate perceptions, which follow each other in succession. Each one of these mental acts ia complete within itself, and might have been connected with no other. We find, however, that these ideas of perception are not ^thus disconnected. They do not terminate in them- selves, but' give occasion to other ideas of great importance; ideas which, but for the acts of perception, could never have existed. Thus, we saw a house standing, we now see it fallen : there at once arises in the mind the idea of a cause, or of something which has occasioned this change. Several ideas following in succession, occasion the idea of duration. The existence of these secondary ideas under these circum- stances is owing to the constitution of the human mind itself It suggests to us these ideas, which, when once con- ceived, are original and independent. This power of the mind is termed Original Suggestion. 4. The knowledge acquired both by our perceptive facul- ties and by consciousness, as well as much that is given us by original suggestion, is the l^nowledge of things or acta as individuals. We perceive single objects; we are con DEFINITION OF THE INTELLECTUAL POWERS. H Bcious of single mental states. These pass away and become recollections. The recollections are like their originals, merely recollections of individuals. Had we no othei power, our knowledge would consist of separate isolated ideas, without either cohesion or classification. Our knowl- edge would be all either of single individuals, or of single acts performed by particular agents. When, however, we reflect upon our knowledge, we find it to.be of a totally diflerent character. It is almost all of classes. With the exception of proper names, all the nouns of a language des- ignate classes ; that is, ideas of genera and species, and not ideas of individuals. There must, therefore, exist a power of the mind by which we transform these ideas of individuals into ideas of generals. We give to this complex power the name of Abstraction, 5. We have thus far considered the intellectual faculties without reference to the element of time. We, however, all know that the ideas obtained in the past remain with us at this present. The history of our lives from infancy is con- tinually before us, or^ at the command of the will, it may be spread out before our consciousness. We know that the ideas which we now acquire may be retained forever. Nay, more, we are conscious of a power of recalling at will the knowledge which we have once made our own. The faculty by which we do this is called Memoi^y. 6. Possessed of these powers, we might obtain all the ideas arising from perception, consciousness and original suggestion ; we might modify them into genera and species, we might treasure them up in our memory and recall them at will. But we could proceed no further. Our knowledge would consist wholly of facts, or the informa- tion which we have derived either from our own observa- tion or the observation of others. But this manifestly ia uot our condition. We are able to make use if the knowl- 12 INTRODUCTION. edge acquired by the powers of which I have spoken, w such a manner as to -arrive at truth before unknown, truth • which these powers could never have revealed to us. Ie this manner we make use of the facts in geology in order to determine the changes which have taken place in the history of our globe. Thus, from the axioms and definitions of geometry, we proceed to demonstrate ^he profoundest truths of that science. The faculty by which we thus proceed m the investigation of truth is termed Reason, 7. Thus far we have treated of those powers which give us knowledge of things and relations actually existing, oi which modify and use this knowledge. Were we limited to these, we could consider no conception but as actually true. We could conceive of nothing except that which we had perceived, or which some one had perceived for us. But we find ourselves endowed with a power of taking the elements of our knowledge and combining them together at will. We thus form to ourselves pictures of things that never existed, and we give to them form and substance by the various processes of the fine arts. It was this power which con- ceived the group of Laocoon, or Milton's Garden of Eden. We give to this power the name of hnagination. 8. The exercise of all our faculties is generally agreeable, and sometimes is productive of exquisite pleasure. I look at a rainbow, I pursue a demonstration, I behold a successful efibrt in the fine arts, and in all these cases I am conscious of a peculiar emotion. The causes producing this emotion are unlike, but the mental feeling produced is essentially the same. " Every one recognizes it under the name of the beautiful ; and the sensibility by which we become capable of this emotion is called Taste. The faculties which will be treated of m the present work toay , then, be briefly defined as follows : 1. The Perceptive faculties are those by which we riecome DEMNITION OF THE INTELLECTUAL POWERS. IS acquainted "with the existence and qualities of the externa] world. 2. Consciousness is the faculty by which we become cognizant of the operations of our own minds. 3. Original Suggestion is the faculty which gives rise to original ideas, occasioned by the perceptive faculties or consciousness. 4. Abstraction is the faculty by which, from conceptions of individuals, we form conceptions of genera and species, or, in general, of classes. 5. Memory is the faculty by which we retain and recall T>ur knowledge of the past. 6. Reason is that faculty by which, from the use of the knowledge obtained by the other faculties, we are enabled to proceed to other and original knowledge. 7. Imagination is that faculty by which, from materials already existing in the mind, we form complicated concep- tions or mental images, according to our own will. 8*. Taste is that sensibility by which we recognize the beauties and deformities of nature or art, deriving pleasure from the one, and suffering pain from the other. It is by no means intended to assert that these are all the powers of a human soul. Besides these, it is endowed with conscience, or that faculty by which we are capable of moral obligation ; with will, or that motive force by which we are impelled to action ; with the various emotions, in- stincts and biases, which, as observation teaches us, are parts of a human soul. These are, however, the most im- portant of those that are purely intellectual. In the follow- ing pages we shall consider them in the order in which they have been named. 2 14 INTRODUCTION. REFERENCES to PASSAGES 1-T WHICH ANALOGOCS SUBJECTS ARE TREATED. Importance of Intellectual Philosophy — Reid's Inquiry, chap. 1, sec. 1 Difficulty of the study — Reid's Inquiry, chap. 1, sec. 2. Cultivation of mind distinguishes us from brutes — Inquiry, chap. 1. sec. 2. What are matter and mind — Reid's Introduction to Essays on the In- tellectual Powers. Matter and mind relative — Stewart's Introduction to vol. i. ; Reid's Essays on certain powers, Essay 1, chap. 1. Origin of our knowledge — Locke, Book' 2d, chap. 1, sec. 2 — 5 and 24. CHAPTER L :HE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES 6EC1I0N I. — OF OUR KNOWLEDGE OF MATTER AND MIND. THERE IS NO REASON FOR SUPPOSING THE ESSENCE OB MATTER AND MIND THE SAME. THE RELATION OF MIND TO MATTER IN OUR PRESENT STATE. Op the essence of mind, as I have remarked, we know nothing. All that we are able to affirm of it is, that it ia something which perceives, reflects, remembers, believeSj imagines, and wills ; but what that something is^ which ex erts these energies, we know not. It is only as we are con- scious of the action of these energies that we are conscious of the existence of mind. It is only by the exertion of its own powers that the mind becomes cognizant of their exis- tence. The* cognizance of its powers, however, gives us no knowledge of that essence of which they are predicated. In these respects, our knowledge of mind is precisely analogous to our knowledge of matter. When we attempt to define matter, we affirm that it is something extended, divis- ible, solid, colored, etc. ; that is, we mention those of ita qualities which are cognizable by our sense?5. In other words. Wig affirm that it is something which has the power of aSecting us in this or that manner. When, however, the question is asked, what is this something of which these qualities are predicated, we are silent. The knowledge of the qualities gives no knowledge of the essence to which 16 • INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. they belong. We cognize the qualities by means of our perceptive powers ; but we have no power by which we are able to cognize essence, or absolute substance. This does not seem to be the fact by accident, but from necessity. If we reflect upon the nature of our faculties, we shall readily be convinced that, by our perceptive -pow- ers, we learn that a particular object affects us in a particu- lar manner, creates in us a certain state of mind, or, m other words, gives us a certain form of knowledge. I look upon snow, and there is created in my mind the idea of white. I look upon gold, I have at once the idea of yellow. Besides this, there is another idea created, which is, that this quality, or power of creating in me this notion, belongs to the object which I contemplate. I thus not only gain the idea of white or yellow, but the additional conviction that snow is white and gold is yellow. The same remarks apply to our knowledge of mind. I am conscious of perception, of recollection, of pleasure, or pain. I thus acquire a notion of these several mental acts, and thus a certain form of knowledge is given to me. Be- sides this, I have an instinctive belief that the mental en- ergy which gives rise to this particular form of knowledge is predicated of the thinking being whom I call I, or myself. If the knowledge which we derive from perception and con- sciousness be analyzed, I think it will be found to go thus far, but that, from the constitution of our nature, it can go no farther. But, while our knowledge of mind and our knowledge of matter agree in this respect, that neither of them gives us any information concerning essences, these two- forms of knowledge are in other respects quite dissimilar. 1. In the first place, it is obvious that the energies of the Dne and the qualities of the other are made known to us by iifferent powers of the mind. The qualities of matter are THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 1^ revealed to us by our perceptive faculties, in Tvhich our spiritual and material natures are intimately united. The energies of mind are revealed to us by consciousness, one of the elements exclusively of our spiritual nature. It is almost needless to remark, here, that this difference in the mode in which these forms of knowledge are revealed to us does not affect the evidence of the truth of either. Percep- tion and consciousness are both original and legitimate sources of belief. We cannot philosophically deny the ex- istence of either. The world without us and the world within us, the me and the not me, are both given to us by the principles of our constitution as ultimate facts, which, whatever may be his theory, every man, from the necessity of his constitution, practically admits. 2. We always express the attributes of matter and the energies of mind by terms generically dissimilar. The qualities of matter we designate by adjectives, or terms aaeaning something added to a substance, and wholly inca- pable of an active signification. Thus, we say of a ma- terial object, it is hard, soft, white, black, warm or cold. On the other hand, we designate the energies of mind by active verbs or participles, terms which indicate a power residing in the substance itself. We say of mind, it thinks remembers, wills, imagines ; or, that it is a thinking, will- ing, remembering, imagining substance. This difference in our mode of speech is aot accidental, but of necessity. If any one will make the experiment, he will find it impossible to express his conceptions on these subjects in any other manner. We are unable to conceive of thinking, reasoning, remembering, as qualities, or of white, black, or color, as ener- gies. We are so made that we are obliged to think of these different attributes as at the farthest remove from each other. From these remarks we discover the limit which has be'u: 2* 18 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPB fixed by our Creator to our investigations on these suojects. We perceive in the objects around us various qualities, and we know that these qualities must be predicated of some- thing, — for nothing, or that which does not exist, can have no qualities, - -but what that something ik we know not. So again, we are conscious of the energies of mind, and we know that these energies must be energies of something, while of the essence of that something we are equally igno- rant. Hence, in all our investigations respecting either matter or mind, we must abandon at the outset all inquiries respecting essences or absolute substance, and confine our- selves to the observation of phenomena, their relations tc each other, and the laws to which they are subjected. The progress of physical science within the last two centuries has been greatly accelerated by the practical acknowledg- ment of this law of investigation. Intellectual science can advance in no other direction. If, then, it be affirmed that the soul or the thinking prin- ciple in man is material, or that its essence is the same as the essence of matter, we answer : First, that the assertion is unphilosophical, inasmuch as it transgresses the limits which the Creator has fixed to human inquiry. We have been endowed with no powers for cognizing the essence of anything, and therefore we pass beyond our legitimate province in affirming anything on the subject. We can neither prove nor disprove it. We may show that no evidence- can be adduced in favor of it: that all the analogies bearing on the subject would lead to a different conclusion ; and thus we may form the basis of an opinion merely, but w.e can go no further. The nature of the case excludes all positive knowdedge. Secondly, we reply that the assertion is nugatory. It is affirmed that the essence of the soul is the same as the essence of matter. But what is the essence of matter ? We . THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. ^^ are obliged to confess that we do not know. Wlnjnj there- fore, we assert that the essence of the soul is the same aa the essence of matter, we merely assert that it is the same aa something of which, by confession, we know absolutely noth-' ing. Were this assertion granted, it would then add nothing whatever to the sum of human knowledge. Would it not be better frankly to confess our ignorance on the subject ? Thirdly, so far as the grounds for an opinion exist, they favor precisely the opposite opinion. The qualities of matter and the energies of mind are as widely as possible different from each other. In all lan- guages they are designated by different classes of words We recognize them by different powers of the mind, powers which cannot be used interchangeably. Our senses cannot recognize the thoughts of the mind, nor can consciousness recognize the qualities of matte**. To assert, then, that the essence of mind and of matter is the same, is to assert, with- out the possibility of proof, that two things are the same^ which not only have no attribute in common, but of which the attributes are as unlike as we are able to conceive. It may not be out of place to enumerate the several men- tal states consequent upon the enunciation of any given proposition. In the first place, the assertion is made with- out any evidence either in favor of or against it. In this case (supposing the veracity of the assertor not to be taken into view) my mind remains precisely as it was before. The assertion goes for nothing. I have no opinion either the one way or the other. I neither believe nor disbelieve, nor have any tendency in either direction. In the second case the assertion is made, and though sufficient proof is not ^ presented to create belief, yet considerations, as, for instance, I analogies, are shown to exist, which create a probability either in favor of or against the thing asserted. Here, then, is ground for an opinion, and the state of mind is 20 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. chansred. We neither believe nor disbelieve, but we hold an opinion either in favor of, or contrary to the assertion. In the third case, the assertion is sustained either by syllo- gistic reasoning, or by testimony conformed to the laws of evidence. Here a different state of mind is produced. I believe it. I rely upon it as I would upon a matter which came within the cognizance of my own perception or con- sciousness. To illustrate these cases. A man asserts that the moon is a mass of silver. His assertion leaves my mind where it was before. I know nothing about it. Another man asserts that the planet Jupiter is or is not inhabited. He cannot prove it, but he presents various analogical facts in harmony with this assertion. I form an opinion on the subject. In the third case, a man asserts that the sun is so many millions of miles from the earth, and he proves, by testimony, that the observations forming 1| the data were made, and he explains the mathematical rea- ' soning by which this result is obtained. I believe it, and in my mind it takes its place with other established facts. Any one, who will reflect upon the evidence presented in favor of the materiality of the mind, can easily determine which of these mental states it is entitled to produce. But it has been sometimes said that the brain itself is the mind, and that thought is one of its functions. The reason given for this belief is, that diseases of the brain and nerves affect the condition of the mind ; that the mind declines as they become di3bilitated by age, and that the mind becomes deranged when the brain suffers from disease.' To this I would reply, that, so far as I have observed, the facts are hardly stated with accuracy when this course of argument is, adopted, and a large class of facts bearing in an opposite direction is too frequently left out of view. But, granting the facts, they do not justify the conclu- ftion that is drawn from them. Suppose the brain to be THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 2\ Lne instrument which the mind uses in its intercourse with the external world, — as, for instance, suppose the brain to secrete the medium by which the mind derives impres- sions from without, and sends foith volitions from within, — any derangement of this organ would, by necessity, create derangement in the forms of mental manifestation connected with that derangement. Disease of the nerves may create false impressions, or may lead to acts at variance with the spiritual volitions. As the facts may be thus accounted for on the supposition that the brain is an organ used by the mind, as well as on the supposition that the brain is itself the organ of thought, they leave the question precisely where they found it. If, then, it be asked, what is the relation which the mind holds to the material body? our answer would be as follows : The mind seems to be a spiritual essence, endowed with a variety of capacities, and connected with the body by the principle of life. .These capacities are first called into exercise by the organs of sense. So far as I can discover, if a mind existed in a body incapable of receiving any im- pression from without, it would never think, and would, of course, be unconscious of its own existence. As soon, however, as it has been once awakened to action by impres- I sions from without, all its various faculties in succession are I called into exercise. Consciousness, original suggestion, I memory, abstraction, and reason, begin at once to act. I These various powers are developed and cultivated by sub- |i sequent exercise, until this congeries of capacities, once so blank and negative, may at last be endowed with all the energies of a Newton or a Milton. Locke compares the mind to a sheet of blank paper ; : Professor Upham, to a stringed instrument, which is silent until the hand. of the artist sweeps over its chords. Both I of these illustrations convey to us truth in respect to the 22 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. relation existing between the mind and the material systeic which it inhabits. The mind is possessed of no innate ideas ^ its first ideas must come from without. In this respect it resembles a sheet of blank paper. In its present state it can originate no knowledge until called into action by im- pressions made upon the senses. In this respect it resembles a stringed instrument. Here, however, the resemblance ceases. Were the paper capable not only of receiving the form of the letters written upon it, but also of combining them at will into a drama of Shakspeare or the epic of Milton ; or, were the instrument capable not only of giving forth a scale of notes when it was struck, but also of com- bining them by its own power into the Messiah of Handel, then would they both more nearly resemble the spiritual essence which we call mind. It is in the power of com- bining, generalizing, and reasoning, that the great differ- ences of intellectual character consist. . All men open their eyes upon the same world, but all men do not look upon the world to the same purpose. REFERENCES. Mind first called into action by the perceptive powers — Locke, Book 2, chap. 1, sec. 9 ; chap. 9, sections 2 — 4, and sec. 15. On the proper mean^ of knowing the operations of our own minds — Reid, Essay 1, chap. 5. No idea of substance or essence, material or spiritual • — Locke, Book 2 chap. 23, sections 4, 5, 16, 30. Energies of mind expressed by active verbs — Reid, Essay 1, chap. 1. Explanation of terms — Ibid. Affirmation concerning the essence of mind unphilosophical — Stewart, Introduction. As much reason to believe in the existence of spirit as of body — Locke, Book 2, chap. 23, secti:ns 5, 15, 22, 30, 31. THE JfEKCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 28 BBCTIOX II. — OF THE PERCEPTIVE POWERS IN GENERAL, Before entering upon the consideration of the individual senses, it may be of use to offer a few suggestions respecting the perceptive powers in general, i propose to do this in the present section. 1. I find myself, in my present state, in intimate con- nection with, what seems to me to be, an external world. I cannot help believing that I am in my study; that, looking out of the window, I behold in one direction a thronged city, in another green fields, and in the distance beyond a range of hills. I hear the sound of bells. I walk abroad and am regaled with the odor of flowers. I see before me fruit. I taste it and am refreshed. I am warmed by the sun and cooled by the breeze. I find that all other men in a normal state are affected in the same manner. I conclude that to be capable of being thus affected is an attribute of human nature, and that the objects which thus affect me are, like myself, positive realities. I cannot, then, escape the conviction that I am a conscious existence, numerically distinct from every other created being, and that I am surrounded by material objects pos- sessed of the qualities which I recognize. The earth and the trees seem to me to exist, and I believe that they do exist. The grass seems to me to be green, and I believe that it is green. I cannot divest myself of the belief that the world around me actually is what I perceive it to be. I know that it is something absolutely distinct from the being whom I call myself I am conscious that there is a me, an ego. ' I perceive that there is a not me. a noii ego. I observe that lodl men hive the Bame convictions, and that in all their 24 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY conversation and reasonings they take these things foi granted. 2. I, ?iowever, observe that my power of cognizing the existence and qualities of the objects around me is limited. There are but five classes of external qualities which I am able to discover ; these are odorS; tastes, sounds, tactual, and visible qualities. For the special purpose of cognizing each of these qualities I find myself endowed with a partic- ular organization, which is called a sense. These are the senses of smell, taste, hearing, touch, and sight. Each sense is limited to its own department of knowledge, and has no connection with any other. We cannot see with our ears, or hear with our fingers. Each sense performs its own function, irrespective of any other. That matter has ' no other qualities than those which we perceive, it is not ' necessary to assert ; but if it have other qualities, inas- j much as we have no means of knowing them, we must' be forever, in our present state, ignorant of their existence. This limitation, however, exists, not by necessity, but, by 1 the ordinance of the greater. He might, if he had so ^1 pleased, have diminished the number of our senses. The deaf and the blind are deprived of means of knowledge which other men enjoy. The number of the senses in many of the lower animals is exceedingly restricted. We might possibly have been so constituted as to hold intercourse with the world around us without the intervention of the senses. Wc suppose superior beings to possess more perfect means of intelligence than ourselves ; but no one imagines them to be endowed with material senses. Our Creator might, probably, have increased the number of our senses, if he had seen fit, and we should then have enjoyed other inlets to ' Knowledge than those which we now possess. It is not im- probable that some of the inferior animals possess senses of Ivhich we are destitute. Migratory birds and fishes are THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 2A endowed with a faculty by which, either by day or by night, they pursue their way, with inevitable certainty, through the air or the ocean. May not this power be given them by ^neans of an additional sense 7 3. When our senses are brought into relation to their a])propriate objects, under normal conditions, a state of mind is created which we call by the general name of thought, or knowledge. If a harp is struck within a few feet of me. a state of mind is produced which we call hear- ing. So, if I open my eyes upon the external world, a state of mind is produced which we call seeing. This men- tal state is of two kinds. It is sometimes nothi/ig more than a simple knowledge, as when my sense of smelling ia excited by the perfume of a rose. At other times it goes further than this, and we not only have a knowledge or 9 new consciousness, but also the belief that there exists some external object by which this knowledge is produced. The external conditions on which these changes depend are as numerous as the senses themselves. Each sense has probably its own media, or conditions, through which alone its impressions are received. We see by means of the medium of light. We hear by means of the vibrations of air. None of these media can be used interchangeably Each medium is appropriated to its peculiar organ. 