one could not have demonstrated what Mr. Newton's book hath shown to be demonstrable; but to show my readiness to obey your commands, I shall not decline the first leisure I can get, to employ some thoughts that way; unless I find what I have said in my Essay shall have stirred up some abler man to prevent me, and effectually do that service to the world. We had here, the 8th instant, a very sensible earthquake, there being scarce a house wherein it was not by somebody or other felt. We have news of it at several places, from Cologne as far as Bristol. Whether it reached you I have not heard. If it did, I would be glad to know, what was the exact time it was felt, if any body observed it. By the queen's pendulum at Kensington, which the shake stopped from going, it was 2 h. post m. At Whitehall, where I observed it, it was by my watch 2 h. 5 m. post m.; which, supposing the queen's pendulum went exact, and adding the equation of that day, will fall near the time marked by my watch, or a little later. If there could be found people, that in the whole extent of it, did by well-adjusted clocks exactly observe the time, one might see whether it were all one shock, or proceeded gradually from one place to another. I thank you for having taken Dr. Sibelius into your protection. I desire you, with my service, to present my most humble thanks to your brother, for the favour of his letter; to which, though I have not time this post to return an answer, I shall not long delay my acknowledgments. I hope you will see, by the freedom I have here taken with you, that I begin to reckon myself amongst your acquaintance. Use me so, I beseech you. If there be any service I can do you here, employ me, with an assurance that I am, Sir, Your most humble and most faithful servant, JOHN LOCKE. SIR, Mr. Molyneux to Mr. Locke. Dublin, Oct. 15,-92. pardon for my long Our then approach I DO most heartily beg your silence to yours of the 20th last. ing parliament was the occasion of my not returning you an immediate answer; and I expected withal to give you a more large account of some things you desire from me. But, seeing no immediate hopes of leisure, by reason of our parliamentary business, I venture at present to send you only the enclosed rough papers; and till I can have an opportunity myself of revising your book, have put it into the hands of a very ingenious and learned person, who promises me to give his observations in writing; which, as soon as obtained, I shall transmit to you. The earthquake was not at all felt here. I am wonderfully pleased that you give me hopes of seeing a moral essay from your hand; which I assure you, sir, with all sincerity, is highly respected by Your most humble servant, WILL. MOLYneux. SIR, Mr. Molyneux to Mr. Locke. Dublin, Dec. 22, 1692. I Now sit down to answer yours of September 20, concerning the second edition of your book, wherein you desire my opinion and advice. And, after so long consideration of the matter, as between that and this, and consulting some ingenious heads here about it, I can say but little; only that the same judicious hand, that first formed it, is best able to reform it, where he sees convenient. I never quarrelled with a book for being too prolix, especially where the prolixity is plea sant, and tends to the illustration of the matter in hand, as I am sure yours always does. And, after I received your letter on this subject, I communicated the contents thereof to two very ingenious persons here; and, at the same time, I lent them your book, desiring them to examine it strictly; and to find out, and note, whatever might be changed, added, or substracted. And after a diligent perusal, they agreed with me in the same conclusion, viz. that the work, in all its parts, was so wonderfully curious and instructive, that they would not venture to alter any thing in it. But however, that I may in some measure answer your expectations, I shall briefly note to you, what I conceive on this subject. And, 1st, the errata typographica (besides those mentioned in the table) are many and great; these therefore, in your next edition, are diligently to be corrected. 2dly, page 270, it is asserted, that, without a particular revelation, we cannot be certain, that matter cannot think, or that Omnipotency may not endow matter with a power of thinking." And pages 314, 315, "the immateriality of God is evinced from the absolute impossibility of matter's thinking." These two places, I know, have been stumbled at by some, as not consistent. To me indeed they appear, and are, very agreeable; and I have clearly evinced their consistency to those that have scrupled them. But I thought fit to give you this hint, that in your next edition you may prevent any such doubt. My sense of these two places is this. In the first it is said, "that we cannot tell (without a particular revelation to the contrary) but an Almighty God can make matter think." In the other it is asserted, "that unthinking matter cannot be this Almighty God." The next place I take notice of, as requiring some farther explication, is your discourse about man's liberty and necessity. This thread seems so wonderfully fine spun in your book, that, at last, the great question of liberty and necessity seems to vanish. And herein you seem to make all sins to proceed from our understandings, or to be against conscience, and not at all from the depravity of our wills. Now it seems harsh to you, that a man will be damned, because he understands no better than he does. What you say concerning genera and species is unquestionably true; and yet it seems hard to assert, that there is no such sort of creatures in nature as birds: for though we may be ignorant of the particular essence that makes a bird to be a bird, or that determines and distinguishes a bird from a beast; or the just limits and boundaries between each; yet we can no more doubt of a sparrow's being a bird, and a horse's being a beast, than we can of this colour being black, and the other white: though, by shades, they may be made so gradually to vanish into each other, that we cannot tell where either determines. But all this I write more in deference to your desires from me, than to satisfy myself that I have given you any material hints, or have offered any considerable objection, that is worth your notice and removal. Mr. Norris's unfortunate attempts on your book sufficiently testify its validity; and truly I think he trifles so egregiously, that he should forewarn all men how far they venture to criticise on your work. But thus far, after all, I will venture to intimate to you, that if you are for another work of this kind, I should advise you to let this stand as it does. And your next should be of a model wholly new, and that is by way of logic; something accommodated to the usual forms, together with the consideration of extension, solidity, mobility, thinking, existence, duration, number, &c. and of the mind of man and its powers; as may make up a complete body of what the schools call logic and metaphysics. This I am the more inclinable to advise on two accounts: first, because I have lately seen Johannis Clerici Logica, Ontologia, et Pneumatologia, in all which he has little extraordinary, but what he borrows from you; and in the alteration he gives them, he robs them of their native beauties; which can only be preserved to them by the same incomparable art that first framed them. Secondly, I was the first that recommended and lent to the reverend provost of our university, Dr. Ashe, a most learned and ingenious man, your Essay, with which he was so wonderfully pleased and satisfied, that he has ordered it to be read by the bachelors in the college, and strictly examines them in their progress therein. Now a large discourse, in the way of a logic, would be much more taking in the universities, wherein youths do not satisfy themselves to have the breeding or business of the place, unless they are engaged in something that bears the name and form of logic. This, sir, is in short what offers itself to me, at present, concerning your work. There remains only, that I again put you in mind of the second member of your division of sciences, the ars practica, or ethics; you cannot imagine what an earnest desire and expectation I have raised, in those that are acquainted with your writings, by the hopes I have given them from your promise of endeavouring something on that subject. Good sir, let me renew my requests to you therein; for believe me, sir, it will be one of the most useful and glorious undertakings that can employ you. The touches you give, in many places of your book, on this subject, are wonderfully curious, and do largely testify your great abilities that way; and I am sure the pravity of men's morals does mightily require the most powerful means to reform them. Be as large as it is possible on this subject, and by all means let it be in English. He that reads the 45th section, in your 129th page, will be inflamed to read more of the same kind, from the same incomparable pen. Look, therefore, on yourself as obliged by God Almighty to undertake this task (pardon me, sir, that I am so free with you, as to insist to yourself on your duty, who, doubtless, understand it better than I can tell you); suffer not therefore your thoughts to rest, till you have finished it; and that God Almighty may succeed your labours is, and shall be the prayer of, Worthy Sir, Your entirely affectionate humble servant, |
