something that appears, and that that which appears is not wholly immaterial; and yet this was properly called vɛuμa, and was often looked upon by those who called it vεvua in Greek, and now call it spirit in English, to be the ghost or soul of one departed; which, I humbly conceive, justifies my use of the word spirit, for a thinking, voluntary agent, whether material or immaterial.

"Your lordship says, *that I grant, that it cannot upon these principles be demonstrated, that the spiritual substance in us is immaterial:' from whence you conclude, that then my grounds of certainty from ideas are plainly given up.' This being a way of arguing that you often make use of, I have often had occasion to consider it, and cannot after all see the force of this argument. I acknowledge that this or that proposition cannot upon my principles be demonstrated; ergo, I grant this proposition to be false, that certainty consists in the perception of the agreement or disagreement of ideas. For that is my ground of certainty, and till that be given up, my grounds of certainty are not given up."

* First Answer.

AN EXAMINATION

OF

P. MALEBRANCHE'S OPINION

OF

SEEING ALL THINGS IN GOD.

[IT would here be altogether out of place to attempt an outline of Malebranche's whole philosophy, since only a very small portion of it is attacked in the following treatise by Locke. Besides, the merit of Malebranche lies not, I think, in the invention of a system, but in the criticism of such other systems as still preserved some credit in his time. Tennemann (Manual of the History of Philosophy, $341,) gives an account of the doctrines of this writer. Buhle (Histoire de la Philosophie Moderne, t. iii. p. 367-425) supplies a tolerably correct and intelligible abridg ment of his general views. But, stated in any other language than his own, it is to be feared that his method of reasoning will appear unsatisfactory, since the whole vitality of the Recherche de la Vérité is, in my humble opinion, to be found in the rich, polished, and flexible style in which it is written. Here it is not to be denied he possesses considerable superiority over Locke; but however ably he may write, and however subtly he may reason, it soon becomes evident, upon a diligent perusal, that his mind was too much clouded by mysticism to permit of his seeing his way clearly through the labyrinth of metaphysics. He falls perpetually into contradictions; often appears to confound the soul with its material organ, the brain; now verges towards the loftiest idealism; now adopts the tone and language of a Pantheist; and in the favourite, and perhaps the only new, part of his system, viz., that which teaches that we behold all things in God, he grows so mystical, so confused, so irreconcilable with common sense and experience, that we at length dismiss the whole speculation as a mere dream. In this light it is quite clear Locke considered it. He was no doubt restrained by the widely-extended reputation of Malebranche, as well as by his own natural politeness, from speaking of it so plainly as now becomes our duty; but yet he manages to show, in the course of his arguments, that the worthy father of the Oratory is very frequently at variance with common sense. Undeterred by this exposure, by anticipation, of his principles, Bishop Berkeley very shortly afterwards spun his famous system on Malebranche's distaff; for it is almost capable of demonstration, that the Bishop of Cloyne's idealism was hatched in the cloisters of the Oratory. I am far from desiring to undervalue the contributions which any philosopher has made towards the more complete understanding of the origin and nature of our ideas, of the powers of our mind, our relations to the First Cause of ideas, of sensations, and of knowledge; but it must be owned that the frank and

earnest student of philosophy frequently finds himself called upon to exercise all his patience and forbearance, in making his way through the writings of Malebranche. Even the refutation of his errors by Locke may be said to furnish a proof of this fact, since the utter groundlessness of his suppositions now appears so self-evident, as to stand in need of no refutation. But the case was very different in Locke's time, and perhaps would be so still, had not the public mind been long ago weaned from pursuits purely speculative, in order to apply itself with undivided earnestness to the sciences which are the more immediate ministers of the progress and happiness to mankind.—ED.]

1. THE acute and ingenious author of the Recherche de la Vérité,* among a great many very fine thoughts, judicious reasonings, and uncommon reflections, has in that treatise started the notion of Seeing all Things in God, as the best way to explain the nature and manner of the ideas in our understanding. The desire I had to have my unaffected ignorance removed, has made it necessary for me to see whether this hypothesis, when examined, and the parts of it put together, can be thought to cure our ignorance, or is intelligible and satisfactory to one who would not deceive himself, take words for things, and think he knows what he knows not.

2. This I observe at the entrance, that P. Malebranche having enumerated, and in the following chapters showed the difficulties of the other ways, whereby he thinks human understanding may be attempted to be explained, and how insufficient they are to give a satisfactory account of the ideas we have, erects this of Seeing all Things in God upon their ruin, as the true, because it is impossible to find a better; which argument, so far from being only argumentum ad ignorantiam, loses all its force as soon as we consider the weakness of our minds and the narrowness of our capacities, and have but humility enough to allow, that there may be many things which we cannot fully comprehend, and that God is not bound in all he does to subject his ways of operation to the scrutiny of our thoughts, and confine himself to do no

* The edition of the Recherche de la Vérité which Locke used, was that in quarto, printed at Paris, in 1678; and when he had occasion to compare it with any other, he seems always to have made use of the small octavo, printed at the same place, and in the same year. By chance it happens that this second edition is the one we have now before us, and to which we shall refer in the notes.--ED.

thing but what we must comprehend. And it will very little help to cure my ignorance, that this is the best of four or five hypotheses proposed, which are all defective; if this too has in it what is inconsistent with itself, or unintelligible to me.

3. The P. Malebranche's Recherche de la Vérité, 1. 3, p. 2, c. 1, tells us, that, whatever the mind perceives, "must be actually present and intimately united to it."* That the things that the mind perceives are its own sensations, imaginations, or notions; which being in the soul, the modifications of it need no ideas to represent them. But all things exterior to the soul we cannot perceive but by the intervention of ideas, supposing that the things themselves cannot be intimately united to the soul. But because spiritual things may possibly be united to the soul, therefore he thinks it probable that they can discover themselves immediately without ideas;t though of this he doubts, because he believes not there is any substance purely intelligible, but that of God; and that though spirits can possibly unite themselves to our minds, yet, at present, we cannot entirely know them. But he speaks here principally of material things, which he says certainly cannot unite themselves to our souls in such a manner as is necessary that it should perceive them; because, being extended, the soul not being so, there is no proportion between them.

4. This is the sum of his doctrine contained in the first chapter of the second part of the third book, as far as I can comprehend it. Wherein, I confess, there are many expressions which, carrying with them, to my mind, no clear ideas,

* The words of Malebranche are "Il faut bien remarquer qu'afin que l'esprit appercoive quelque chose, il est absolument necessaire que l'idée de cette chose lui soit actuellement présente." (Recherche de la Vérité, 1. III. p. ii. c. 1.)

On this part of his system Malebranche evidently entertained na very clear or distinct ideas. "De sorte," says he, "qu'il ne semble pas absolument necessaire d'admettre des idées pour representer à l'ame des choses spirituelles parce qu'l se peut faire qu'on les voye par elles mêmes, quoique d'une manière fort imparfaite." (t. p. 346.) In the notes on the Essay on the Human Understanding, the reader will have observed that Bishop Berkeley, who may be regarded as the Malebranche of Great Britain, entertained as nearly as possible the same opinion, with respect to the knowledge we can have of spirits. (See Book II. c. xxi. p. 210.)-ED