4. Physiologists have enabled us to trace with consider- able accuracy several steps of the process by which the intercourse between the spiritual intellect and the material world is maintained ; by which impressions on our material organization result in knowledge, and the volitions of the -•oul manifest themselves in action. A brief reference to our organization in this respect is here indispensable. The nervous system in general is that part of our phys- ical organization by which the mind holds intercourse with the external world, and through which it obtains the ele- 8 26 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. ments of knowledge. The nervous system is, however, of a two-fold character. A part of it is employed in giving energy to those processes by which life is sustained. These have their appropriate centres either in the spinal marrow, or in the different ganglia. Thus the heart, arteries and lungs, have their appropriate system of nerves, with the.r proper centre. The digestive apparatus has its own nervous system. These are all parts of the general arrangement of brain, spinal marrow and nerves, but their functions are performed without volition or thought. Hence many of the lower animals, which have no need of thought, have no other nervous apparatus. The brain may be removed from some of the cold-blooded animals without, for a considerable pe- riod, producing death. In such cases sensation will pro- duce motion, the arterial and digestive processes will con- tinue for a while uninterrupted. Thus a common tortoise will live for several days after its head has been cut off. Thus we also perform these various functions without any interven- tion of the will. We digest our food, we breathe, our hearts pulsate, without any care of our own; and these functions are performed as well when we sleep as when we wake,— nay, they proceed frequently for a while with entire regularity. when consciousness has been suspended by in- jury of the brain. As this part of the nervous system has nothing to do with thought and volition, we may dismiss it from our considera- tion, and proceed to consider that other portion of it which stands in so intimate connection with the thinking prin- ciple. The organism which we use for this- purpose consists of the brain and nerves. The part of the brain specially con- cerned in thought is the outer portion, called the cerebrum. From the brain proceed two classes of nerves, which have Deen appropriately termed afferent and efferent. The affe- 1 THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 27 rent nerves connect the various organs of sense with the brain, and thus convey to it impressions* from without. When an image from an external object is formed on the retina of the eye, a change is produced along the course of the optic nerve, which terminates in the brain, and the re- sult is a change in the state of the mind which we call see- ing. When the vibrations of the air fall upon the ear, another change is produced on the auditory nerve which is continued until it reaches the brain, and the result is a change in the state of the mind which we c^li hearing. The other, or the efferent class of nerves, proceed from the brain outwardly, and terminate in the muscles. By these the vo- litions of the mind are conveyed to our material organs, and the will of the mind is accomplished in action. The process just now mentioned is here reversed. The volition of the mind acts upon the brain, the change is communi- cated through thp nerves to the muscles, and terminates in external action. Thus the brain is the physical centre to which all impressions producing knowledge tend, and from which all volitions tending to action proceed. The proof of these truths is very simple. If the connec- tion betwen the organ of sense and the brain be interrupted by cutting, tying or injuring the nerve, perception imme- diately ceases. If, in the same manner, the connection be- tween the brain and the voluntary muscles be interrupted, the limbs do not obey the will. Sometimes, by disease, the nerves of feeling alone are paralyzed, and then, while the power of voluntary motion remains, the patient loses en- tirely the sense of touch, and will burn or scald himself without consciousness of injury. At other times, while the * I of course use the word impression here, in a general sense, to convey the idea of a change produced, and not of literal impression oi change of material fbri£ INTELLECTLAL PHILOSOPHY. nerves of sensation are unaffected, the nerves of volition are paralyzed. In this case, feeling and the other senses are un- impaired, but the patient loses the power of locomotion. Sometimes an effect of this kind is produced by the mere pressure upon a nerve. Sometimes, after sitting for a long time in one position, on attempting to rise we have found one of our feet '' asleep." We had lost the power of mov- ing it, and all sensation for the time had ceased. It seemed 2 more like a foreign body than a part of ourselves. Long- continued pressure on the nerve had interrupted the com- munication between the brain and the extremities of the nerves. As soon as this communication was reestablished, the limb resumed its ordinary functions.^ These remarks respecting the nerves apply with somewhat increased emphasis to the brain. If by injury to the skull the brain becomes compressed, all intelligent connection be- tween us and the external world ceases. So long as the cause remains unremoved, the patient in such a case con- tinues in a state of entire unconsciousness. The powers of volition and sensation are suspended. If the brain becomes inflamed, all mental action becomes intensely painful, the * Sometimes this communication is so entirely suspended that a limb inl this state, when touched by the other parts of the body, appears like a foreign substance. An instance of this kind, which many years since oc- curred to the author himself, may serve to iUustrate this subject He awoke one night after a sound sleep, and was not agreeably surprised to find a cold hand lying heavily on his breast. He was the sole occupant of the room, and he knew not how any one could have entered it It was 80 dark that he could perceive nothmg. He, however, kept hold of the hand, and, as it did not move, was somewhat relieved by tracing it up to his own shoulder. He had lain in an awkward position, so that he had pressed upon the nerve until all sensation had ceased. Probably many stories of apparitions and nightly visitations may be accounted for by supposing a similar cause. f- I THE PI.HCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 29 perceptions are false or exaggerated, and the volitions as- sume the violence of frenzy.* It may illustrate the relation which the nervous system sustains to the other parts of our material structure, to suppose the brain, nerves and organs of sense separated from the rest of the body, and to exist by themselves, with- out loss of life. In such a case, all our intellectual con- nections with the external world could be maintained. We could see, and hear, and feel, and taste, and smell, and re- member, and imagine, and reason. All that we should lose would be the power of voluntary motion, and the con- veniences which result from it. If, then, we should put this nervous system into connection with the bones, muscles, and those viscera which are necessary for their sustentation, we should have our present organization just as we actually find it. We see, then, that the other parts of our system are not necessary to our power of knowing, but mainly to our power of acting. 5. Of sensation and perception. I have said that when our senses, under normal condi- kions, are brought into relation to the objects around us, the result is a state or act of the mind which we call know- 'ing. A new idea or a new knowledge is given to the mind. This knowledge is of two kinds. In one case it is a simple * Sometimes, however, astonishing lesions of the brain occur without ither causing destruction of life or eyen any permanent injury. A case fas a few years since publishei in the daily papers, under the authority )f several eminent physicians, more remarkable than any with which I lad been previously acquainted. A man was engaged in blasting rocks md as he stood over his work, and was, I think, drawing the priming- fire, the charge exploded, and drove through his head an iron rod of some :wo or three feet in length. The rod came out through the top of his lead, and was found covered with blood and brain. He nevertheless talked home without assistance, and under ordinary medical care recov- ired in a few weeks. 3* 80 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. I knowledge, connected with no external thing. Thus, sup^ pose that I had never yet received any impression from the external world. In "profound darkness a rose is brought near to me. I am at once conscious of a new state of mind. I have a knowledge^ something which I can reflect upon, which we call smell. This knowledge, however, exists solely in my mind. I refer it to nothing, for I know nothing to which I can refer it. This simplest form of knowledge ia called sensation. But there is another form of knowledge given us through the medium of our senses. In some cases we not only ob- tain a new idea, or a knowledge of a quality, but we know, also, that this quality is predicated of some object existing without us. We know that there is a not me ^ and that thia is one of its attributes. Suppose, as in the other case, I am endowed with the sense of sight, and in daylight the rose is placed before me. I know that there is an ex- ternal object numerically distinct from myself, and that it is endowed with a particular form and color. This act ia called perception. These two forms of knowledge are united in the sense of touch, and may be clearly distinguished by a little reflec- tion. The illustration of Dr. Eeid is as follows : ^^ If a man runs his head with violence against a pillar, the attention of the mind is turned entirely to the painful feeling, and, to speak in common language, he feels nothing in the stone, but he feels a violent pain in his head." " When he leans his head gently against the pillar, he will tell you he feels nothing in his head, but feels hardness in the stone."— Reid's Inquiry, chap. 5, sec. 2. So I prick a person with the point of a needle ; a new knowledge is created in his mind, which he denominates pain. I draw the needle lightly over his finger, and I ask him what it is ; he replies, the point of a needle. So, if I place my f ngera THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 31 lightly on a table with my attention strongly directei to the feeling, I am conscious of a sensation. If I move my hand slowly over the table in order to ascertain its qualities, I am conscious of a perception ; that is, of a knowledge that the table is smooth, hard, cold, etc. The smell of a rose, the feeling of cold, the pain of the toothache, are sensations. The knowledge of hardness, of form, of a tree, or a house, arc perceptions. It has been commonly suppo ed that every perceptioii was preceded by and consequent upon a sensation. Hence the question has frequently ari^^n, since the perception is predicated upon the sensation, and the sensation conveys to us no knowledge of an external world, whence is our knowl- edge of an external world derived ? From these data it has seemed difficult to answer the question satisfactorily. Dr. Brown has attempted to solve the difficulty by supposing the existence of a sixth sense, which he calls the sense of muscular resistance. He suggests that the pressure of the hand against a solid body produces a peculiar sensation in the muscles by which we become cognizant of the existence of an external world. To me this explanation is unsatisfac- tory. The question is, how does sensation, which is a mere feeling, and gives us no knowledge of the external, or the not me, become the cause of perception, which is a knowl- edge of the external '? Dr. Brown attempts to remove the difficulty by suggesting another sensation, which, being a mere sensation also, has no more necessary connection with the knowledge of the external than any other. It is my belief that the idea of externality, that is, of objects numerically distinct from ourselves, is given to us spontaneously by the senses of touch and sight. When we feel a hard substance, the notion that it is something exter- nal to us is a part of the knowledge which at once arises in the mind When I look upon a tree. I cannot divest my- 82 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. self of the instantaneous belief that the tree and myself are distinct existences, and that :t is such as I perceive it to be. Unless this knowledge were thus given to us by the consti- tution of our minds, I know not how we should ever arrive at it. That this view of the subject is correct, is, I think, evident from what we observe of the conduct of the young of all animals. The lamb, or the calf, of a few hours old, seems by sight to have formed as distinct conceptions of ex- ternahty, of qualities, of position, and of distance, as it ever obtains. We cannot suppose that its knowledge arises from any sense of muscular resistance, but must believe that it is given to it originally with the sense of sight. So an in- fant turns to the light, grasps after a candle, just as it doea after any visible object in later life. I therefore believe that this complex knowledge is given to us by the senses of sight and touch, just as the simpler knowledge is given to us by the senses of smell and taste. REFE RENCES. Perception in general — Reid's Inquiry, chap. 6, sec. 20. Process of nature in perception — Reid's Inquiry, chap. 6, sec. 21. Mode of perception — Essays on Intellectual Powers, Essay 2, chap. 1. Perception limited by the senses — Essay 2, chap. 2. The evidence of perception to be relied on — Essay 2, chap. 5. Sensation and perception — Abercrombie's Intellectual Powers, Part 2, sec. 1. 1 SECTION III. — OF THE MODE OF OUR INTERCOURSE WITH THE EXTERiTAL WORLD. In the preceding sections we have treated of both the physical and spiritual facts concerned in the act of percep- tion. We have seen that in order to the existence of per- ception, some change must be produced in the organ of I THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 8b sense ; this must give rise to a change transmitted by the nerves to the brain, and the brain must be in a normal state in order to be affected by the change communicated by the nerves. If either of these conditions be violated, neither sensation nor perception can exist. When, however, these organs are all in a normal state, and its appropriate object is presented to an organ of sense, the result is a knowledge or an affection of the spiritual soul. The first part of the process is material — it consists of changes in matter; the last part is thought, an affection of the immaterial spirit. The question is, how can any change in matter produce thought, or knowledge, an affection of the spirit ? Or, still more, how can this modification of the matter of the brain produce in us a knowledge of the external world, its qualities and relations ? The lighting of effluvia on my olfactory nerve is in no respect like the state of my mind which I call the sensation of smell. The vibrations of the tympanum, or the undulations of the auditory nerve, are in no respect similar to the state of my mind when I hear an oratorio of Handel. The two events are as unlike to each other as any that can be conceived. In what manner, then, does the one event become the cause of the other ? A variety of answers has been given to these questions. The manner in which the subject has been formerly treated is substantially as follows : It was taken for granted that the mind was a spiritual essence, whose seat was the brain ; that the mind could only act or be acted upon in the place where it actually resided, and that, as external objects were at a distance from the mind, it was necessary for images of external objects to be present to it, in order that it might obtain a knowledge of their existence. Hence arose the doctrine of what has been called repre- sentative images. By some of the ancient philosophers it was supposed that forms or species rf external objects 84 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. enter?! the organs of sense, and through them becam€ present to the mind, ii; was the opinion of Locke, so far as I can understand him, that, in every act of perception, there is an intermediate image of the external object pres- ent to the mind, which the mind cognizes immediately, in- stead of the object itself. I am aware that th« language of Locke is, on this subject, exceedingly unceitain and ambig- uous. Sometimes he seems to use the word idea to express merely an act of the mind, and, at other . times, something present to the mind, but numerically distinct from it, which is the immediate object of knowledge. That, however, he really believed that in perception there must exist something, a positive entity, different both from the mind and its per- ceptive act, is evident from such passages as the following : '^ There are some ideas which have admittance only through one sense which is peculiarly adapted to receive them." — ^' And if these organs, or the nerves which are the conduits to convey them from without to their audience in the brain, the mind's presence-room (as I may so call it), are any of them so disordered as not to perform their func- tions, they have no postern to be admitted by, no other way to bring themselves into view and be perceived by the un- derstanding." — Book II., chap. 3, sec. 1. Again: '^ If these external objects be not united to our minds when they produce ideas therein, and yet we perceive their original qualities in such of them as singly fall under our senses, it is evident that some motion must be thence continued by our nerves or animal spirits, by some parts of our bodies, to the brain or seat of sensation, there to produce the particular ideas we have of them. And since the ex- tension, figure, number and motion, of bodies of an observa- ble bigness, may be perceived at a distance by sight, it is evident some singly impe7cejjtible bodies m>ust come from them to the eyes, and thereby convoy to the brain somi - THE PERCEPTIVE FACLLTIES. 35 motion which produces these ideas which we have of them.^' — Book II., chap. 8, sec. 12. Again : •• I pretend not to teach, but to inquire, and there- fore cannot but confess here, again, that external and internal sensation are the only passages that I can find of knowledge to the understanding. These alone, as far as I can discover, are the windows by which light is let into this dark room ; for, methinks, the understanding is not much unlike a closet wholly shut from the light, with some little opening left to let in external visible resemblances or ideas of things without. Would the pictures coming into such a dark room but stay there and lie orderly, so as to be found upon occasion, it would very much resemble the understanding of a man in reference to all objects of sight and the ideas of them." — Book ii., chap. 2, sec. 17. From these quotations, — and many of the same kind might be added, — two things are evident : first, that Locke used the word idea to designate both the act of the mind in per- ception, a mere spiritual aflection; and also something pro- ceeding from the external object which was the cause of this state. Secondly, that he did really recognize this interme- diate something as a positive entity which the soul cognizes instead of the outward object. He speaks of the nerves as the conduits to convey these ideas to their presence- chainber^ the brain ; of im,perceptible bodies which must come from them (external objects) to the eyes, and be conveyed to the brain. These expressions are too definite to be used figuratively, and we must, therefore, accept this explanation of the phenomena as a statement of the belief of our illustrious author. This belief, however, was by no means peculiar to him. It was a common belief at the time, and he always refers to it as a matter well understood, and received without question, by his cotemporaries. The stu- dent who wishes to pursue this subject farther, will read S6 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. with pleasure the passages referred to at the close of the chapter. The belief, then, prevalent at the time of Locke, may be stated briefly thus : The soul is located in the brain. It can cognize nothing except where it exists in space. Exter- nal objects, being separated from it, can never be the imme- diate objects of its perception. There must, therefore, pro- ceed from the external object to the mind some images or forms, which, entering by the senses, become present to the mind, and are there the objects of perception. Hence the mind never cognizes external objects ; this is, from the na- ture of the case, impossible. It only cognizes these images m the brain, and, from their resemblance to external objects, it learns the existence and qualities of the external world. Dr. Reid for a while believed this doctrine, but, startled at the conclusions to which it led, was induced to examine the foundations on which it rested. Upon reflection, he soon arrived at the following conclusions : 1st. The existence of these images is inconceivable. We can conceive of the image of a form, but how can we con- ceive of the image of a color as existing in absolute dark- ness ; and still more of the image of a smell, a sound, or a taste ? Or how can we conceive of distinct images of Lll of these various qualities forming the conception of a sinde object ? ^ 2d. Were this theory conceivable, it is wholly destitute of proof^ It IS merely the conception of a philosopher's bram. Who ever saw such images? Who, bv his own consciousness, was ever aware of their existence? What shadow of proof of their existence was ever given to the world ^ Are we, then, called upon to believe an inconceiva- ble hypothesis on no other evidence than merely the asser- tion 01 philosophers ? J - ^^ 3d. Were the existence of intermediate images proved, it THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 37 would relieve the subject of no essential difficulty. It might reasonably be demanded, is it easier to cognize a small object than a large one ? If the image be matter, then the question still remains unanswered, how does a change of matter create thought, an affection of the soul ? Is the im- age spirit ? Then it cannot resemble the external object, and can give us no notion of its qualities. And, more than all, if ¥re never cognize the object, but only the image, how can we have any knowledge whatever either of the external object or of its qualities ? The suggestion of these considerations abolished at once the doctrine of a representative image. Since the time of Dr. Reid, it has, I think, been conceded, by the most judicious writers on this subject, that we know nothing concerning the mode of perception beyond a statement of the facts. There ^ is a series of physical facts which can be proved by experi- ment to exist. When these terminate there arise knowl- edges of two kinds : the one a simple knowledge, as when I am conscious of a smell or a sound ; the other a compound knowledge, embracing a simple idea, as of color or form, and also an idea of an external object of which these quali- ties are predicated. Both of these are pure and ultimate cognitions. We are as perfectly convinced of the truth of the one as of the other. I as fully believe that I see a rose, that its leaves are green and its petals red, as that I smell an odor which I have learned to call the smell of a rose. I cognize no image, I cognize the rose itself; and I am as sure of its existence as I am of my own. Such seems to be the law of perception under which I have been created. I can neither change these perceptions, nor help relying with perfect confidence on the truths which they reveal to me. If I am asked to explain it any farther, I confess myself unable to do so. If investigation shall enable us to establish any additional facts in the series by which the material 4 38 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPKY. change terminates in thought, we will accept its discoverh with thankfulness. Until this is done, it is far better, wheti we have reached the utmost limit of our knowledge, humbly to confess our ignorance of all that is beyond. The doctrine of a representative image would not, at the present day, deserve even a passing notice, were it not for the consequences which were deduced from it. Some of these are worthy of remark. In the first place, it was difficult to conceive how the soul cx)uld be affected and thought produced by any change in matter. It was supposed that this difficulty could be re- lieved by the hypothesis of representative images. But then it was demanded, are these images matter or spirit ? If they are matter, and matter cannot act but upon matter, since they act on the mind, the mind must be matter. Hence was deduced the doctrine of materialism. Or, on the other hand, are these images spirit ? In this case, spirit might act upon spirit; but then how could spiritual images proceed from matter, and, more still, how could they resemble mat- ter? If, then, we cognize nothing but these, whence ia the evidence of any material world ? Hence the doctrine of idealism. But again. It is granted in this hypothesis that we can cognize in itself nothing external. We cognize nothing but images, and it is impossible for us to cognize anything else. But it was apparent that no images, which could by possi- bility pass through the nerves, could resemble external qual- ities ; what reason, then, have we to believe that the external quality is, in any respect, like the image which alone we are able to contemplate? Again: in order to know that the images are similar to the objects which they represent, we must know both the object and its representative. But by necessity we can know only the one , how can we affirm that It resembles the other? If I enter a gallery of paintings, THE PERCEPTIVE FACULTIES. 39 how can I determine whether the pictures are likenesses oi are mere productions of the fancy; if neither I nor any other man had ever seen any originals of which they could be the resemblances? Hence it is manifest that the evidence of the existence of a material world, or of anything existing out of the mindj is at once swept away. Keasoning in this manner, Bishop Berkeley arrived at idealism. He denied the existence of an external world, and concluded that nothing existed but spirit and the affections of spirit. But this idea was generalized. It was admitted that we could not cognize external objects directly, but only through the medium of representative images. If this is true of material, why is it not true of spiritual objects, — of the cognitions of consciousness ? Why do we not cognize them by means of representations 1 But if we cognize them thus, and have no cognition of the objects themselves, how do we know that there is any such existence as mind or its faculties ? In short, how do we know that anything exists but ideas and impressions '? How do we know that any such realities exist as time, space, eternity, Deity 7 All is re- solved into a succession of ideas, which follow each other by the laws of association, and besides these there is nothing in the universe. This is nihilism, and such consequences were actually deduced by some philosophers from this doctrine. It was surely important to examine the evidences of an hy- pothesis which led to such results. This imperfect fragment of the history of intellectual philosophy is not without its value. It teaches us the vast superiority of the acknowledgment of ignorance, to the gratu- itous assumption of knowledge. When we have reached the limits of our knowledge, there is no harm in confessing that beyond this we do not know. But to look out into the darkness, and dogmatically to affirm what exists beyond the rsach of our vision, may exclude invaluable truth, and in- 40 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. troduce the most alarming error. Thus, in the present in stance, a hypothetical explanation of a fact, which in our present state does not seem to admit of explanation, when carried out to its legitimate results was found to terminate in universal scepticism, and furnish a foundation for consis- tent atheism. Philosophy will certainly have made impor- tant progress when it shall have been able accurately to determine the limits of human inquiry. REFERENCES. Representative images — Locke, Book 2, chap. 3, sec. 1 ; chap. 8, sec. 12 ; chap. 11, sec. 17. Reid's Inquiry, chap. 1, sees. 3—7 ; 2d Essay, chaps. 4, 7, 9, 14. Stewart, vol. 1, chap. 1, sec. 3. Introduction, Part 1, vol 2, chap. 4, sec. 1 ; chap. 1, sec. 3. Cousin, Psychology, chaps. 6 and 7. Knowledge an agreement between the idea and object — Lock& Book 4^ chap. 1, sec. 2 ; chap. 4, sec. 3. Cousin, chap. 6. Consciousness an authority — Chapter 1. Three things existent in perception — Reid, 2d Essay, chap. 5. Idealise: and Nihilism— Cousin, chap. 6, last part, and chap 7 Rftid 2d Essay, 3hap«. 10l~12. THE INDrVIDUAL SENSES SEPAKATELY CONSIDERED SECTION IV. — OF THE SENSE OF SMELL. Having, in the preceding chapter, treated of our percep- tive powers in general, I proceed to describe the particular senses with which we have been endowed. Proceeding from the simpler to the more complex, I shall examine, in order, smell, taste, hearing, touch and sight. The organ of smell is situated in the back part of the nostrils. It is composed of thin laminae of bone, folded together like a slip of parchment, over which the olfactory nerve is spread, covered by the ordinary mucous membrane which lines the mouth and posterior fauces. It is so situ- ated that the whole surface of the organ is exposed to the current of air in the act of inspiration. In those animals which seek their prey by scent, this or- gan is found larger, exposing a greater amount of surface to the air, than in those which pursue their prey by sight The perfection in which this sense is enjoyed by some of the lower animals has always been a subject of remark. A dog will track the footsteps of his master through the streets of a crowded city, and, after a long absence, will recognize him by smell as readily as by sight or hearing. When we are brought near to an odoriferous body, we immediately become sensible of a knowledge, a feeling, or a 4* 42 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. particular fetate of mind. If a tuberose is brought nc^ a person who has never smelled it, he is at once conscious of a form of knowledge entirely new to him. If we do not by our other senses, know the cause of the sensation, we have no name for it, but are obliged to designate it by re- ferring to the place where we experienced it. If, by our other senses, we have learned the cause of the sensation, we designate it by the name of the object which produces it. Were the perfume of a rose present to me for the first time, and did I not see the flower, I could give to it no name. As soon as I have ascertained that the perfume proceeds from the rose, I call it the smell of a rose. We thus seo clearly that from this sense we derive nothing but a sensation, a simple knowledge, which neither gives us a cognition of anything external, nor teaches us that anything exists out of ourselves. The exercise of this sensation is either agreeable, indif- ferent or disagreeable. The perfume of flowers, fruit, aro- matic herbs, &c., is commonly pleasant. The odor of ob- jects in common use is generally indifferent. The odor ot putrid matter, either animal or vegetable, is excessively dis- agreeable. In general, it may be remarked that substances which are healthful for food are agreeable to the smell ; while those which are deleterious are unpleasant. The final cause of this general law is evident, and the reason why the organ of smell in all animals is placed directly over the mouth. Odors of all kinds, however, if they be long continued, lose their power of affecting us. We soon become insensible to the perfume of the flowers of a garden ; and men, whose vocation requires them to labor in the midst of carrion, after a short time become insensible to the offen - sive effluvia by which they are surrounded. Pleasant odors are refreshing and invigorating, and re- store, for the time, tie exhausted nervous energy. Offen- THE INDIVIDUAL SENSES. 43 ftive odors, oa the other hand, are depressing to the spirits, and tend to glcom and despondency. The former of these effects is alluded to with great beauty in the well-known lines of Miltran ** As when to them who sail Beyond the Cape of Hope, and now are past Mozambique ; off at sea, north-east winds blow Sabean odars from the spicy shore Of Araby the blest ; with such delay Well pleased, they slack their course, and many a league. Cheered with the grateful smell, old Ocean smiles." Paradise Lost, Book 4, lines 169 — 165. Concerning the manner in which this sensation is pro- duced, I believe that but one hypothesis has been suggested. The received opinion is that what is called effluvia, or ex- tremely minute particles, are given off by the odorous body, that these are dissolved in the air, and brought in contact with the organ of this sense in the act of breathing. That this may be so is quite probable. It is, however, destitute of direct proof, and is liable to many objections. It is dif- ficult to conceive how a single grain of musk can, for a long time, fill the area of a large room with ever so minute par- ticles, without visible diminution of either volume or weight Until, however, some better theory shall be presented, we seem justified in receiving that which even imperfectly ac- counts for the facts in the case. Still, we are to remember that it is merely a hypothesis, to be abandoned as soon as any better explanation is established by observation. From what has been already remarked, it must be, I think, evident that the sense of smell gives us no percep- tion. It is the source of a simple knowledge which alone would never lead us out of ourselves. This sensation clearly gives us no notion whatever of the quality which produces 44 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY- it, noi have philosophers ever been able to determine what that quality is. It is possible that the suggestion of cause and effect might indicate to us the probability of a cause, but the sense itself would neither awaken this inquiry nor furnish us with the means of answering it. Does the sense of smell furnish us with any conc-bption ? By conception, I mean a notion of a thing, such as will enable us, when the object itself is absent, to make it a distinct object of thought. Thus I have seen a lily ; I can form a distinct notion of its form and jcolor, and I can com- pare it with a rose, and from my conceptions point out the difference between them. I could describe this lily, from my conception of it, so that another person could have the same notion of it as myself Were I a painter, I could ex- press my conception on canvas. Now, is there a similar power of forming a conception of a smell ? Can I form a distinct notion of the smell of an apple or a peach, and can I compare them together, or describe them by language, or in any other manner transfer my conception to another ? So far as I can discover, from observing the operation of my own mind, all this is impossible. After having smelled an odorous body, I know that I should be able to reco-nize that particular odor again. I cannot form a conceptio^'n of the smell of a rose, but I know that I could, if it were present, immediately recognize it and distinguish it from all other odors. Beyond this I am conscious of no power whatever. This, however, I am aware, is but the experience of a emgle mdmdual. Other persons may be more richly en- dowed than myself. I have frequently put this question to th classes which I have instructed, and I find the testimony not altogether uniform. Some few young gentlemen in every of a smell as they ha4 of a color or a form. The greater THE INDIVIDUAL SENSES. 45 part, however, have agreed with me that they had no power to form the conception in question. It has, very probably, occurred to the reader that the words, ^'the smell of a rose," convey two entirely different meanings; the one objective, the other subjective. The ''smell of a rose'' may designate a peculiar feeling or knowledge existing in my mind, or it may designate the un- known cause of that feeling. Thus, when I say the smell of a rose is sometimes followed by fainting, I mean the sen- sation produced in the mind. I say the apartment is filled with the smell of a rose. I here mean the unknown quality existing in the rose. Both of these expressions I suppose to be correct, and in harmony with the idiom of the Eng- lish language. The same ambiguity exists in all the terms commonly used to designate sensations. Thus, the taste of an apple, heat, cold, sweet, sour, and many others, admit of a similar twofold signification. Chemical philosophers, aware of this ambiguity in lan- guage, have wisely introduced a new terra, by which, in a particular case, this difficulty may be obviated. Observing that the term '' heat " may signify a certain feeling in my mind, as well as the unknown cause of that feeling existing in a burning body, and as they were continually treating of the one, and almost never of the other, they have desig- nated the two ideas by difierent words. Retaining the term heat to signify the sensation of a sentient being, they use the word " caloric " to designate the unknown cause of the sensation. Every one must perceive how much definitenesa the use of this term has added to this branch of philosoph- ical inquiry. REFERENCE. Bud's Inqiiry, chapter 2, the whole chapter. 46 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOI flr. SECTION V. — THE SENSE OF TASTE. The nerves of taste are spread over the tongue and the back part of the fauces. They terminate in numerous papillae^ or small excrescences, which form together the or- gan of taste. It is almost needless to obsei ve that the nerves are everywhere covered with the mersbrane lining the mouth, and never come in immediate contact with the sapid substance. These papillae are most nVimerous on the tip, the edges, and the root of the tongue^ leaving many portions of the intermediate surface almost destitute of this ' sensation. The sense of taste is never excited except by solutions. The saliva, which is copiously furnished by the glands of the mouth, is an active solvent. By mastication, the solid food becomes intimately mixed with this animal fluid, is partially dissolved by it, and, in this condition, is brought into rela- tion to the papillae which constitute the organ of taste. Insoluble substances are, therefore, tasteless. When the papillae of the tongue either become dry, or are covered with the thick coating produced by fever, taste becomes im- perfect or is wholly suspended. When a sapid body, under normal circumstances, is brought into relation with the organ of taste, a sensation either pleasing or displeasing immediately ensues. When the sen- sation is pleasant, we are instinctively impelled to swallow, and with the act of swallowing the sensation is perfected and ceases. When the sensation is unpleasant, we are on the other hand, impelled to reject whatever may be the cause ot It, and frequently it requires a strong effort of the will to control this impulse. The sensation of taste is not con. Bummated without the act of swaUowing. It would seem THE IimiVIDUAL SENSES. 47 probable that the anterior and posterior nerves of the tongue were designed to perform different offices, the former giv- ing us an imperfect sensation, which creates the disposition either to swallow or to reject the sapid substance ; the latter awakening the perfected sensation as the substance passes over it. As in the case of smell, so in that of taste, I think that ♦nth the sensation no perception is connected. A particular sensibility is excited ; a feeling either pleasant or unpleasant IS created ; a simple knowledge is given us ; — but no cog- nition of anything external can be observed. Whatever notions of externality come to us, by means of this sense, are derived from other sources than the sense itself Thus, we can receive nothing into the mouth except by bring- ing it into contact with the lips. The sense of touch then cognizes it as something external to ourselves. The suggestion of cause and effect might lead us possibly to the same conclusion. These, however, are no parts of the sense of taste. The taste in the mouth which frequently accom- panies disease, awakens no idea of anything external. When, however, by means of our other senses, we have learned that a particular flavor is produced by any sub- stance, we associate the flavor with the substance, and give it a name accordingly. We thus speak of the taste of an apple, a pear, or a peach. So far as I am able to discover, the remarks made in the last section, respecting conception as derived from smell, apply with equal truth to the sense of taste. I think that men generally have no distinct conception of an absent taste, but only a conviction that they should easily recognize it if it were again presented to them. This form of recollection may be so strong as to create a longing for a particular fla- vor, but still there is no conception like that produced by eiUier sight or touch. 48 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. The same ambiguity may be observed here as in the analogous sense. The taste of an apple, means both the quality in the fruit which produces the. sensation and the affection of the sentient being produced by it. The one is objective, belonging exclusively to the non ego; the other is subjective, belonging wholly to the *.go. Of the sensation we have a very definite knowledge ; it can be nothing but what we feel it to be. Of the cause we are, as in the sense of smell, wholly ignorant. The number of sensations derived from taste is, I think, much greater than that derived from smell. An epicure becomes capable of multiplying them, and distinguishing them from each other to a very great extent. We are able, also, to classify our sensations of taste much more definitely than those of smell. Thus, we speak of acid, subacid, Bweet, bitter, astringent, and many other classes of tastes, to which we refer a large number of individuals. In this manner we designate various kinds of fruit, medicines, &c. While, therefore, these two senses seem to be governed by the same general laws, I think that in man the knowl- edge derived from taste is more definite and more varied than the other. By means of the sense of touch, which so completely surrounds the sense of taste, we should, in the use of it, also arrive at the idea of externality. In this respect it is indirectly the source of knowledge which is not given us by the sense of smell. In blind mutes, however, to whom the sense of smell becomes much more important, in all probability the case is reversed, and smell furnishes more numerous and definite cognitions than taste. 1 have said above that the sensation of taste is not per- fectly experienced unless the sapid substance is swallowed. Whatever is swallowed enters the stomach, undergoes the process of digestion, and, whether nutritious or deleterious^ enters the circulation and becomes assimilated with our mar THK INDIVIDUAL SENSES. 49 terial system. It is manifest, therefore, that if a substance be pleasing to the taste, we may, by gratifying this sense, iw^ilow either what is in itself deleterious, or that which ecomes deleterious by being partaken of in excess. It is, .-ence, evidently important that the gratification of the sense be made subordinate to the hio:her desim : that of promoting the health and vigor, physical and intellectual, of the whole man. In brutes, for the most part, the gratification of the appe- tite is controlled by instinct. The instances are very rare in which one of the lower animals has any desire for food which is not nutritious, or desires it in larger quantity than the health of the system demands. Man, how^ever, is en- dowed with no such instinct. The regulation of his appe* tite is submitted to his will, directed by reason and con science. Guided by these, a perfect harmony will exist between his gustatory desire and the wants of his material and intellectual organization. But suppose it to be otherwise. Suppose the human be- ing to swallow neither what nor as much as his health requires, but what and as much as will furnish gratification to his palate. He will eat or drink much that is delete- rious, and much which, by excess, becomes destructive to health. When, by frequent indulgence, this subjection to appetite has grown into a habit, the control of the spiritual over the sensual is lost, and the man becomes either a glut- ton or a drunkard, and very commonly both. The efiects of these forms of indulgence are too well known to require specification. Gluttony, or ihe excessive love of food, renders the intellect sluggish, torpid and inef- ficient, cultivates the most degrading forms of selfishness, exposes the body to painful and lingering disease, and fre- ' quently terminates in sudden death. 5 50 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. «* The full-fed glutton apoplexy knocks Down to the ground at once, as butcher felleth ox.'* Thompson's Castle of Indohnce. The appetite for deleterious drinks leads to consequences still more appalling. In a very short time it ruins the health, enfeebles the intellect, maddens the passions, de- stroys all self-respect, and, in the most disgusting manner, brutiilizes the whole being. It speedily and insensibly grows into a habit which enslaves the nervous organism, sets at defiance the power of the will, and thus renders the ruin of the being, both for time and eternity, inevitable. We hence perceive the importance of holding our appetites in strict subjection to the dictates of reason and conscience, and especially of excluding the possibility of our ever becoming the victims of intemperance. RE FERENCE. • Reid's Inquiry, chapter 3. SECTION VI.— THE SENSE OP HEARING. The organ of this sense is the ear. It is composed .of two parts, the external and mternal ear. The external ear b intended merely to collect and concentrate the vibrations of the air, and conduct them to the membrana tympani^ which separates the two portions of this organ. Tha external ear thus performs the functions of an ear-trumpet. The membrana tympani is a thin membrane stretched across the lower extremity of ttie tube in which the outward ear terminates. The vibrations of the air, thus produced upon the tympanum, are, by a series of small bones occu- pying its inner chamber, transmitted to certain cells filled with fluid, in which the extremity of the auditory nerve THE INDIVIDUAL SENSES. 51 terminates. From these cells the nerve proceeds directly to the brain. The medium by which the auditory nerve is affected, is the atmospheric air. Sonorous bodies of all kinds produce vibrations or undulations in the air, which strike upon the tympanum, and are, by the apparatus above alluded to, con- veyed to the auditory nerve. The effect produced upon the nerve is simply that of mechanical vibration, and this vibra- tion, so far as we can discover, is the cause of the sensation of sound. A mere fluctuation in the extremities of the nerve is the occasion of all the ielight which we experience in listening to the sublimest compositions of a Handel or a Mozart. No more convincing proof can be afforded that there is no conceivable resemblance between the change in the organ of sense, and the delightful cognition of the soul, which it occasions. The number of sounds which the human ear is able to distinguish is very great. Dr. Keid remarks that there are five hundred tones which may be distinctly recognized by a good ear ; and that each tone may be produced with five hundred degrees of loudness. This would give us two hun- dred and fifty thousand different sounds which could be per- ceived by an ear of ordinary accuracy; This I presume is true ; but a little reflection will convince us that the number )f sounds which we are able to distinguish far transcends ali human computation. The voice of every human bemg may easily be distinguished from that of every other, >v'hile the number of separate sounds which every individual is able to produce, including tones, loudness, stress and eiQ- phasis, is absolutely incalculable. If the same note be struck by ever so many different -instruments, the -ound of each instrument can be readily recognized. If ten thou- sand instruments of the same kind were collected, it is prob- able that no two could be found whose sounds would ba 52 fNTELLECTDAL PHILOSOPHY. identical. Numbers which accumulate by such masses set all computation at defiance. Although our power of distinguishing the smallest varia- tion of sound is so remarkable, it has been observed that ^ there are some sounds which are inaudible to particular persons. It seems probable that each ear is endowed with the power of cognizing sounds within a particular range, but that this range is npt the same in every individual. This difierence is, I think, most observable in the shrillest sounds, or those pitched on the highest key, and producer, by the most rapid vibrations. I have known some persons who were unable to hear the sound produced by a species of cricket, while to other persons the sound was so loud as to be unpleasant. I think that Dr. Reid remarks the same pecu- liarity respecting himself. We all possess, to a considerable degree, the power of determining the direction from which sounds proceed. We derive this power, probably, in part, from the fact that our ears are separated at some distance from each other, on op- posite sides of the head, and hence a sound must, in many cases, affect the one differently from the other. Persons who have lost the use of one ear much less easily determine the direction of sounds. This power, moreover, is greatly improved by practice. We learn, in this manner, to form a judgment of the distance of sounds, and to associate with them much other knowledge which properly belongs to the other senses. Thus, it is said that Napoleon was never de- ceived as to the direction or distance of a cannonade, and the remarkable precision of his judgment always excited the wonder of his friends. It is in this manner, I presume, that ventriloquism, as it is termed, is to be explained. We have learned by experi-' ence to determine the distance and direction of sounds. For instance, I hear a person speaking. The quality of the THE INPIVID.AL SENSED. 5S Bound, its degree of loudness and distinctness, teach me that it is produced by some one on mj left hand, and in the street which passes by my window. If a person in the room with me were able to produce a sound which should strike upon my ear precisely like that which I just now heard, I should suppose that it proceeded from the same place as before. The effect would be more remarkable, if he should, by some ingenious device, direct my attention to the window, and create in me the impression that some one was outside of it. In order to accomplish this result, it is necessary that the performer be endowed with an ear capable of de- tecting every possible variety in the quality of sound, and vocal organs of such extreme delicacy that they are able perfectly to obey the slightest intimation of the will. I have never witnessed any performance of this kind, but I have known one or two persons who possessed this power in a modified degree, and this is the account which they have given me concerning it. I am told that those who perform these feats publicly are also able to. create the sounds which we hear, without moving, in the least, the visible organs of speech. How ^ they are able, in this manner, to produce articulate sounds, I am unable to explain. Is hearing a sensation or a perception ? That is, does it furnish us with a simple knowledge, without giving us any cognition of an external world ; or does it furnish us with a complex knowledge, that is, a knowledge of a quality and of the object in which it resides ? The knowledge furnished by this sense seems to me to be of the following character : it is purely a sensation, a simple knowledge, giving us no intimation of anything external. The knowledge, however, derived from this sense, differs from those which we have already considered, in many particulars. Some of these are worthy of attention. The sensation of hearing is much more definite, f^rWi, 6^ 54 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. and intensely pleasing, than that derived from either of the preceding senses. It bis, moreover, a power of strongly affecting°the tone of mind of the hearer. These impressions being made upon a being endowed with original sugges- tion, would naturally occasion an inquiry for a cause. While hearing a strain of music, it would at once occur to us that we did not produce it, that we could not prolong it, and, hence, that it must originate from something external to our- selves. We should thus learn that there existed something out of ourselves ; but what that something was, the sense of hearing would furnish us with no means of determining. Let a man hear a violin, a bugle, or a piano, and, though he would readily observe a diflference between them, he could by this sense alone form no conception of the nature of either instrument, or of the medium through -which an im- pression was made upon his auditory nerve. When did a peal of thunder ever suggest to man the nature of the cause which produced it ? In this respect, therefore, the sense of hearing differs from those already considered. It suggests to us the idea of a cause, but gives us no knowledge of the nature of that cause. In another respect, however, the sensation of hearing is peculiar. It enables us to form very definite conceptions. Smell and taste possess this power, if at all, in a very lim- ited degree. By no power of language can we convey to another the knowledge which they give us. The sense of hearing enables us to proceed much further. We hear a Bound; we can repeat it. We hear a tune ; we can mentally recall it without producing any sound whatever, and wc can derive pleasure from this silent conception of it. Still more, we are able to designate a great variety of articulate sounds by the alphabet. By means of this notation, the sounds of a speaker's voice can be so recorded, that another person wlio has not heard him, and who may not even under- THF INDIVIDUAL SENSES. ' 55 stand the langu age in which he has spoken, may he able accurately to repeat all that he has said. The case is still stronger when the words uttered are set to music. Here it is not only possible to note down the words, but also the precise musical notes in which they were expressed, so that the song, and the tune in which it was sung, may be accurately repeated by a person on the other side of the globe. I have remarked that our conception of musical sounds may give us pleasure in perfect silence : as when we remem- ber a strain which we have heard on a former occasion. This is yet more observable when sounds are described by their appropriate notation. A skilful musician will read the notes of an opera or oratorio, form the conception as he proceeds, and derive from them as definite a pleasure as he who reads the pages of a romance or a tragedy. It has frequently happened that the most eminent musicians have been afflicted with deafness. It is delightful to observe that this infirmity in only a modified degree deprives them of their accustomed pleasure. They sit at an instrument, touching the notes as usual, and become as much excited with their own conceptions as they were formerly by sounds. Under these circumstances, some of them have composed their most elaborate and successful productions. These facts establish a wide difference between the sense of hearing and the senses of taste and smell. The latter produce in us no definite conceptions, and are susceptible of being formed into no such language. Hearing is evidently a much more intellectual sense than either of those which we have thus far considered. Besides, musical sounds have an acknowledged power over the tone of the human mind. By the tone of mind, I mean that condition of our emotional nature which inclines us to be grave or gay, lively or sad, kind or austere, appre- 56 INTELLE^rUAL PHILOSOPHY. hensive or reckless. New, it is well known that music has the power not only to harmonize with any of these tones of mind, and thus increase it, but in many cases to alter and control it. Every one knows the difference between a sport- ive and a melancholy air, between a dirge and a quickstep; and every one also knows how readily his tone of mind as- similates with the character of the music which he chances to hear. Sacred music, well performed, renders deeper the spirit of devotion. The hilarity of a ball-room would in- stantly cease if the music were withdrawn. I question if the martial spirit of a nation could be sustained for a single year, if music were banished from its armies ; and military evolutions, whether on parade or in combat, were performed under no other excitement than the mere word of command. From these well-known facts, an aesthetical principle may be deduced of some practical importance. The design of music is to affect the tone of mind. To do this, it must be in harmony with it. No one would think a psalm tune adapted to a charge of cavalry ; and every one would be shocked to hear a devotional hymn sung to the tune of. a martial quickstep. It hence follows, that what may be good music for one occasion, may be very bad music for another. If we are called upon to judge of the excellence of any piece of music, it is not enough that the music be good, — the question yet remains to be decided, is it good for this particular occasion ; that is, does it harmonize with the particular tone of mind which the words employed would naturally awaken 7 If it do not, though it may be very] good music for some occasions, it is bad music in this par- ticular case. The II Penseroso and the L' Allegro of Mil- ^ ton have, I believe, been set to music, and, if the music! were adapted to the thought, the effect of these beautiful po-^ ems would be increased by it. But every one sees that the ^| music adapted to the one must be very unlike that adapted^ I 1 THE INDIVIDUAL SENSES. - 5]f to the other. Let the music be transferred from the one to the other, and the incongruity would be painful ; and what was just now good music would become at once intolerable. Much of the church, music at present in vogue seems to me to partake of the incongruity of such a trans- position. Here, also, the question may be asked, whether all poetry is adapted to music. From the preceding remarks it would seem that it is not, unless it awaken some emotion. And again, the emotion in some cases may not be adapted to music. Terror, horror, the deepest impressions of awe, are probably not adapted to musical expression. The attempts which have been made to convey such emotions by music have, I apprehend, generally failed. They may, like much other music, display the skill of the composer or the per former, but they leave the audience unmoved. Another peculiarity of this sense deserves to be mentioned By it we are capable of forming a natural language under- stood by all men. Our emotions mstinctively express them- selves by the tones of the voice, and these are easily recog- nized by those to whom they are addressed. Every one understands the tones indicative of kindness, of authority, of pity, of rage, of sarcasm, of encouragement and contempt. Should a man address us in an unknown tongue, we should immediately learn his temper towards us by the tones of his voice. The knowledge of these tones is common to all men, under all circumstances. Children of a very tender age learn to interpret them ; nay, even brutes seem to understand their meaning very distinctly. It would seem, then, that the tones of the voice form a medium of communi- cation, not only between man and man, but even between man and some of the inferior animals. I have said that these tones of the voice are universally understood. It is also true that they have the power of b8 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHr. awakening an emotion, similar to that which produced them, in the mind of the hearer. A shriek of terror will convulse a whole assembly. It is said that Garrick once wxnt to hear Whitefield preach, jind was much impressed with the power of that remarkable pulpit orator. Speaking afterwards of the preacher's eloquence, he is reported to have said, *'I would give a hundred pounds to utter the word Oh ! as White- field utters it.'.' It is probable that it is in the powder of expressing our emotions by the tones of the voice, more than in anything else, that the gift of eloquence consists. This was, I presume, the meaning of Demosthenes, who, when asked what was the first, and the second, and the third ele- ment of eloquence, replied, successively, ^'Delivery, delivery, delivery ! '' This is, I think, illustrated in the case to which I have alluded. Whitefield's printed sermons do not place him high on the hst of English preachers ; while, as they were delivered by Whitefield himself, they produced efiects which can only be ascribed to the very highest efibrts of eloquence. The relation of these remarks to the cultivation of elo- quence is obvious. Suppose a public speaker to be able to construct a train of thought which shall lead the minds of men, by logical induction, to a given result. Suppose, moreover, that this train of reasonmg is clothed in appro- priate diction, so that it is adapted not only to convince, shut to please an audience. It is now to be delivered in the hearing of men. It may be delivered in so monotonous tones as to put an assembly to sleep, or in tones so inappro- priate and grotesque as to provoke them to laughter. It is now necessary that the orator be deeply moved"" by his own conceptions, and that he be able to give utterance to his own emotions in the tones of his voice. His organs of speech must be capable of every variety of expression, and they must so instinctively respond to every emotion, that the THE INDIVIDUAL SENSES. 59 ttfought which the speaker enunciates is lodged in the mind of the hearer, animated by the precise feeling of him who utters it. He who is thus endowed can hardly fail of becoming an orator. Hence, if we would improve in eloquence, we must studiously cultivate the natural tones of emotion; in the first place by feeling truly ourselves, and, in the second, by learning to express our emotions in this language which all men understand. REFERENCE. Reid's Inquiry, chap. 4, sections 1, 2 SECTION VII. — THE SENSE OF TOUCH. The nerves of feeling are situated under the skin, and are plentifully distributed over the whole external surface, So completely does the network which they form cover the whole body, that the point of the finest needle cannot punc- ture us in any part without wounding a nerve, and giving us acute pain. It is in this manner that we are guarded from injury. Were any portion of our body insensible, we might there sufier the most appalling laceration without being aware of our danger. The chief seat of the nerves of touch is, however, in the palm of the hand, and in the ends of the fingers. The other parts of the body lender us sensible of injury from external sources, but they are incapable of furnishing ua with any definite perceptions. The hand, on the contrary, conveys to us very exact knowledge of the tactual qualities of bodies. For this purpose it is admirably adapted. The separation of the fingers from each other, their complicated flexions, the extreme delicacy of their muscular power, all §0 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. combine to render this organ susceptible of an infinite varietj of definite impressions. Though the fingers are separated, yet in using them toc^ether, when a single object is presented, but one percep- tion is conveyed to the mind. It would seem, however, that, in order to produce this result, corresponding points of the fingers must be applied to the object. If we change them from their normal position, by crossing the second over the fore-finger, two perceptions will be produced, and a small object, as a pea, will seem to us double. The sensation of touch is of two kinds, as it is caused, first, by teTnperature^ and secondly by contact. The sensation produced by temperature is that of cold or heat. It is awakened by any body whose temperature diftn from that of our external surfiice. When we place OV hands in water only blood warm, we are not conscious rf this sensation. If we place one hand in hot, and the other in cold water, for a few minutes, and then remove them both to tepid water, we experience the sensation of heat in the one and of cold in the other. The efiect produced upon us by temperature is a simple knowledge, a pure sensation. It gives us no knowledge of anything external. During the first chill of a fever le are unable to determine whether the weather is cold, or OV system diseased ; that is, whether the sensation proceede from without or from within. And when the sensation pro- ceeds from without, it gives no information respecting its cause, or the manner in which it afiects us. Heat and cold are merely aficctions of a sensitive organ- ism. That which causes them is called by choinista caloric. This quality in bodies has openeERCEPTIONS, 85 Secondly, we must learn to associate with each variation observed by one sense, the quality or condition discovered by another sense. In this manner we acquire the language . of nature, and are enabled to interpret it for our own bene- fit and the benefit of others. We are thus able to form judgments which, to the uninitiated, seem like the result of magic. Thus, distinctness and indistinctness of color and outline teach us the magnitude and distance of objects many miles off. Thus the Indian, by observing minute differ- ences of sound, will form an accurate judgment undei circumstances which would leave other men wholly in dark- ness. The physician, by placing his ear on the chest of his patient, can tell whether the organs within are healthy or diseased, and can thus the better employ such m'^ans of cure as will accomplish the result which he proposes. It is hardly necessary to remark that the progress of the arts enables us to cultivate our acquired perceptions with greater success. The microscope and the telescope have greatly increased our power in this respect. Instru- ments for observing infinitesimal changes in temperature will probably lead to similar results. The tendency of science is in this direction, and it will, without doubt, lead to a rich harvest of discovery. Before closing this section, it is proper to remark that in the usu of acquired perceptions we are liable to form false judgments, and then to complain that our senses have deceived us. I once saw, on a door-post, the painting of a key hanging on a nail, and it was so well executed that I was not aware of the deception until I attempted to take it down. Here it might be said that my senses deceived me, but such was not the fact. My eyos testified truly to all that they promised to make known. They testified to a certain color and shading. This <^v^deuco was in its nature 8 gft IJlTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. ambiguous lor the effect might be produced either by a painting or by a real key. Without sufficient attention, I inferred that it was a key, when I ought to have examined it more carefully. But mj senses did not deceive me, for the eye testified truly, and when I applied to another sense, it enabled mo to form a true judgment. I was misled by my own negligence, and not by any defect in my senses. I ought, perhaps, to add that the deception in this case was aided by my companion, who directed my attention to the door, and asked me to hand him the key that he might open it. Had it not been for this circumstance, I should probably have discovered the truth from the effect of binocular vision. It will be found that all the cases w^hich are commonly as- cribed to deception of the senses are of the same character as that to which I have here referred. Our senses alw^ays testify truly, but we sometimes deceive ourselves by the inference which we draw from their evidence. The defect resides in our inference, and not in our senses, for it is by the use of our senses, alone, that we are enabled to correct the error into which we have fallen by our own inadver- tence. REFERENCES. Original and acquired perceptions — Reid's Inquiry, chap. 6, sec. 20— £3. Abercrombie, Partii., sec. 1. Improvement of the senses — Reid, Essays on the InteUectual Powers E^say 2, sec. 21. SECTION X. — OF THE NATURE OF THE KNOWLEDGE WHICH WE ACQUIRE BY THE PERCEPTIVE POWERS. Having, in the preceding sections, treated of the manner m which our knowledge of the external j^orld is acquired, QUALITIES OF BODIPJS. 87 "1 propose, in the present section, to offer some suggestions on the nature of this knowledge. 1. The knowledge which we acquire by perceptioi is always of individuals. If we see several trees, we see them not as a class, but as separate and distinct objects of perception. If we see several men, as John, James, Edward, we see each one as a distinct individual. The same remark applies to the acts which we observe. We see John strike James ; that is, we see a particular individual perform a particular act. We thus see, that while, from the knowledge gained by the perceptive faculties, we subse- . quently form genera and species, yet, without the aid of some other powers of the mind, to form genera and species would be impossible. Our several items of knowledge would be like separate grains of sand, without cohesion and without affinity. • 2. The knowledge derived from the perceptive powers is always knowledge of the concrete. When Ave perceive a body, we do not cognize the color, figure, temperature, etc., each as an abstract quality, and then afterwards unite them in one conception ; but we perceive a body, colored, of such a figure and temperature ; that is, a body in which all these qualities are united. The first impression made upon us is the cognition of an external object, possessing all these qualities ; or, at least, so many as are cognizable by the senses which are at the time directed towards them. We have the power of separating these qualities, in thought, the one from the other, and of making each of them a dis- tinct object of attention. This, however, is the function of fk faculty of the mind to be treated of hereafter. 3. Of primary and secondary qualities. It has been already stated that our knowledge is of qual- ities, not of essences. We do not cognize the objects around us absolutely, we cognize them as possessed of certain means gg INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. of affecting us, and thus giving us notice of the modes of their existence. The qualities of matter have, of old, been divided into two cliisses, which, at a later period, have been denominated primary and secondary. The primary qualities are those which, by necessity, enter into our notion of matter ; which we must conceive of as belonging to body, as soon as we conceive of body at all. Such are extension, divisibility, magnitude, figure, solidity, and mobility. We cannot think of matter, without involving these qualities in our very notion of it. If we conceive of matter as the only thing created, before any sentient being was created to cognize it, we think of it as possessing all these qualities in as perfect a manner as at present. The secondary qualities are those which are not necessary to our conception of matter as matter, yet which give it the power of variously affecting us as sentient beings pos- sessed of such or such an organism. Such are smell, tiste, sound, color, hardness, softness, and many others. These might all be absent, or wholly unrecognized, and yet our idea of matter as matter would be definite and precise. They are only cognized by means of their appropriate media. If the media had not been created, no "conception of them could ever have been formed. We cognize them only by means of our peculiar organism. Had this organism been created of a different character, these qualities could never have been known. Of the primary qualities themselves we form a definite idea ; we know that they are what they Beem to us to be. Of the secondary qualities, in themselves, >VG know nothing more than this, that some occult cause j-jossesses the power of affecting us by means of o.ur senses in this or that manner, or of creating in us such or such] cognitions. These secondary qualities have been, more lately, ve] QUALITIES OF BO >IES. 89 properly divided into two classes. First, those wnich we cognize by their relation to our own organism : and, sec- ondly, those which we cognize by their relations to other bodies. Thus, malleability, ductility, and various other qualities, are cognized by the action of various metals on each other. Gold and steel are, to our organism, equally unmalleable ; that is, we can make no impression upon either by voluntary effort. But when gold is brought into forcible contact with steel, its quality becomes manifest. The same is true of brittleness, and various other qualities. Sir William Hamilton, after examining this subject with unsurpassed acuteness, has suggested another classification of the qualities of matter. It will be found, treated of in full in note D to his edition of the works of Dr. Reid. To pur- sue the subject at length, would be impossible within the limits that must be assigned to the present work. I shall attempt no more than to present a condensed view of some of the most important elements of his classification. Sir William Hamilton divides the qualities of matter into three classes. First, primary or objective ; second, secundo- primary or subjecto-objective ; and third, secondary or sub- jective qualities. The primary are objective, not subjective, percepts proper, not sensations proper ; the secundo-primary are both objective and subjective, percepts proper and sensa- tions proper; the secondary are subjective, not objective, sensations proper, not percepts proper. 1. Of the primary qualities. These are all deducible from two elementary ideas. We are unable to conceive of a body except, first, aa occupying space, and second, as contained in space. Fron the first of these follow, by necessary explication, extension divisibility, size, density or rarity, and figure; from the second are explicated incompressibility absolute, mobility, situation. 2. The secundo-primary. 8* I 90 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. These have two phases, both immediately apprehended *' Ou their primary or objective phasis, they manifest them- selves as degrees of resistance opposed to our locomotive energy ; on their secondary or subjective phasis, as modes of resistance, a presence affecting our sentient organism." *' Considered physically, or in an objective relation, they, are to be reduced to classes corresponding to the diflferent sources, in external nature, from which resistance or pressure springs. These sources are three. I. Co-attraction. 11. Repulsion. III. Inertia. From co-attraction result gravity and cohesion. From gravity result heavy and light. From cohesion follow, 1. Hard and soft ; 2. Firm and fluid : 3. Viscid and friable : 4. Tough and brittle ; 5. Rigid and flexible ; 6. Fissile and infissile ; 7. Ductile and inductile ; 8. Retractile and irretractile ; 9. Rough and smooth ; 10. Slippery and tenacious. From repulsion are evolved, 1. Compressible and incom- pressible ; 2. Resilient and irresilient. From inertia are evolved, Movable and Immovable. 3. The secondary qualities. '^ These are not, in propriety, qualities of bodies at all. As apprehended, they are only subjective affections, and belong only to bodies in so far as these are supposed fur- nished with the powers capable of specifically determining the various parts of our nervous apparatus to the partic- ular action, or rather passion, of which they are susceptible; which determined action or passion is the quality of which we are immediately cognizant ; the external concause of that internal effect remaining to the perception altogether unknown.-' ''Of the secondary qualities," that is, those phenomenal affections determined in our sentient organism by the agency of external bodies, '^ there are various kinds; the variety QUALITIES OF BODIES. 91 principally depending on the differences of the different parts of our nervous apparatus. Such are the proper sensi- sibles, the idiopathic affections of our several organs of sense, as color, sound, flavor, savor, and tactual sensation ; such are the feelings from heat, electricity, galvanism, etc., and the muscular and cutaneous sensations which accompany the perception of the secundo-primary qualities. Such, though less directly the result of foreign causes, are titillation, sneezing, horripilation, shuddering, the feeling of what is called setting the teeth on edge, etc. etc. Such, in fine, are all the various sensations of bodily pleasure and pain, determined by the action of external stimuli." Concerning these in general, it may be remarked, 1. ^^ The primary are qualities, only as we conceive them to distinguish body, from not-body : they are the attributes of body as body, corjjoris ut corpus. The secondary and secundo-primary are more properly denominated qualities, for they discriminate body from body. They are the attri- butes of body, as this or that kind of body, corporis ut tale corpus y 2. ^^ The primary arise from the universal relations of body to itself; the secundo-primary, from the general rela- tions of this body to that ; the secondary, from the special relations of this kind of body to this or that kind of sentient organism. 3. *' Under the primary we apprehend the modes of the non ego ; under the secundo-primary we apprehend the modes both of the ego and the non ego ; under the second- ary we apprehend modes of the ego, and infer modes of the non ego. 4. '^ The primary are apprehended as they are in bodies ; the secondary, as they are in us ; the secundo-primary, aa they are in bodies and as they are in us. "* 5. *' The terms designating primary qualities are univocal, 92 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. marking out one quality ; those designating the secundo-pri mary and secondary are equivocal, denoting both a mode of existence in bodies and a mode of affection in our organism." Of these qualities, in particular, considered as in bodies, 1. ^^ The primary are the qualities of a body in relation to our organism as a body simply ; the secundo-primary are the qualities of a body in relation to our organism as a pro- pelling, resisting, cohesive body ; the secondary are the t[ualities of body in relation to our organism as an idiopath- ically excitable and sentient body. 2. " The primary are known immediately in themselves ; the secundo-primary, both immediately in themselves and mediately in their effects on us ; the secondary, only medi- ately in their effects on us. 3. '' The primary are apprehended objects ; the secondary, inferred powers ; the secundo-primary, both apprehended objects and inferred powers. 4. "The primary are conceived as necessary and perceived as actual ; the secundo-primary are perceived and conceived as actual ; the secondary are inferred and conceived as pos- sible. 5. ^'The primary may be roundly characterized as mathe- matical ; the secundo-primary, as mechanical ; the secondary^ as physiological.'' Of these qualities, considered as cognitions, 1. *' We are conscious as objects, in the primary qualities, of the modes of the not-self; in the secondary, of the modes of a self; in the secundo-primary, of the modes of a self and a not-self, at once. 2. " Using the terms strictly, the apprehensions of the primary are perceptions, not sensations ; of the secondary, sensations, not perceptions ; of secundo-primary, sensations and perceptions together. 3. ^* In the primary there is thus no concomitant seconi- QUALITIES OF tfOi>IBS. 93 ary quality; in the secondary, no conooi:*.it&n«» primary quality ; in the secundo-primary, a secondary and quasi- primary quality accompany each other. 4. ^' In the apprehension of the primary, there is ^lO :jub- ject-object determined by the object-object ; in the secundo- primary, there is a subject-object determined by the object- object; in the secondary, the subject-object is the only object of immediate cognition." I have not, in the above quotations, inserted all the acute and valuable distinctions of our author. I have selected those only which seemed to me the most important, and which discriminate most clearly the characteristic elements of these modes of cognition. For a more extended view of the subject I must refer the reader to the work itself, where he will find every distinction wrought out with a power of metaphysical analysis which has never been sur- passed. In regard to Sir William's classification, if I may hazard an opinion, I think that his distinctions are rendered obvi- ous and beyond dispute. Whether his classification includes all the secundo-primary qualities, I am by no means certain. In so far as these qualities are apprehended by their efiects on our organism, his classification appears exhaustive. But what shall we say of that class of qualities which arise from the relations of insentient bodies to each other, as malleabil- ity, chemical affinity, and various others? These are not known by any impression on our organism, as a propelling, resisting, cohesive body. They are not primary qualities. They are not cognized by our idiopathic sentient organism. They must be secundo-primary, but I think are not included in our author's classification. 4. Leaving now the subject of primary and secondary qual- itieSj I proceed to remark; that the knowledge derived firom 94 INTELLECTUAi PHILOSOPHY. {perception is truly knowledge ; that is, the evidence of oui senses is worthy of belief Til us, I open ray eyes, and I perceive before me a book I put forth my hands, and feel of it. My perceptions per- fectly coincide. They both testify to the existence of an extorniil object, numerically distinct from myself, of such a niii'Miitude, form, situation. I am conscious of a state of" mind which I call perception; and of that state of mind one of the elements is an unalterable conviction that the object exists now and here, just as I perceive it. This conviction is a necessary part of my state of mind, if, indeed, it be not the state of mind itself This conscious perception is to me the know^ledge that this book exists. If I am asked why I believe thus, or have this conviction, I can give no other account of it than that I am so made It is a cogni- tion given me in virtue of my creation. If I am asked to prove it, I must plead my inability to do so. I can prove no proposition except by some other proposition of higher authority. But there is no proposition of higher authority than this cognition given me by my Creator, who made me so that, under certain conditions, I cannot choose but have it. If I am asked to prove that I exist, I am unable to do it for the same reason, namely, that I have no more evident proposition w^hich can be used as a medium of proof I am 80 made that the existence of an external world is revealed to me at the same time and just as obtrusively as my own existence. By the constitution of my mind, the one fact is as clearly revealed to me as the other. But this subject is capable of more extended illustration and explication. 1. *'Our cognitions, it is evident, are not all at second hand." Demonstration must at last rest upon propositions which carfy their own evidence, and necessitate their own admission. Were it otherwise, were there no truths which Validity of perception. 95 revealed themselves to the human mind, all proof would be nugatory ; it would be a succession of arguments, each one resting on something yet to be proved. Some truth must then be given to us in our creation as intelligent be- ings, on which we may found our reasoning, and from which all demonstration must proceed. If it be asked, how do these primary cognitions assure U3 of their truth and certify us of their verity, the only answer ia that they are results of our mental constitution. As soon as a human mind apprehends them, without argument or proof, it immediately knows them to be true. The only answer we can give to him who asks us a reason of these beliefs is, that we are so made, we are created to believe them. To suppose their falsehood, is to suppose that we are created thus simply in order that we may be deceived. And as, besides this, it is upon these beliefs that all subse- quent knowledge is founded, if we deny them, all knowl- edge is a delusion, and truth and falsehood are unmeaning terms. This, surely, without any proof, cannot be asserted ; and, hence, I think it must be conceded that we must in the first instance receive these beliefs as true, until they are shown to be false, and just in so far as they are shown to be false. That we do thus by the constitution of our nature believe in the testimony of our senses, that we do thus uni- versally admit it, is, I think, beyond controversy. It is, therefore, to be believed until it is shown to be unfounded. But it may possibly be denied that this belief is one of those given us by our creation, or one of the first truths revealed to the common sense of man by virtue of his intel- lectual constitution. What, then, are the characteristics by which these truths may be known ? Sir W. Hamilton reduces these characteristics to the foui following : 1. They are incomprehensible. ^^ A conviction is m 96 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. comprehensible when there is merely given us in conscious ness that its object is, and when we are unable to compre- hend, through a higher notion or belief, why or how it is. ^' When \SQ are able to comprehend why or how a thing is, the belief of the existence of that thing is not a primary datum of consciousness, but a subsumption under the condi- tion or belief which affords its reason." 2. Thty are simple. '' It' is manifest that if a cogni- tion or belief be made up of, and can be explicated into, a plurality of cognitions or beliefs, that, as compound, it can- not be original." 3. They are iiecessary and universal ^' If necessary, they must, of course, be universal. The necessity here Bj)oken of is of two kinds. The first kind is when we can- not construe it to our minds that the deliverance of con- sciousness is not true, or when the opposite of the assertion is unthinkable. Thus the proposition that a part is greater than the whole, or that two straight lines can at the same time be parallel and at right angles in the same plane, is unthinkable. There is another necessity, however, which is not unthinkable, when the deliverance of consciousness may be false, but when, at the same time, we cannot but admit that it is of such or such an import. This is the case in contingent truths, or what may be called matters of fact. In this case, the thing is not conceived as absolutely impos- sible, but impossible under the present constitution of things, or we being as we are. Thus, I can theoretically suppose that the external object of which I am conscious in percep- tion may be in reality nothing but a mode of mind, or self. I am unable, however, to think that consciousness does not compel me to regard it as external, as a mode of matter or not self. Such being the case, I cannot practically believe the supposition which I am able speculatively to maintain ; for I cannot believe this supposition without believing that VALIDITY OF PEIICEI'TION. 97 the last ground of all belief is not to be believed, which ia self-contradictory. 4. y sir compai^ative evidence and certainly. ''These truths are so clear and obvious that nothing more clear or obvious can be conceived by which to prove them." Ac- cording to BuiSBer, they " are so clear, that if we attempt to pr^ve or disprove them, this can be done only by proposi- tions which are manifestly neither more evident nor more certain." Now, so far as I can perceive, all these characteristics belong to the deliverance of consciousness in perception. Tliey are incomprehensible, simple, practically necessary, and of such clearness of manifestation that they can neither be proved nor disproved by anything more evident. We are then entitled to consider them first truths, or truths revealed to man in the constitution of his nature. If such deliver- ances are not to be believed, then nothing is to be believed, and all knowledge is essentially impossible. But the subject may be finally considered from another point of view. The data of consciousness may be considered as two-fold. 1. "As apprehended facts or actual manifestations." As when I say, I see a tree, or I feel a cube, there is an actual manifestation to me that I am in that particular state of mind described by these words. Consciousness reveals to me that fact as the present state of my mind. 2. " These deliverances of consciousness may be consid- ered as testimonies to the truth of facts beyond their own phenomenal reality." These acts of consciousness are the testimonies to the fact thai that tree and that cube are now existing. It is, however, to be observed that the testimony to the existence of this state of mind, and to the existence of the tree which this state of mind cognizes, is given ua in the same act. 9 . 08 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. The truth of this first testimony of consciousness is ad- mitted hy all. When consciousness testifies that I am now in a mental state which I call perception, it cannot be doubted that such is the fact. The doubt, in this case, ia clearly suicidal. The state of mind called perception is at- U^sted by consciousness. The state which I call doubting ia attested by the same consciousness. If, then, conscious- ness is not to be believed when it testifies to perception, neither is it to be believed when it testifies to doubting. So tliat, if a man doubts whether he is really in the state of mind called perception, he must equally doubt whether he is in the state of mind which he calls doubting. He must doubt whether he doubts, just as much as he doubts whether he perceives, meaning, by this term, a mere subjective act, a state of the thinking subject. There may, however, be without absurdity a doubt as to tiie other part of the act ; that is, to the truth of this testimony as to something numerically different from the subject. It may be said that this is merely a subjective state of the mind itself: that it is merely a form of the ego produced by the action of some subjective cause, and that it gives us no knowledge of anything external. To this objection it may be answered, 1. "It cannot but be acknowledged that the veracity of consciousness must, at least in the first instance, be conceded- Negantl iiicumbit probatio. Nature is not gratuitously to be assumed to work, not only in vain, but in counteraction of herself Our faculty of knowledge is not, without a ground, to be supposed an instrument of illusion. Man, unless the melancholy fact be proved, is not to be held organized for the attainment and actuated by the love of truth, only to become the dupe and victim of a perfidious Creator." 2. ''But, granting that these convictions are at the be- VALIDITY OF PERCEPTION. 99 ginning to be received as true, it is yet competent to attempt to prove them false, and thus correct an error into which we have been led by our constitution. But how shall this be done ? As the ultimate grounds of knowledge, these convictions cannot be redargued from any higher knowledge ; and as derivative beliefs they are paramount in certainty to every derivative knowledge. They cannot, therefore, be disproved by knowledge derived from any other source, for the most certain knowledge which we possess must rest upon the same foundation as the testimony of our own con- sciousness." 3. "If, then, these convictions be disproved, they must be disproved by themselves. This can be done only by one of two methods. First, it must be shown that these pri- mary data are directly and immediately contradictory of themselves." "They are many, they are in authority co- ordinate, and their testimony is clear and precise. ' Now, if this testimony is intellectually or in fact, at variance, then we must conclude either that one or the other, or both, tes- timonies are false. Or, secondly, it must be proved ' ' that they are mediately or indirectly contradictory, inasmuch i as the consequences to which they necessarily lead, and for the truth or falsehood of which they are therefore responsi- ble, are repugnant. In no other way can the veracity of consciousness be assailed. It will argue nothing to show that they are incomprehensible, for nothing can be more absurd than to make the comprehensibility of a datum of consciousness, the criterion of its truth. To ask how an immediate fact of consciousness is possible, is to ask how consciousness is possible ; and to ask how consciousness is \ possible, is to suppose we have another consciousness above and before that human consciousness concerning whose mode of operation we inquire. Could we answer this, verily we should be as gods." Neither of these attempts has ever been 100 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. made. We may, therefore, receive the testimony of con- Bciousness as true beyond the reach of argument or contra- diction. 4. And, lastly, consciousness testifies to two things : first that there is now existing a state of mind; and, secondly that that state of mind is an actual cognition of an external world possessing such or such qualities. Suppose we admit the first testimony; how, then, admitting this, can we reject the other testimony of which it forms a part ? What dis- tinction can we take between the two items of the same tes- timony, by which we can receive the one and reject the other. Or, on the other hand, suppose we deny the testi- mony of consciousness to the truth of the perception, how can we admit it when it attests to an existing state of mind? If the one is false, the other may be true, but it is surely not to be credited. Thus the very facts of our subjective existence would be shown to be unworthy of belief, and the evidence of the existence of the ego and the non ego would be swept away togetheir. In this and the preceding article I have used the thoughts, and, for the most part, the language of Sir W. Hamilton. It gives me pleasure to acknowledge my obligations to a gentleman, whose boundless learning in every department of human knowledge, united with unrivalled acuteness and rare power of examining with perfect distinctness the mi- nutest shades of thought, have long since given him a posi- tion among the profoundest philosophers of this or any other age. 5. I close this section with a few remarks upon the law of perception in its relation to evidence. This law may be stated in few words. 1. When all our faculties are in a normal state, and an . appropriate object is presented to an organ of sense, a sen- sation or a perception immediately ensues. We cannot by VALIDITY OF PERCEPTION. 101 our will prevent it. If I open my eyes, I cannot escape the flight of the object before me. If a sound is made, near to me, I cannot by my will prevent hearing it ; and the same is true of all other senses. 2. On the other hand, my faculties being in their normal condition, if no object is presented to my organs of sense, 1 can perceive none. I cannot perceive what I will, but only what is presented to me. I cannot see a tree, unless a tree is before me. I cannot hear a sound, unless a sound is produced within hearing; and so of the rest. 3. Hence it follows that if, under normal conditions, I am conscious of perceiving an external object, then that object exists when and where I perceive it. The conscious perception could exist under no other conditions. It is a fact which admits of being accounted for in no other man- ner. And, on the other hand, if, under normal circum- stances, I perceive no object, then no object exists to be perceived. These simple laws lie at the foundation of the evidence of testimony. If we perceive an event, we know that that event is transpiring. If we remember that we perceived it, we know that it has transpired. So, if we are satisfied that credible witnesses were conscious of perceiving an ob- ject, we know that the object existed as perceived. If un- der circumstances, such that if it were present they must have perceived it, and they were conscious of no percep- tion, then we know that the object was not present. The further consideration of the conditions by which these laws are limited belongs to the science of evidence. The state- ment of the law itself is all that concerns to our present inquiry. Within a few years past various statements have been made which seem to modify the above laws. It has been asserted that persons, under the influence of what is called 9* 102 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. mesmerism can be rendered perfectly unconscpus of what is passing around them ; that they are able to cognize per- sons and events without the intervention of the appropriate meilia, and under circumstances which render it certain tluit such cognitions could not have originated in the ordi- nary use of the organs of sense. This subject has attracted considerable attention, both in this country and in Europe. Sir W. Hamilton remarks: '^ However astonishing, it is now proved, beyond all rational doubt, that, in certain abnormal states of the nervous organismj perceptions are possible through other than the ordinary channels of the senses.'' — Hamilton's Reid, page 246, note 2, Edinburgh edition. It has been, I believe, proved beyond dispute, that pa- tients under this influence have submitted to the most dis- tressing operations without consciousness of pain ; that other persons have cognized events at a great distance, and have related them correctly at the time ; and that persons totally blind, when in the state of mesmeric consciousness have enjoyed for the time the power of perceiving external ob- jects. So far as I have been informed, while these distant cognitions are sometimes correct, they are as frequently wholly erroneous, and the person is totally unable to distin- guish the true from the false. The subject seems to me well worthy of the most searching and candid examination, The facts seem to indicate some more general laws of exter- nal cognition than have yet been discovered. The matter is by no means deserving of ridicule, but demands the atten- tion of the most philosophical inquirers. REFERENCE S. Knon ledge acquired by perception is of individuals — Locke, Book 4, chap. 7, sec. U ; Reid, Essay 5, chap. 1. The knowledge acquired by perception is real — Reid, Essay 2, chaps. 5 CONCEPTION. 103 Primary and secondary qualities — Locke, book 2d, chap. 8, sec. 9, 10, W, 24 ; Reid, Essay 2d, oh. 17 ; Cousin, ch. 6. Sir W. Hamilton, Dissertation supplementary to Reid ; note D. Laws of Perception — Reid, Essay 2d, cli. 1, 2. The credibility of the evidence of perception demonstrated — Sir W Hamilton's Dissertation on Common Sense. Note A, as above. SECTION XI. — OF CONCEPTION. The subject of conception is, in its origin, so intimately allied to perception, that, although it enters as a constituent element into almost every act of the mind, there seems a propriety in treating of it here. The word conception has already frequently occurred in the preceding pages. It is proper that it should be more definitely explained. Conception has been defined as that act of the mind in which we form a notion or thought of a thing. To this, however, it has been objected, that the word notion or thought in this place means the same as conception, and that we might with the same propriety reverse the defini- tion, and say that the having a notion of a thing was the forming a conception of it. There seems to be force in this objection. The fact is, that a simple act of the mind is in- capable of definition. We can do no more than present the circumstances under which it arises, and our own conscious- ness at once teaches us what is meant. 1. To proceed in this manner, then, I would observe that when I look upon a book, or any external object, I instantly Torm a notion of it, of a particular kind. I know it as an ex- ternal body, numerically distinct from myself, of a certain form color and magnitude, at this moment and in this place existiag before me. When I handle a book, I have the 104 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. same notion^ the quality of color only excepted. This knowledge is called perception. 2. Secondly, I find that when the object of perception ia removed, and the act of perception ceases, a knowledge of the object is still present to my mind. This is called a con- ception. Thus, the book which I just now perceived is re- moved, but the conception of it is still an object of con- sciousness. A cube which I saw is burned to ashes, but I have a distinct conception of its form and dimensions. I can recall to my mind the cataract which I saw last summer, the house in which I slept, or particular portions of the road over which I passed. In these cases, however, the conception is not simple ; it is combined with the act of memory. I have not only the conception, but the assurance or belief, that at a certain time these objects actually existed as I now con- ceive of them. 3. But let us now separate this act of conception from the act of memory. We can conceive of a tree or a cataract without connecting it with the idea either of present or past existence. We are doing this continually in the course of our own thoughts. We do it when we read a romance. We are here continually forming images of things, places, and • persons, which we know never existed. So, in a geometri- cal demonstration, we form for ourselves the conception of a figure, and proceed to reason upon it, though we have never seen it represented to the eye.^ A concept or concep. • The word conception is commonly used in two or three significations. ' It is employed to designate the power or faculty, the individual act of that ficulty, and that act considered as an object of thought. On this subject Bir W. Hamilton remarks, *'We ought to distinguish imagination and imai;e, conception and concept. Imagination and conception ought to be employed in speaking of the mental modification, one and indivisiole, cc«h Bidered as an act; image and concept, in speaking of it, considerea tm product or immediate object " — Note to page 263. CONCEPTION. 105 lion is, therefore, that representation or cognition of a thing which we form in the mind when we are thinking of jt. 4. Again, when we think of an act of the mind as thmk- ing, willing, believing, or of any emotion, as joy or sorrow, we form a conception of it. We cannot think it unless we can do this. Hence, when a state of mind is spoken of which we cannot represent to ourselves in thought, we say we can- not conceive of it ; that is, the words spoken do not awaken in us any corresponding conception. 5. Again, by the faculty of abstraction we may analyze the elements of these concrete conceptions, and combine them into general or abstract ideas. Thus, from several in- dividual horses we form the general notion of a horse, mean- ing the genus, and having respect to no individual horse existing. These are general conceptions, or conceptions of genera or species. 6. We have also conceptions of general intuitive truths, such as the axioms of mathematics. We conceive of the truth that the whole is greater than its part, or that if equals be added to equals the wholes are equal. So we form conceptions of general relations, as of cause and efifect_ power, and many others. 7. Lastly, we are able to form images by combining into one whole, elements previously existing in the mind, as when a painter conceives of a landscape, or of a historical group. This form of conception is more properly styled imagination. In all cases of conception where the act is completed, if I do not mistake^ we form something of the nature of a pic- ture, which the mind contemplates as the object of thought. I am aware that, in speaking and writing, when the terms are perfectly familiar, we do not pause and form the con- ception. Thus, we use the axioms, in demonstration, without pausing to reflect upon the words we employ, and yet wo - 106 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. use them with entire accuracy. Thus we speak of cause and effect, number, and various other ideas. When, how- ever, we attempt to dwell upon any one of these ideas, so far as I can observe, we form a concept of it in the mind. Thus, when I think of the term horse as a genus, and dwell upon it in thought, there is before me, as an object, a con- cept of such an animal. So, if I think the axiom the whole is greater than its part, two magnitudes corresponding to these terms present themselves before me. From this remark, however, must be excepted those cases in which we recognize a truth as a necessary condition of thought, as duration, space, and ideas of a similar character. Even here, however, we find the mind from its natural impulse striving to realize something which shall correspond to a concept. Of conceptions thus explained it may be remarked in general : 1. In conception there is nothing numerically distinct from the act of the mind itself From the analogies of lan- guage we are liable to be misled in thinking of this subject. We speak of forming a conception, and of forming a machine ; of separating the elements of a conception, and of separating the parts of an object from one another. As in the one case there is some object distinct from the ego, we are prone to suppose that there must be also in the other. There is, however, in conception nothing but the act of the mind itself We may, nevertheless, contemplate th?s act from different points of view ; first, as an act of the mind, or as the mind in this particular act, and, secondly, as a product of that- act which we use in thinking. There is, however, numerically nothing but the act of the mind itself 2. Conception enters into all the other acts of the mind. In the simplest sensation there is, for the time being, a knowledge or a notion, though it may remain with us not a CONCEPTION. 107 moment after the object producing it is withdrawn. We can have a knowledge of our own powers only as we have conceptions of them. We can remember, or judge, or rea- son, only as we have conceptions. In fact, all our mental processes are about conceptions. Of them, all our knowl- edge consists. 3. Our conceptions are to us the measure of possibility. When any proposition cannot be conceived, that is, is un- thinkable, we declare it impossible or absurd. Thus, if it be said that a part is greater than the whole, that two straight lines can enclose space, or that a change can take place in a body while all the conditions of its existence re- main absolutely the same, I understand the assertion ; but when I attempt to form a conception of it, that is, to think it, I find myself unable to do so. I affirm it to be impos- sible. On the other hand, I may think of a communication between the earth and the moon. In the present state of science it is impracticable, but it is within the limits of thought, ' and my mind is not so organized that I feel it to be impossible. This case, is, however, to be distinguished from the unconditional, the incomprehensible. This, from the nature of our intellect, we know to be necessary ; it is not contradictory to thought, though to grasp the concep- tion is impossible. In the other case we are able to com- prehend the terms, but we are unable to construe them in thought ; in other words, the relation which is affirmed is unthinkable. 4. In simple conception, or where it is unattended by any other act of the mind, there is neither truth nor false- hood. ^ I may conceive of a red mountain, of a blue rose, of a winged horse, but the conception has nothing to do with my belief in the existence of either of these objects. If the conception is united with an act of judgment or memory, then it at once becomes either true r false. In the concep- 108 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. tion itself, however, I can discover neither. Stewart, I know, advances a contrary opinion ; but I must confess my- self wholly unconvinced by his reasoning. 5. Conceptions may be either clear and distinct, or obscure and indistinct. We easily observe the difference here spoken of in the effects produced on us by different descriptions. Some authors describe a scene with so graphic a power that we at once form a conception as definite as though we had our- selves beheld it. Others use emphatic and imposing lau- gyage, but they leave on us no, distinct impression. We arc deluged by a shower of words, but no conception is imprinted on the memory. 6. Conceptions may be strong and vivid, or faint and languid. The same scene may with equal faithfulness be described to us by two persons. The one deeply affects us, while the other hardly interests us suflSciently to command our continued attention. We observe the same effect in ourselves, resulting from the accidental tone of our own minds. At some times we find our conceptions much stronger than at others, under precisely the same external circumstances. From what has been observed, it will readily appear that the power of forming conceptions differs greatly in differ- ent individuals. Every teacher must have remarked this fact, in his attempts to communicate instruction. Some per- sons will at once seize upon the salient points of a concep- tion, discover its bearing and relations, and hold it steadily before the mind, until it becomes incorporated with their knowledge. They never can be satisfied until they have attained to this result. Others require repeated explana- tions, and, when they suppose themselves to have mastered a conception, we are surprised to observe that no important point seen\s to have arrested their attention, but that there rest on their minds only considerations of inferior impor- tance blended together in dim and uncertain confusion. CONCEPTION. 109 The differenoi^ in chis respect, is still more remarkable in the connection of conception with the fine arts, though per- haps this exercise of the power belongs rather to the imagi- nation. A portrait-painter will form so distinct a concep- tion of a countenance that, years afterward, he will repre- sent it correctly on canvas. The same power of forming distinct conceptions is essential to the poet or novelist. No one can read the descriptions of Sir Walter Scott without being sensible of his high endowment in this respect. Nor was this power limited to the scenes which he himself had witnessed. His description of a summer day in the deserts of Syria could not have been surpassed by the most gifted Bedouin Arab. It was to this power that he owed much of that brilliant conversational eminence, which rendered him the centre of attraction in every circle in which he chose to unbend himself. REFERENCES. Conception — Reid, Essay 1, chap. 1 Formed at will — Reid, Essay 4, chap. 1. Enter into every other act of the mind — Reid, Essay 4, chap. 1. Neither true nor false — Reid, Essay 4, chap. 1. Ingredients derived from other powers — Reid, Essay 4, chap. 1. Analogy between painting and conception — Reid, Essay 4, chap. 1 Conception in general — Stewart, vol. i., chap. 3. Attended with belief — Stewart, vol. i., chap. 3. Power of description depends on — Stewart, vol. i., chap. 3. Improved by habit — Stewart, vol. i., chap. 3. Conception — Abercrorabie, Part 3, sect. 1. Clear or obscure — Abercrombie, Part 3, sect. 1. In conception neither truth nor falsehood — Locke, Book 2d, chap 22, •ects. 1—4, 19, 20. Clear or obscure — Locke, Book 2, <5h. 29, sect 1 10 CHAPTER II. OONSCIOJSNESS, ATTENTION, AND REFLECTION. SECTION I. — CONSCIOUSNESS. Consciousness is that condition of the mind in which it. is cognizant of its own operations. It is not thinking and feeling, but that condition in which we know that we think or feel. Thought, however, is necessary to consciousness, for unless thought existed, we could not be conscious of it. We may nevertheless suppose a mental act to be performed of which we have no consciousness. In such a case we should have no knowledge of its present existence, and should only know that it had existed by its results. On this subject, however, a considerable diversity of opin- ion obtains. Sir W. Hamilton and many philosophers of the highest authority believe that consciousness cannot prop- erly be separated from the act to whose existence it tes- tifies, and that to make a distinction between the assertions, 'I perceive" and '^I am conscious of perception,'' is im« .possible. They hold that when we, are not conscious of an act, the act is not performed ; and that when consciousness does not testify to anything, it is because there is nothing concerning which it can testify. In answer to this, it may be granted that when it is said *' I perceive," the meaning is the same as when I say '' ^ am conscious of perceiving." When I say '' I perceive," CONSCIOUSNESS. Ill there is involved, by necessity, in this assertion, the evi- dence of consciousness. The question still returns, Is there a state of mind which involves perception, of which we are not conscious, and which is not expressed by the words " 1 am conscious that I perceive" ? Let us, then, proceed to examine the facts. A person may be engaged in reading, or in earnest thought, and a clock may strike within a few feet of him without arresting hi^ attention. He will not know that it has struck. Let, now. another person ask him, within a few seconds, if the clock has struck, and he will be conscious of a more or less dis- tinct impression that he has just heard it ; and, turning to observe the dial-plate, finds such to have been the fact. What, now, was his state of mind previous to the question ? Had there not been a perception of which he was not con scions ? But we may take a much stronger case. While a person is reading aloud to another, some train of thought frequent- ly arrests his attention. He, however, continues to read, until his opinion is requested concerning some sentiment of the author. He is unpleasantly startled by the reflection ^hat he has not the remotest conception of what he has been reading about. He remembers perfectly well up to a cer- tain point, but beyond this point he is as ignorant of the book as if he had never seen it. What, then, was the state of his mind while he was reading ? He looked upon the page. He must have seen every letter, for he enunciated every word, and observed every pause correctly. No one had a suspicion that he did not cognize the thoughts which he was enunciating to others. Yet, the. moment afterwards, he has not the least knowledge either of the words or the ideas. Can we say that there was no perception here ? . Could a man read a sentence aloud without perceiving the words in which it was written ? Yet, so far as we can discover, this state of mind was unattended by consciousness. 112 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. '■ Another case, of a very striking character, was related to me by the person to whom it refers. A few years sinc^5, while in London, I became acquainted with a gentleman who had, for many years, held the responsible office of short- liiind writer to the House of Lords. In conversation one day, he mentioned to me the following occurrence. Some time during the last war with France, he was engaged in tiiking minutes of evidence in a court of inquiry respecting the Walcheren expedition. Li this duty he was incessantly engaged from four o'clock in the afternoon until four o'clock the next morning. At two o'clock in the morning he was aroused from a state of unconsciousness by Sir James E., one of the members of the court, who asked him to read the min- utes of the evidence of the last witness. It was the testimony of one of the general officers who had described the fortifica- tions of Flushing. My friend, Mr. G., replied, with some em- barrassment, ' ' I fear I have not got it all. " '' Never mind, ' ' replied the officer, ^' begin, and we will help you out." The evidence consisted of tw^o pages of short-hand, and Mr. G. read it to the close. He remembered it all perfectly ex- cepting the last four lines, of which he had no recollection whatever. These last lines were, however, written as legibly as the rest, and he read them without difficulty. When he came to the end, he turned to General E., saying, '^ Sii James, that is all I have." '' That," replied the other, '' is all there is ; you have the whole of it perfectly." He had rei)orted the evidence with entire accuracy up to the very moment when he was called upon to read, and yet the last four lines had been written, and written in short-hand, so far as he knew, during a period of perfect unconsciousness. The condition of the mind which we term derangement conveys some instruction on this subject. Here, it is not uncommon for the patient to suppose that he is not the per- son speaking or acting, but some other, and that some other CONSCaCOUSNESS. 113 mind than his otm is occupying his body and performing the intellectual operations, of which he is conscious. Thug, Pinel mentions the case of a man in France who imagined that he had been sentenced to death and guillotined ; but that, after his execution, the judges reversed their decision, and ordered his head to be replaced ; the executioner re- placed the wrong head, and hence he was ever after think- ing the thoughts of another man instead of his own. We have said that consciousness is that condition of the mind in which it becomes cognizant of its own operations ; that is, we are cognizant, not only that certain intellectual opera- tions are carried on, but that they are our own. In this case of deranged consciousness, the individual was aware that there were thoughts, desires, remembrances, &c., going on within him, but he could not recognize them as the opera* tions of his own mind. These cases would seem to show that a distinction may fairly be made between consciousness and the faculties to the operation of which it testifies. Yet it would scarcely seem proper to denominate it a faculty ; I prefer to call it a con- dition of the mind. Such being the nature of consciousness, it is of course unnecessary to specify the various kinds of knowledge which we cognize by means of it. If it be the condition neces- sary to the cognition of our mental operations, then all forms of thought are made known to us through this medium. Hence, as I have before suggested, to say I know, and to say I am conscious of knowing, mean the same thing : since the one cannot be true without involving the other. Consciousness always has respect to the state of the mind •tself, and not to anything external. We are not conscious of a tree, but conscious that we perceive the tree. We may be conscious of hearing a sound ; we are not conscious of a 10* 114 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. Bound. Those writers who deny the existence of conscious- ness as a condition distinguishable from the act to which h testifies, of course, adopt a different form of expression. They would say that I am conscious of a tree, or of a Bound, assuming that perception in all its varieties is but so many forms of consciousness. I have no desire to enter upon a further discussion of this subject. So far, however, as I am able to observe the operations of my own mind, 1 am constrained to believe that the form of expression which I have used represents my act in perception more accurately than the other. Consciousness has respect to the present, never to the past. We can be conscious of nothing that does not exist now and here. We may be conscious that we now remem- ber the sunset of yesterday, but we cannot now be conscious of the perception of the sunset of yesterday. We may be conscious that we remember the appearance of an absent friend, but we cannot be conscious of the appearance of an absent friend. In the normal condition of the mind, consciousness, with- out any effort of the will, is always in exercise, and is always bearing witness to the existence of our own mental acts. It may be turned off involuntarily from the object directly before us to some other, but, during our waking hours, it always bears witness to something. Hence, con- sciousness, united with memory, gives rise to the conviction of i)ersonal identity. We know by means of this faculty that certain thoughts and feelings exist, and that they are the thoughts and feelings of the being whom I denominate I, myself Memory connects these various testimonies of consciousness into a connected series, and thus we know that our intellectual acts, from our earliest recollecti(m, proceed from the same being, and not another. I thus know that ilie thoughts and feelings which I remember to have been CONSCIOUSNESS 115 conscious of yesterday are the thoughts and feelings of the same being who is conscious of other intellectual acts to-day ; that is, that through all the changes of the present state, the ego^ myself, is the same individual and continuous subject. There have been observed occasionally abnormal cases of what may be termed double consciousness. In such a case, the present existence of the individual is at one time connected with one period of his life, and at another time with another. A young woman in Springfield, Mass., some years since, was affected in this manner. She was at first subject to attacks of what appeared to be ordinary somnam- bulism. These were then transferred from the night to the day-time, and during their continuance her powers of per- ception were in a strange manner modified. With her eyes thickly bandaged, in a dark room, she could read the finest print. She was removed to the hospital for the insane at Worcester, in order to be under the care of the late Dr. Woodward. Here it was immediately observed that her normal and abnormal states represented two conditions of consciousness. Whatever she learned in the abnormal state was entirely forgotten as soon as she passed from this state to the other, but was perfectly remembered as soon as the abnormal state returned. Thus she was taught to play backgammon in both states. What she learned in the ab- normal state was entirely disconnected from what she learned in her natural state, and vice versa. The acquisition made in one state was lost as soon as she entered the other : and it was remarked that she learned more rapidly in the abnor- mal than in the normal state. The first symptom of her recovery was the blending together of the knowledge acquired in these separate conditions. As the cure ad- vanced, they became more and more identified, until the • testimony of consciousness became uninterrupted and then 116 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. the abnormal state vanished altogether. Several cases are also on record in which persons have been subject to this double consciousness without any manifestation of somnam- bulism. In such instances, the individual has suddenly awaked to a recollection of his former life, with the excep- ' tion of a portion immediately preceding, of which he has no recollection. A period of his existence seems perfectly parenthetical, and h.s present consciousness connects itself only with that portion of his life which preceded the change in his condition. This peculiar affection will be best illus- trated by an example. A few years since, a theokigical student, represented to be a person of unexceptionable char- acter, was suddenly missing from a city in the interior of New York. All search for him was fruitless, and he was supposed to have been murdered. A few months afterwards, his friends received a letter from him, dated Liverpool, England. He stated that a short time before, he had found himself on board of a vessel bound from Montreal to Liver- pool, without the least knowledge of the manner in whfeh he came there. He recollected nothing from the time of his being in the city where he had last been seen by his friends. He however learned from his fellow-passengers that he had embarked on board the vessel at Montreal, — and he must have walked about two hundred miles in order to arrive there, — that he sometimes seemed peculiar on the passage, but that there had been nothing in his conduct to excite particular remark. Consciousness suggests to us the notion of existence. When we are conscious of a sensation there immediately springs from it the idea of self-existence. The conscious- ness of a perception suggests the idea of the existence both of the object perceived, of the subject perceiving, and fre- queutly of some particular condition of that subject. Thus, suppose 1 am looking upon a waterfall. I am conscieis of CONSCIOUSNESS. 117 eogmzing an external object ; I am conscious of the state of mind called perception, and I am conscious of the emotion of beauty or sublimity occasioned by the object which I perceive. It is obviously in our power to contemplate at will either of these objects of thought. I may direct my attention to the external object, or to the internal mental act, or to the emotion which the object occasions. Thus, in the instance just mentioned, I may direct my whole power of thought to the observation of the waterfall. I may examine it so care- fully and minutely, that its image is fixed in my remem- brance forever. Or, on the other hand, I may turn my attention to my own intellectual state, and analyze the nature of the act of perception. Or, still more, after having become deeply impressed with the external object, I may contemplate my own emotions, and, following the train of thought which they awaken, may lose all consciousness of the perception of the object, wholly absorbed in the sen- sibilities which it has called into action. We may do either of these in any particular instance. We may from natural bias, or from the circumstances of education, form the habit of pursuing either the one or the other of these trains of thought. Hence arises the distinction between objective and sub- jective writers. The objective writer describes with graphic power the appearances of external nature, the march of pageants, the shock of battles, and whatever addresses itself to the perceptive powers. This habit of mind is also of special importance in all the researches of physical science The subjective writer turns his thoughts inward, and either as a metaphysician, analyzes his own mental phenomena, or pours forth in the language of poetry the emotions of his soul. Thomson and Scott, especially the latter, are eminently objective. Young and Byron are equally sub- 118 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHf. jective No one can compare a canto of the Lady of the Lake with a canto of Childe Harold, or with one of Youn^^'s Night Thoughts, without observing the difference which I am here attempting to illustrate. It is, however, obvious that no writer can be either wholly objective or wholly subjective. Were two writers wholly objective, their representations of external nature would be exactly alike. But how dissimilar are the most objective passages of Scott, Thomson and Moore ! Each one tinges every description with the hues of his own subjectivity. Nor, on the other hand, can the most subjective writer be wholly subjective. He needs some objective starting-point, and he will choose it in conformity w^ith the, peculiar bias of his mind, and pursue that line of thought which best har- monizes with his general temperament. Thus Young com- mences a train of subjective reflection by reference to an external object. " The bell strikes one ! We take no note of time But by its loss. To give it then a tongue Is wise in man. As if an angel spoke, I feel the solemn sound ! If heard aright, It is the knell of my departed hours." Minds of the very highest endowment have the objective and the subjective equally at their command. Not only the descriptions of Shakspeare and Milton,. but their delinea- tions of human emotion, are the theme of universal eulogy. And we may also remark that for its power over the human heart genius depends less upon the circumstances by which It is surrounded, than upon its own inherent energies. Cowper has so described the bogs and fens of Olney, that v^e seem to have been contemplating a picturesque*^ land- scape ; and ^Hhe turning up of a mouse's nest with the I)lough " is reflected back in images of affecting loveliness from the bosom of Burns, ATTENTION AND REFLECTION. 11& SECTION 11. — ATTENTION AND REFLECTION. I HAVE remarked in the previous section that conscious- ness, in the ordinary states of the mind, is involuntary. We are sensible of no effort of the will when we either observe the objects around us, or are conscious of the mental changes taking place within us. I have also above alluded to the fact that we may make either the object perceived, or the state of the perceiving subject, an object of thought. But, besides this, our consciousness may be accompanied by an act of the will. We may, for instance, will to ex- amine, with the greatest possible care, an object of percep- tion, as a mineral, or a flower, or some particular work of art. Excluding every other object of thought, the effort of the mind is concentrated upon the act of perception. We thus may discover qualities which we never before perceived. But in what respect does this state of mind differ from ordi- nary consciousness ? The effort of the Avill cannot change the image formed on the retina ; for it can exert no influence whatever on the laws of light to which this image is sub- jected. It must consist in a more intense consciousness, by which every, impression made on the organ of sense is brought more directly before the mind. Our perception is excited and directed by an act of the will. This condi- tion of mind, when directed to an external object, is properly called Attention. The difference between consciousness and attention may, I think, be easily illustrated. In jassing through a street, Te are conscious of perceiving every house within the range of our vision. But let us now come to a row of buildings, one of which we desire to find, and which has been pre- viously described to us. We examine every one of these houses earnestly and minutely. We can, if it be necessary £20 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. dcscrii)e every cne of them with accuracy, while of the others which we have passed in our walk we can give no account whatever. We say that we have observed every house in that row attentively, but that on the others we bestowed no attention. Or, to take a too common instance ; we read a book carelessly, we see every letter and form a conception of every sentence ; but all is done listlessly, and we close the book hardly aware of a single idea that we have gained while we have been thus occupied. Let, how- ever, our whole mental effort be directed to the subject on which we are reading, and we fix it in our recollection, and we can, at will, recall it and make it a matter of thought. We say of ourselves, that in the former case we read with- out and in the latter case with attention. We sometimes, I think, speak of attention as practically distinguished fi:-om every other act of the mind. Thus, suppose we are striving to catch an indistinct sound that is occurring at intervals, we then listen with attention. We say to another person, '' Give all your attention that is pos- sible, and you may hear it." He may possibly reply, ^'I am all attention." Here we seem to recognize the condition of attention directed to no present object of perception, bu we merely place ourselves in a condition to perceive any object which presents itself Sometimes the object to which our thought is directed is internal ; that is, it is some state of the mind itself. Ordi- nary consciousness testifies to the existence of these stater ' without any act of the will ; nay, it is not in the power of the will to arrest this continuous testimony. But we some- times desire to consider some particular mental state, as the :t of perception or memory ; or some emotion, as that of Ae beautiful or sublime. It is in the power of the will to deUin such mental state, and hold it up before us as aa •bjcct of thought. When, by volition, we make our own ATTENTION AND REFLECTION. 12] mental states objects of observation, we denominate this act Reflection. As the etymology of the word indicates, we turn the mind backwards upon itself, so that it contemplates its own states and operations, very much as in the case of attention it concentrates its effort upon objects of percep- tion. I do not pretend that the words attention and reflection are always used in this restricted sense. Attention is fre- quently used to designate voluntary consciousness both ob- jective and subjective. Reflection is not so commonly used to denote both* mental states. It has, however, seemed to me that these mental states should be designated by different terms, and that the etymology of the two words, as well as the general current of good use, tends in the direction which I have here indicated. This general power of rendering the various faculties of the mind obedient to the will is of the greatest possible importance to the student. Without it, he can never em- ploy any power of the mind with energy or effect. Until it be acquired, our faculties, however brilliant, remain undisciplined and comparatively useless. From the want of it, many men, who in youth give, as is supposed, great promise of distinction, with advancing years sink down into hopeless obscurity. Endowed with fertility of imagination and unusual power of language, they are able to follow any train of thought that accident may suggest, and clothe the ideas of others with imagery which seems to indicate orig- . inal power of scientific research. But the time soon arrives when the exigences of life require accuracy of knowledge, soundness of judgment, and well-placed reliance on the decisions of our own intellect. The time for display has passed, and the time for action — action on which our success or failure depends — has come. Such men, then, after per^ haps dazzling the circle of their friends with a few wild and 11 122 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. ttiiiciful schemes, which gleam at intervals amid the ap^ proachiiig darkness, sink below the horizon, and are seen no more forever. One of the greatest advantages derived from early and systematic education is found in the necessity which it imposes of learning thoroughly and at stated periods certain a[)propriate lessons. We are thus obliged to direct our attention for a time to the earnest pursuit of some object. By being placed under this necessity for a few years, the power of the will over the faculties, if we. are faithful to ourselves, becomes habitual. What we learn is of impor- tance, but this importance is secondary to that of so culti- vating and disciplining our faculties that we are ever after- wards able to use them in enlarging the boundaries of science, or directing the courses of human thought and action. If a system of education, besides cultivating the habit of attention, cultivates also the habit of reflection and generalization, so that the student learns not only to acquire but from his acquisitions to rise to general principles, ob- serve the operations of his own mind, and compare what be has karned with the instinctive teachings of his own under- standing, the great object of the instructor will be success- fully accomplished. To acquire habits of earnest and continued attention and reflection, is one of the most diflScult tasks of the student. At the beginning, he finds his mind wandering, his atten- tion easily turned aside from the object to which he would direct it, and disposed to yield to the attraction of external objects, or to seize upon every fancy that the memory or the imagination may present. Much of that time is thus spent in dreamy idleness, which he had really determined to employ in laborious study. It is evident that his success !nust depend wholly on the correction of these habits. Our minds are comparatively useless to us, unless we can render I ATTENTION AND REFLECTION. 123 ihem oiedient servants to the Trill, so that, at any time and under any circumstances, we can oblige them to think of what we. wish, as long as we wish, and then dismiss it and think of something else. We should strive to attain such a command of all our faculties that we can direct our whole mental energies upon the most abstruse proposition, until we have either solved it, or ascertained that, with our pres- ent advantages, a solution is impossible. Perhaps the section cannot be more profitably closed than by the suggestion of some means by w^hich the power of cho will over the other faculties may be increased. 1. Much depends upon the condition of the physical sys- tem. Our intellectual faculties are in more perfect exercise in health than in sickness, and as the condition of the body tends to sickness our power over them is proportionally diminished. Every one knows how difficult it is to command his attention during a paroxysm of fever. In recovering from illness, one of the first symptoms of convalescence is a return of the power over the mind, and a disposition to employ it in its accustomed pursuits. Now, it is obvious that anything which interferes with the normal condition of the system, durmg the continuance of its action, produces the same effect, as temporary indisposition. Such causes are over- feeding, either occasionally or habitually, the use of indiges- tible food, the want of sleep, or of exercise, undue mental excitement, or exce-siv^- fatigue. Every one in the least attentive to this subject must have observed the effect of some or all of these causes upon his power of mental con- ceritration. A large portion of the life of many men is spent in habitual violation of the laws by which the free use of the mind is conditioned. If, by accident, they for a ■ short time obey the laws of their nature, their intellectual powers recover their tone, and they enjoy what they call a lucid interval. They postpone all important mental labor 124 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. until this favored period arrives, without ever suspecting that it is owing to their own folly that they are not in this condition continually. Our Creator manifestly intended that our intellectual light should shine with a clear and steady brilliancy, not that it should gleam out occasionally, after loriir j)oriods of mist and gloom and darkness. But, if we would obtain the power of using our intellect to the greatest advantage, we must habitually obey those laws which have been imposed upon us by our Creator. The diet of a student should be light, and rather spare than abundant. A laboring man needs nutritious and abundant food, to supply the waste caused by physical exer- tion. The diet which is indispensable to the one is exceed- ingly injurious to the other. A student also requires reg- uhir and sufficient daily exercise, which should generally be . carried to the point of full perspiration. His sleep should . be all that health requires, and he should invariably retire at an early hour. His study and sleeping room should be well ventilated, and his ablutions should be daily and abundant. To specify more minutely in detail the treat- ment of the physical system, would be out of place here ; and, besides, no rules which could be given would be appli- cable to every case. Every man, observing the laws of the human constitution, shouV apply them honestly to his own case. All that is required is that the student form all his physical habits with the direct and earnest purpose of giv- ing the freest scope and the most active exercise to all his ntellectual faculties. It is, however, the fact that students are liable to err in almost all of these particulars. They pay no attention either to the quantity or quality of their food. Though, perhaps, in early life, accustomed to labor, as soon as they commence a course of study, they forsake, not only labor, but all manner of exercise. If anxious to improve, -they ATTENTION AND REFLECTION. 12S Study until late at night, thus destroying the power of ap- plication for the following day. They live ii;i heated and ill- ventilated rooms. Measuring their progress by the num- ber of hours employed in study, they remain over their books until the power of attention is exhausted. Much of their time is thus spent in ineffectual efforts to comprehend the proposition before them, or, after they have compre- hended it, in equally ineffectual attempts to fix it in their recollection. The result of all this it is painful to contem- plate. Broken down in health and enfeebled in mind, the man in early life is turned out upon society a confirmed and mediocre, invalid, equally unfitted for the habits either of active or sedentary life. This is surely unfortunate. There can be no good reason why a student, or the practitioner of what are called the professions, should be an invalid. Tc study, violates no moral or physical law. A student may, then, be as healthy in body and vigorous in mind as any other man. If he be not, his misfortune is the result, not of mere mental application, but of the violation of the laws under which he has been created. 2. I have already intimated that the power of prolonged and earnest attention depends upon the will. But we find that until the mind becomes in some manner disciplined, the influence of the will is feeble and irregular. Of course, t)ur first attempt must be to increase the power of the will over the other intellectual faculties. Here, however, I am aware that probably great differ- ences exist in mental constitution. The will in some men is by nature stronger than in others. Some men surrender a deliberately-formed purpose at the appearance of a trifling obstacle ; others cling to it with a tenacity which nothing but death can overcome. In this latter case, every physical and mental energy is consecrated to the accomplishment of the purpose to which the life of the being is devoted. Wheii 11* 126 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. 8U ch a >v'ill, moved by high moral principle 4nd guided by sound judgment, is directed to the accomplishment of a great enterprise, it wins for its possessor a name among the benefactors of the race. John Howard was an illustrious cxiuni)lc of this class of men. The most masterly delinea- tion of this form of character found, so far as I know, in any language, is contained in John Foster's Essays ; a book whicli I should fail in my duty did I not recommend to the thoughtful perusal of every young man. Such instances of energetic will are, however, rare, and it becomes us to inquire whether the control over our facul- ties can be obtamed by those who are less happily consti- tuted. The most important means of cultivation, if we . , desire to improve ourselves, lies in the will itself. The more constantly we exercise it, the greater does its power become. The more habitually we do what we resolve to do, instead of doing what we are sohcited to do by indolence, or appetite, or passion, or the love of trifles, the more readily will our faculties obey us. At first the efibrt may yield only a partial result, but perseverance will render the result more and more apparent, until at last we shall find ourselves able to employ our faculties in such manner as we desire. If, then, the student finds his mind unstable, ready to wander in search of every other object than that directly before him, let him never yield to its solicitations. If it stray fi:om the subject, let him recall it, resolutely determining that it shall do the work that he bids it. He who will thus faithfully deal with his mtellectual faculties will soon find that Ms labor has not been in vain. But, in order to arrive at this result, we must be thor- oughly in earnest, and willing to pay the price for so inval- uable an acquisition. We must forego many a sensual pleasure, that the action of our faculties may be free and unembarrassed. We must -esolutely resist all tendencies ATTENTION AND REFLECTION. 127 to indolence, both physical and mental. We must learn to be alone. We mast put away from us all reading and all conversation that would encourage the tendencies Avhich we wish to suppress. By, doing this, and exerting to the full the present power of our will, we cannot fail to make prog- ress in mental discipline. It may not be improper to add a remark respecting a kind of reading in which a student is, at the present day, strongly tempted to indulge. I have.no disposition here to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the reading of works of fiction. It is sufficient for my purpose to observe, first, that this kind of mental occupation evidently requires no efibrt of the will to arrest the attention. The mind follows pleasantly and unconsciously the train of conceptions pre- sented by the author. Disquisitions requiring mental effort are always considered blemishes in a romance, and are, I believe, generally passed over unread. And, secondly, the mind be- comes filled with interesting and exciting images, which remain with us long after the reading has been finished. From these causes, reading of this character must enfeeble the will, and create a tendency to wander from a course of thought which follows entirely different laws of association. These reasons seem to me sufficient for advising any person desirous of cultivating the habit of attention, either to abandon the reading of fiction altogether, or, at least, to in- dulge in it with such severe discretion as shall prevent it from fostering those habits which we desire to eradicate- After we have accomplished our objeci, and the victory of the will over our other powers has been acknowledged, we may allow ourselves a larger liberty. Until this is done, the stricter the discipline which we enforce upon ourselves, the more rapid will be our attainment in the habit of self-government. 3. The power of the will over our other faculties is 128 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. greatly assisted by punctuality ; that is, by doing everything in precisely the time and place allotted for the doing of it. If, when the hour for study has arrived, we begin to waste our time in frivolous reading or idle musing, we shall find our real work more distasteful, the longer we procrastinate. If on the contrary, we begin at once, we the more easily conquer our wandering propensities, and our minds are fully occupied before trifles have the opportunity of alluring us. The men who have accomplished the greatest amount of in- , tellectual labor have generally been remarkable for punc- tuality ; they have divided their time accurately between their different pursuits, have rigidly adhered to the plan which they have adopted, and have been careful to improve every moment to the utmost advantage. 4. The control of the will over our faculties is much as- sisted by the use of the pen. The act of writing out our own thoughts, or the thoughts of others, of necessity in- volves the exercise of continuous attention. Every one knows that, after he has thought over a subject with all the care in his power, his ideas become vastly more precise by committing them to paper. The maxim of the schoolmen was studivm sine calamo somnium. The most remark- able thinkers have generally astonished their contemporaries by the vast amount of manuscript which they have left be- hind them. I think that universal experience testifies to the fact that no one can attain to a high degree of mental cultivation, without devoting a large portion of his time to the labor of composition. It is a very valuable habit to read no book without oblig- ing ourselves to write a brief abstract of it, with the opinions which we have formed concerning it. This will oblige us to read with attention, and will give the results of that atten- tion a permanent place in our recollection. We should thus, in fact, become reviewers of every book that we read, ATTENTION AND REFLECTION. 129 The learned and indefatigable Reinhardt was thus able to conduct one of the most valuable reviews in Germany, by writing his opinions on every work which came under his perusal. The late Lord Jeffrey commenced his literary career in precisely this manner. When a youthful student at the university, he not only wrote a review of every book which he read, but of every paper which he himself com- posed. His strictures were even more severe on his own writings than On the writings of others. He thus laid the foundation of his immense acquisitions, and attained to so great a power .of intellectual analysis, that for many years he was acknowledged to be the most accomplished critic of his time. REFERENCES. Consciousness — Reid, Essay 1, chap. 1 ; Abercrombie, Part 2, sect. 2 ; Locke, book 2, chap. 6, sect. 2 ; chap. 9, sect. 1. Is consciousness distinguished from perception? — Stewart, voL i., chap. 2. Cases of Abnormal Consciousness — Abercrombie, Part 3, sect. 4 ; part 2. Attention and Reflection — Reid, Essay 1, chap. 5 ; Essay 4, chap. 4 Stewart, yoI i., chap. 2. Abercrombie, Part 2, chap. 1. Improvement of Attention and Reflection, Part 2, chap. 1. Consciousness — Cousin, sect. 1, p. 12, 8vo : Hartford, 1834. Henry translation, and note A, by J Tof. H. CHAPTER m. ORIGINAL SUGGESTION, OR THE INTUITIONS OF THE INTELLECT. I SECTION L — EXAMINATION OF THE OPINIONS OF LOCKE. We have thus far considered those powers of the human mind by which it obtains a knowledge of the existence and qualities of the external world, and of the existence and energies of the thinking subject. This knowledge, as I have said, is all either of individual existences or of individ- ual acts, or states of the subjective mind. It is, of course, all concrete, and the conceptions derived from it are of the same character. This knowledge is original, direct and im- mediate. It is the constitutional testimony of our faculties as soon as they are brought into relation to their appropri- ate objects. It always contemplates as an object something now existing, or something which at some time did exist. • Let us, then, for a moment consider what would be the condition of a human being possessed of no other powers than those of which we have thus far treated. He would be cognizant of the existence and qualities of the objects which he perceived, and of the state of mind. which these objects called into exercise ; and, if endowed with memory, he could retain this knowledge in recollection. Here, however, his knowledge would terminate. Each fact would remain dis- connected from every other, and each separate knowledge would terminate absolutely in itself No relation between OPINIONS OF LOCKE. • 131 any two facts would be either discovered or sought for. The questions why, or wherefore, would neither be asked nor answered. The knowledge acquired would be perfectly barren, leading to nothing else, and destitute of all tendency and all power to multiply itself into other forms of cognition. The mind would be a perfect living daguerreotype, on which forms were indelibly impressed, remaining lifeless and un- changeable forever. It was the opinion of Locke, that all our knowledge either consisted of these ideas of sense or consciousness, or wag derived from them by comparison or combination. Thus, says he, ^^ First, our senses, conversant about particular sensible objects, do convey to the mind several distinct per- ceptions of things, according to those various ways in which those objects do affect them. Thus we come to those ideas we have of yellow, white, heat, cold, soft, bitter, and all those which we call sensible qualities ; which, when I say the senses convey to the mind, I mean they from external objects convey into the mind what produces these sensations. Phis source I cdl Sensation,''^ — Book 2, chap. 1, sec. 3. Secondly. ^^ The other fountain from w^hich experience furnisheth the understanding with ideas, is the perception of the operations of our own minds w^ithin us, as it is em- ployed about the ideas it has got ; which operations, when the soul comes to reflect on and consider, do furnish the understanding with another set of ideas, which could not be had from things without. Such are perception, thinking, doubting, believing, reasoning, knowing, willing, and all those different acts of our own minds, which, we being con- scious of and observing in our ownselves, do from these receive into the understanding as distinct ideas as we do from bodies affecting our senses. I call this Reflect ion,^^ — Ibid. sect. 4. " The understanding: seems to me not tc have the least 132 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. glimmering of any ideas which it does not receive from one of these two. External objects furnish the mind with the ideas of sensible qualities, which are all these different per- ceptions they produce in us, and the mind furnishes the understanding with ideas of its own operations." Again: "• Let any one examine his own thoughts, and thoroughly search into his understanding, and let him tell me whether all the original ideas he has there are any other than of the objects of his senses, or of the operations of the mind considered as objects of his reflection, and how great a mass of knowledge soever he imagines to be lodged there, he will, upon taking a strict view, see that he has not any idea in his mind but what one of these two have imprinted, though, perhaps, with infinite variety, compounded and enlarged by the understanding, as we shall see hereafter." — Ibid. Sec. 5. Again: ^"If we trace the progress of our minds, and with attention observe how it repeats, adds together, and unites its simple ideas received from sensation and reflection, it will lead us further than perhaps we should have imagined. And I believe we shall find, if we warily observe the orig- inals of our notions, that even the most abstruse ideas, how remot(^ soever they may seem from sense or from any oper- ations of our own minds, are yet only such as the under- standing frames to itself by repeating and joining together those ideas that it had from objects of sense, or from its own operations about them."— Book 2d, chap. 12, sec. 8. From these extracts it appears evident that Locke be- lieved all our original knowledge to proceed from perception, or, as he calls it, sensation, and consciousness. Whatever other knowledge we have, is produced secondarily by adding together, repeating, and joining together, the simple ideas derived from these original sources. I have before re- marked that these ideas are of individuals and are concrete. If, therefore, the theory of Locke be correct, all our other OPINIONS OF LOCKE. 133 knowledge is created by adding, repeating, and joining together these individual and concrete conceptions. Now, if this be so, — if it be the law of our nature that the human intellect is incapable of attaining to any other knowl- edge than the ideas of sensation and reflection, that is, of perception and consciousness, — in other words, thart the knowledge of the qualities of matter and the operations of our own minds, then it follows that all our notions which cannot be reduced to one or the other of these classes, is a mere fiction of the imagination, unworthy of confidence, and is, in fact, no knowledge at all. But it is Obvious that there are in our minds many ideas which belong to neither of these classes ; such, for instance, are the ideas of relation, power, cause and efi*ect, space, duration, infinity, right and wrong, and many others. Can these be produced by the uniting, joining, or adding together our conceptions of the qualities of matter, or of our own mental acts ? Let any one try the experiment, and he will readily be convinced that they can be evolved by no process of this kind. It will follow then, if the theory of Locke be admitted, that these notions, which I have above specified, and all others like them, are mere fancies, the dreams of schoolmen or of fanatics, having no real foundation, and forming no sub- stantial basis for science, or even valid objects for inquiry. Nothing, then, can, be deemed worthy of the name of science or knowledge, except the primitive data either of perception or consciousness, or what is formed by adding, uniting, join- ing together, these primitive cognitions. Hence, the ideas of which I have spoken, such as those of space, duration, infinity, eternity, cause and effect, all moral ideas, — nay, the idea of God himself, — are the figments of a dream, and all that remains to us is merely what we can perceive with- out and be conscious of within. This was the conclusion at which many men arrived at the close of the last century. 12 134 INTELLECTUAL PHIIOSOPHT. Inasmuch as t-ieir principles were said to be derived from Locke, he has sometimes been considered the foiAider of the sensual school. It is, however, to be observed, that Locke did not perceive, much less would he have admitted, the result to which his doctrines led. He speaks of the ideas to which I have alluded, such as space, power, &c., as legitimate objects of human thought, and gives quite a correct account of th.eir origin. Thus, speaking of power, he remarks : '^ The mind being every day informed by the senses of the alteration of those simple ideas it observes in things without, and taking notice how one comes to an end and ceases to be, and an- other begins to exist which w(is not before ; reflecting, also, on what passes within itself, and observing a constant change in its ideas, sometimes by the impression of outward objects on the senses, and sometimes from the determination of its own choice ; and concluding, from what it has always ob- served to have been, that like changes will for the future be made in the same things by the same agents, and by the like way considers in the one thing the possibility of having any of its simple ideas changed, and in another the possibility of making that change, and so it comes .by that idea which we call power.'' — Book 2, chap. 21, sec. 1. Here we perceive that Locke acknowledges the existence of ideas or knowledges derived neither from sensation nor reflection, and gives a very intelligible account of their origin. It is obvious that the idea of power is not derived from the senses ; we neither see, nor feel, nor hear it. It is not an operation of the mind, therefore is not derived from reflection. And, besides, comparing, adding together, uniting, are acts of the mind, wholly difierent either from perception or consciousness. It is evident, therefore, that Locke, when he examined the ideas in his own mind, ob- served among them many which neither perception n^ r con- OPINIONS OF LOCKE. 135 BCiousness could give ; and he, perhaps carelessly, accounted for their origin by the use of the indefinite expressions, •^ takes notice of," '' concludes," ^' comes to the idea," &c. We see, therefore, that Locke went beyond his own theory, and really saw what his theory declared could not be seen. Had he pursued a difierent method, and first observed the ideas of which we are conscious, and afterwards investigated their origin, his system would probably have been greatly modified. He, however, pursued the opposite course : first determining the origin of our ideas, and then limiting our ideas by the sources which he supposed himself to have exhausted. The manner in which Locke was led into this error is apparent. He had been at great pains to refute the doctrine of innate ideas, and to show that the human mind could have no thought until some impression was made upon it from without. It was also obvious to him that the only objects which we are able to cognize are matter and mind. ^ He compared the mind to a sheet of white paper, entirely blank until something is written on it by a power external to itself This, however, although the truth, is only a part of the truth. As I have before remarked, if the sheet of paper had the power of uniting the letters written upon it into words, and these words into discourse, and of proceed- ing forever in the elimination of new and original truth, it would much more accurately represent the intellect of man. This illustration of a sheet of white paper evidently misled our philosopher, and prevented him from giving due prom- inence to the originating or suggestive power of the mind. This brief notice of the opinions of Locke seemed neces- sary, especially since so great and important conclusions . Have been deduced from his doctrine. The whole subject has been treated in a most masterly manner by Cousin, in 136 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPili.. his Revie\T of the Philosophy of Locke, to which I would specially refer the student. But tc what conclusion are we led by this brief examina- tion of the theory of Locke? We have seen that, on the supposition that all our ideas are derived from perception and consciousness, a large portion of the most important ideas of which the human soul is conscious must be aban- doned as the groundless fictions of the imagination, having no foundation in the true processes of the understanding. On the other hand, we know from our own consciousness that these ideas are universally developed in the human in- tellect as soon as it begins to exercise independent thought. We must, therefore, conclude, that the theory of Locke is imperfect, and that it does not recognize some of our most important sources of original knowledge. It is, then, our i business to inquire for some other sources besides those I recognized by Locke. • REFERENCES. Sources of our knowledge— Locke, Book 2, chap. 1, sec. 3, sec. 4, Bee. 5 ; Book 2, chap. 12, sec. 8, chap. 22, sec. 1, 2, 9. Suggestion a power of the mind — Reid, Inquiry, chap. 2, sec. 7 ; Int. Powers, Essay 3, chap. 5 ; Essay 2, chap. 10, 12. Examination of Locke's Theory — Stewart, vol. i., chap. 1. Before all others. — Cousin's Examination of Locke's PhUosophy, chap. li 1., 3, 4. SECTION II. — THE NATURE OF ORIGINAL SUGGESTION, OR THE POWER OP INTUITIVE COGNITION. Locke has truly stated that all the substances to which in our present state we are related are matter and mind. By perception we obtain a knowledge of the qualities of the one, and by consciousness a knowledge of the operations of ORIGINAL SUGGESTION. 137 jhe other. Each is distinct and complete within itself, and each terminates definitely at its own appropriate limit. The thought, however, thus awakened, does not thus ter- minate. The mind of man is endowed not only with a receptive^ but also with what may be called a suggestive power. When the ideas of perception and consciousness terminate, or even while they are present, a new series of mental phenomena arises by virtue of the original power of the intellect itself. These phenomena present them- selves in the form of intuitive cognitions, occasioned by the ideas of consciousness and perception, but neither produced by them nor in any respect similar to them. They may be considered acts of pure intellection. To the ideas of per- ception or consciousness there by necessity belongs an object either objective or subjective. To those ideas of the intellect I think no such object belongs. Hence they could not be cognized originally either by perception or conscious- ness. They could not exist within us except we were endowed with a diflFerent and superior intellectual energy. We can give but little account of these intellections, nor can we ofier any proof of their verity. As soon as they arise within us, they are to us the unanswerable evidence of their own truth. As soon as we are conscious of them, we know that they are true, and we never offer any evidence in support of them. So far as our powers of perception aa^d consciousness are concerned, the mind resembles in many respects a sheet of white paper. Here, however, the analogy terminates. There is nothing in the paper which in any respect resembles this power of intuitive knowledge of which we here speak. What we here refer to may, perhaps, be best illustrated by a familiar example. A child, before it can talk, throws a ball and knocks down a nine-pin. By perception aided by memory, it derives no other ideas beside? those of a rolling 12^ 138 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. ball and of a falling ninepin. This is all that the senses could give it. It might be all that would be apparent tc the mind of a brute. But is this the case with the child? Far otherwise. There arises in his mind, by virtue of its own energy, the notion of cause and effect; of something in the ball capable of producing this change, and of something in the ninepin which renders it susceptible of this change. He instinctively cognizes a most important relation existing between these two events. Still more, he has an intuitive belief that the same event can be produced again in the same way. Relying on this belief, he sets up the ninepin again, and throws the ball in the confident expectation that it will produce the same result as at first. There has thus been created in his mind, not only the relation of cause and effect, but the important conviction that like causes wdll produce like effects. In consequence of the relations which have thus been revealed to him, he sets a value upon his toys which he did not before. The same idea is developed as soon as the infant puts his finger in the candle. He will not try the experiment a second time. He immediately obtains a knowledge of the relation of cause and effect, and that the same cause will again produce the same effect. He does not see this relation ; it is not an object of percep- tion, nor is it an operation of the mind. He does not feel it when he is burned. As soon, however, as he cognizes the relative ideas, the relation in which they stand to each other presents itself to him as an intuitive cognition. I have here used an illustration from external objects. I. however, by no means assert that in this manner we first arrive at the knowledge of cause and effect. The same idea is evidently suggested by every act of voluntary motion. A child wishes to move his hand ; it moves, but perhaps not m the right direction. He tries again with better success. At last he accomplishes his object. Heie is, perhaps, tha ! ORIGINAL SUGGESTION. 139 most striking instance of this relation which he ever wit- nesses, and it is brought home directly to his own conscious- ness. He is conscious of the act of volition, he knows tliat he wills ; this mental act is followed by a change of position in his hand, and by motion in something with which his hand comes into contact. This succession of events, the for- mer of which is within the cognition of his own conscious- ness, and the latter of his perception, would be suiBcient to give occasion to this intuitive knowledge at a very early period. It may be proper to observe, that although this power of original suggestion is developed and perfected with advanc- ing years, yet it commences with the first unfolding of the intellect. Both the perceptive and the suggestive powers belong to the essential nature .of a human mind Were a child destitute of the power of intuitive cognition, even at a very early age, we should know that it was an idiot. If, for instance, it manifested no notion of cause and effect, but would as soon put its fingers into a candle the second time as the first, we should be convinced that it was not possessed of a normal understanding. Nay, we form an opinion of the mental capacity of a child rather by the activity of its suggestive than of its perceptive powers. It may be blind or deaf, or may suffer both of these aflSictiong together ; that is, its perceptive powers may be at the mini- mum, and yet we may discover that its intellect is alert and vigorous, and that it discovers large powers of acquisition and combination. Such a case occurs in the instance of Laura Bridgman, a bUnd mute, whose suggestive powers are unusually active, and who has, with admirable skill, been taught to read and write, so that she is at present able to keep a journal, and correspond with her friends by letter. With respect to these ideas of suggestion, or intuiticn, twc 140 INTELLKCTUAL PHILOSOPHY. important remarks are made by Cousin. I give his ideas here, rather than his words. 1. ^' Unless we previously obtained the idea of perception and consciousness, we could never originate the suggested or intuitive cognitions. If, for instance, we had never observed the fact of a succession, we could never have obtained the idea of duration. If we had never perceived an external object, we should never have obtained the idea of space. If we had never witnessed an instance of change, we should have had no idea of cause and effect. As soon, however, as these ideas of perception and consciousness are awakened, they are immediately either attended or followed by the ideas of suggestion. We perceive, then, that, chronologi- cally considered, the ideas of perception and consciousness take precedence. They appear first in the mind, and, until they appear, the others could have no existence. It was this fact which probably gave rise to the error of Locke. Because no .other ideas could be originated except through means of the ideas of perception and consciousness, he in- ferred that our knowledge could consist of nothing but these ideas, either in their original form, or else united or added to each other. The fact, on the contrary, seems to be, that our suggested ideas are no combination or modification of our receptive ideas ; they form the occasions from which the mind originates them by virtue of its own energy. We are 80 made, that, when one class of ideas is cognized, the other spontaneously arises within us, in consequence of the con- stitution of the human, intellect. 2. ''But, secondly, when we have thus obtained these ideas of suggestion, we find that their existence is a neces- sary condition of the existence of the very ideas by which they are occasioned. Thus, as I have said, tne notion of an external world is the occasion in us of the idea of space but, when we have obtained the idea of space, we see that ORIGINAL SUGGESTION. 141 it is a necessary condition to the conception of an external world ; for, were there no space, there could be no external world. If we had never witnessed a succession of events, we should never have obtained a conception of duration. Having, however, obtained the conception of duration, we perceive that it is a necessary condition of succession ; for, were there no duration, there could be no succession. And again, had we never observed an instance of change, we should never have attained the conception of cause and effect, or of power. But the conception of power once gained, we become immediately sensible that, had there been no power, change would have been impossible. We thus learn that, logically considered, the suggestive idea takes the precedence, inasmuch as it is the necessary condition of the idea by which it is occasioned." With these remarks of this most acute and very able meta- physician I fully coincide, so far as they apply to a large por- tion of our ideas of suggestion. I think, however, that there is a large class of our intuitive cognitions, of which the second of these laws cannot be affirmed. Take, for instance, our ideas of relation and degree, arising from the contemplation of two or more single objects. I do not see how it is true that the relation is a necessary condition to the existence of the bodies which occasion it, or that the idea of degree is a necessary condition to the existence of the qualities by which it is occasioned. I dissent with diffidence from an author so justly distinguished ; nevertheless, in treating on this, as on any other subject, I am bound to state fully the truth aa it presents itself to my individual consciousness. In order the more fully to illustrate this subject, I have thought it desirable to present a number of instances in which these original suggestions or intuitions are occa- Bioned by the ideas of perception and consciousness. I by uo means attempt an exhaustive catalogue. Jt will be suffi- 142 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. cicnt for my purposes, if I am able to present such a vkw j of the subject as will direct more definite attention than haa generally been given to this part of our intellectual consti- tution. It has seemed to me that these intuitions might be class- ified as follows : I. Those unaccompanied by emotion. II. Those accompanied by emotion. I. Those unaccompanied by emotion are, 1. Those occasioned by objects in a state of rest 2. Those occasioned by objects in the condition of change. II. Those accompanied by emotion are, 1. iEsthetic ideas. 2. Moral ideas. REFERENCES. Cousin, chaps. 2, 3, and 4. SECTION III. — IDEAS OCCASIONED BY OBJECTS IN A STATE or REST. We may contemplate objects in a state of rest either as one or many. Let us, in the first place, examine a single object. Suppose, for instance, a solid cube is placed before me. I look at it, and perceive its color and form ; I handle it, and perceive that it is hard and smooth, and that its form is the same as I have discovered by sight: I strike it, and it gives forth a sound ; I attempt to smell it and taste of it, and thus derive all the knowledge of its qualities which I am able to discover. I reflect on • these various acts of percep- tion, and thus obtain a knowledge of the state of my mind when performing these mental acts. I have then all the ORIGINAL SUGGESTION. 14^^ knowledge which I can derive from perception and con- sciousness. Had I no other mental energies, my knowl- edge would here arrive at an impassable limit. If, however, we reflect upon our own cognitions, we shall be conscious of much important knowledge occasioned by these mental acts, which the acts themselves do not give us. I look upon the cube ; I perceive it to be extended ; I re- move it to another place. What is there where the cube was a moment since ? What is that which the cube occu- pies, and in which it is contained '] It can be occupied by matter, or left vacant. I become conscious of the fact that it is a condition necessary to the existence of all matter. Abolish it, and I abolish the possibility of an external uni- verse. I call it space. What is it ? It has no qualities that can be cognized by the senses. It is neither an act nor an aflection of the mind. It is not matter ; it is not spirit. It differs from both in every conceivable particu- lar. The existence of matter is made known to us by the senses. Space is cognizable by none of them. It is neither seen, nor felt, nor heard, nor smelled, nor tasted. Matter is a contingent existence : it may or may not exist here, or it may not have existence anywhere. I can conceive of an era in duration when it never existed. I can conceive of another era when it will cease to exist. Not so of space ; as soon as I form a notion of it, I perceive it to be neces- ^ry. I cannot conceive of its non-existence or annihilation. This cube and all other matt^er is limited, and is so from necessity : space is by necessity unlimited. Matter, being limited, of necessity has form ; space has no form, for it has no limitation. The conception of a body, however vast, su^r^ests an image ; space suggests to us no image. We find ourselves, therefore, in possession of a conception, revei.led to us neither by perception nor consciousness, which, never- theless, is cognized by the mind, from the necessity of ita 144 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. own nature. Without perception it would never have been cot^nized. Chronologically, it is, therefore, subsequent to it. As soon, however, as I obtain this conception, I know that it is a necessary condition to the existence of that which is perceived. It is necessary physiologically; for without space there can be no matter. It is necessary psychologi- civUy ; for we cannot in our minds conceive of matter with- out conceiving of space as a necessary condition of our conception. But let us reflect upon this idea somewhat more atten- tively. We all have a knowledge of what is meant by space ; we cannot easily confound it with any other idea ; yet no one can describe it. It has no qualities. It holds no rela- tion to our senses, or to our consciousness. What are its limits ? As I have before said, it has none. The house in which I am writing occupies space, and is contained in space. The earth and the whole planetary system move in space. The whole sidereal system either moves or reposes in space We pass to the utmost verge of the material universe — space fitill stretches beyond, unmeasured, immeasurable. We have approached no nearer to its confines than at first ; for, were such creations as now exist to be multiplied forever, space would be yet inexhaustible. What do we call this idea, which, by the constitution of our minds, emerges necessarily from this conception ? It is the idea of the boundless, the immensurable, the infinite. It is an idea which we cannot comprehend, and yet from which we cannot escape. We may, perhaps, remember how, in childhood, we wearied our feeble understandings in the attempt to grasp it. It is at present as far beyond the power of our comprehension as at first, yet we find the mind ever tending towards it. It is an idea neither of perception nor consciousness, nor can it be evolved from any union or combination of those ideas. It evolves itself at once, on our conception of space, from the ^-^ X! -4^ V; ^ 4 i "-^^p. r^ P "t \ fe. rf '. ^. . ^' i [ I ORIGINAL SUGGESTION. 145 energies of the mind itself. Having been once formed, it holds its place independently in the mind, and depencls not for its existence on any other idea. Again ; I canhot be conscious of my own existence with- out being conscious at the same time that I am an individ- ual, separate not only from the rest of the material, but from the other individuals of the spiritual universe. I am, in myself, a complete form of existence, distinct from every other form that has existed, or that may exist. When I obssrve the cube, it suggests to me the same idea, that of unity. I retain this idea of oneness, apart from any object which at first suggested it. It cannot be called a quality. It is not an energy of the mind ; yet it is an idea which immediately arises within us, on such occasions as I have suggested. * It may, however, be proper to remark, that this idea of unity is always relative. It always has respect to the relation in which we contemplate an object. An individual human being is one ; yet it possesses one body and one spirit, and without both of these, in our present stat^, it would not be a human being. A human soul is one ; but, in order to be a human soul, it must be possessed of various faculties, each one of which may be considered distinctly. A regiment is one, and yet it could not be a regiment, un- less it were composed of several distinct companies united under a single commander. A company is one ; but it is made up of single individuals, as privates, subalterns, cap- tain, etc. We thus see that, in speaking of unity, the rela- tion in which we contemplate the object is always to be taten into view ; and that there is no absurdity or contra- diction in saying, that it is one in one relation, d^nAmany in another relation. Let us look once more upon our cube. We perceive in it form, solidit]^, divisibility, color, etc. These we call quali- 13 146 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. ties of matter, or the powers which it possesses of affecting us in a particular manner. But is either of these qualities matter ? Are all of them combined matter ? Were we to say that color and form and divisibility, etc., are matter, or substance, would this assertion exf ress the idea of which we are conscious when we reflect upon this subject ? So far is this from the fact, that the assertion would seem to involve an absurdity. We always say of a material object, it is something divisible, solid, colored, etc. ; plainly distinguish- ing, in our conceptions, the something in which the qualities reside, from the qualities which reside in the something. We thus find ourselves possessed of the two ideas, essence and attribute, substance and quality. We know that there must be one, whenever we perceive the other. But where does this idea of substance come from ? Surely neither from the senses nor from consciousness ; yet we all have attained it. It must have originated in the mind itself We perceive the quality. The mind affirms the existence of the sub- stance, and affirms it not as a contingent, but as a necessary truth. It is almost superfluous to remark, that we arrive at the ssLine idea from consciousness. Consciousness testifies to the existence of mental energies. From this knowledge, the mind at once asserts the existence of an essence to which these energies pertain. Were there no mental energies, we could never become cognizant of a spiritual substance ; but, having been cognizant of it, we know that it is a necessary condition to the existence of the energies of which we are conscious. 2. These instances are sufficient to illustrate the nature of the cognitions which are suggested by the energies of the mind itself, when we contemplate a single object. Let ua now suppose several objects, seme of similar and others of f' ORIGINAL SUGGESTION. 147 dissimilar qualities, to be present before us. Suppose ^liciri, for instance, cubes, pyramids, cylinders, etc. If I observe them singly, each will furnish me with all the primary and suggested ideas to which I have just now referred. I observe several to be of one form. I compare their aggregate with unity, and there arises in my mind the idea of number. As soon as I have formed this notion, I find myself abstracting it from the cubes, and from every other object, and treat it as a conception by itself, capable of enlargement or diminution at my will. So readily does this conception separate itself from the objects which gave occasion to its existence, that, in the rudest conditions of society, men give names to the several ideas of number, and very soon form a symbolical language to represent them. Every one knows that his ideas of number were originally derived from the observation of a plurality of objects ; and yet no one, thinking of ten, twenty, thirty, to say nothing of thousands and millions, ever associates these ideas with any actual existences. We always consider them as abstract ideas, yet ideas of the most fixed and determinate character. But these ideas are not objects of perception. We neither see nor feel nor taste number; yet perception occasions these ideas. We know- number as soon as the occasions which suggest it present themselves. In enumeration, we always proceed by unity. We re- peat unity until we arrive at a certain aggregate, which we then consider as a unit. Thus, in our enumeration, we repeat unity, giving a different name to every increasing aggregate, until we arrive at ten. We then make this our unit, and add to it other similar uniis, until we arrive at a hundred ; in the same manner, we make this our unit until we arrive at a thousand, then to a million, etc. Suppose, aow, I carry on this process to any assignable limit, can I exhaust my idea of number ? Suppose I proceed until mj 148 INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY. powers of computation fail, have I yet .proceeded so far that I cannot add to the sum millions upon millions ? Can I conceive of any number so vast that I cannot add to it aa many as I choose? We perceive this to be impossible. Here, again, we recognize the same idea which lately evolved from our notion of space. It is the idea of infinity. We see that it springs at once, by the operation of oui minds, from every conception capable of giving occasion to it. Again; we cannot observe a number of objects at the same time, without recognizing various relations which exist be- tween them. I see two cubes possessing in every respect the same qualities. Hence arises the relation of identity of form, color, etc. Others possess different qualities ; hence the relation of diversity. When the forms are precisely the same, or when they occupy exactly the same space, there arises relation of equality. When they occupy different measures of space, there arises the relation of inequality. These latter relations are specially used in all our reason- ings in the mathematics. All our demonstrations in this science are designed to show that two quantities are either equal or unequal to each other. Still further, I perceive that two or more objects are not in contact. Space intervenes between them, and we recog- nize the relation of distance. Each one has a definite rela- tion in space to all the others. Hence arises the relation of place. Place always refers to the position which a body holds in respect to other bodies. Were there but one body in space, we could not from it form any notion of place. As soon as other bodies are perceived, and their relation to it recognized, we obtain this idea respecting it. Thus, I say tliis paper lies where it did ten minutes since. Here I refer to the table and the objects upon it, whose position in relation to the paper is the same as it was before, leaving ORIGINAL SUGGESTION. 149 out of account altogether the fact that the table has moved with the diurnal and annual revolution of the earth. A man in a railroad car will say that he has not changed his place for half a day, when he knows that he has been moving at the rate of thirty or forty miles an hour. Again ; we perceive that, of several cubes, the first occu- pies a larger portion of space than the second, and the second a larger portion than the third. All of them are red, but the tinge of one is deeper than that of another. Hence arises the relation of degree. This idea is so univer- sally recognized, that, in all languages, it is designated by a special form, entitled degrees of comparison. But it is not necessary that I pursue this subject further. I think that every one must recognize in his own mind a power of originating such knowledges as these, as soon as the occasion presents itself They are not ideas of percep- tion or of consciousness, but ideas arising in the mind, by its own energies, as soon as we cognize the appropriate objects which occasion them. Having once obtained them, they immediately sever themselves from the objects which occa- sion them, and become ideas of simple intellection, which we use as abstract terms in all oi;ir reasonings. REFERENCES. Space — Locke, Book 2, chap. 13 ; Cousin, chap. 2 ; Reid, Essay 2, chap. 19. Space and body not the same — Locke, Book 2, chap. 18; Cousin, chap. 2. Infinity from spa