1. There is something in man which perceives the various motions of the body	9. The understanding, will, and affections
2. This perception is sometimes continued and recalled	10. This may be so, or may not
3. We know things in a more sublime manner	11. Of the immortality of the soul
4. There is something in us which has an appetite to sensible things	12. Of the union of the soul and body
5. And another appetite, which is often contrary to this	13. Reason cannot discover the origin of man
6. How philosophers account for the direction of our bodily motions	14. The scriptural account of it
7. For the external senses	15. Of the production of the soul
8. The imagination and memory	16. Of the generation of the body

1. Every one finds there is something in himself which perceives the motions raised in his body by outward objects. For when we see, hear, taste, smell or feel, while the objects affect our bodily organs, we find also various perceptions in our mind, according to the variety of those objects.

2. We observe likewise, that after the objects are removed, those perceptions often continue, yea, and are variously mixed and compounded together, which we term IMAGINATION. And. a long time after, when those objects are not only removed, but even cease to exist, those perceptions return into our mind. And this we call MEMORY.

3. And as we perceive these outward objects, so we know that we do perceive them. The mind can look inward upon itself, and reflect upon its own perceptions. Over and above this, we seem to find in ourselves, a knowledge of things abstracted from matter. But the more we labour to penetrate into the nature of this divine principle, the more it seems to retire and withdraw itself from our most studious researches.

4. In like manner we find in ourselves various appetites for good things, and aversions to evil things: yea, ‘the very involuntary motions of the body tend to avoid the evil and attain the good. And the things which are perceived by our senses, or represented by our imagination, so necessarily affect us, that we can by no ‘means . hinder ourselves from having an appetite for some, and an aversion to others.

5. Yet frequently a more hidden and sublime appetite exerts itself in our minds: one that checks, controls, and exercises authority over all the rest. For if we arc convinced, that the things which are pleasant, are nevertheless hurtful, the appetite for them is over-ruled, and we find a desire, not to enjoy, but to avoid them.

6. In order to explain these things, philosophic men suppose, that all the involuntary motions of the body, are performed in a mechanical manner, by matter so and so modified: and that such effects spring of course from such causes, according to the stated laws of motion.

7. As to ‘the SENSES, they suppose, that when the organs of sense are struck by any of the bodies that surround us, and the motion caused thereby continued through the nerves to the brain, the soul, residing there, is suitably affected: God having so closely connected the soul and the body, that on certain motions of the body, if conveyed to the brain by means of the nerves, certain perceptions of the mind always follow: as, on the other hand, on certain perceptions of the mind, certain bodily motions follow.

8. They suppose, if these motions, which are by the nerves communicated to the brain, continue there after the objects are removed, the perception of these is IMAGINATION: which, if it occurs after it has ceased, is then stiled MEMORY. Others suppose, that imagination results from the motion of the animal spirits, through those traces which were made in the brain, while the outward objects were present; and memory, from the spirits moving through them afresh, after some intermission.

9. Once more. They suppose there are two faculties in the soul; one that is passive, the UNDERSTANDING, by which it perceives all the motions of the body, and knows and reflects on its own operations: the other active, the WILL, by which we incline to good, and are averse to evil. The. AFFECTIONS are only, the will exerting itself variously on various objects.

10. To speak freely upon the matter. I know the body of man is contrived with such exquisite wisdom, that he is able, by means of the organs of sense, to perceive outward objects; to continue those perceptions, to recall them after they are gone, and by a reflex act, to know what passes in his mind or body. But I know not how to account for any of these things.

11. That the soul is immaterial, is clear from hence, that it is a thinking substance. If it be said, “ God can endue matter with a faculty of thinking :“ we answer, no otherwise than he can endue a spirit with solidity and extension; that is, he can change spirit into matter; and lie can change matter into spirit. But even the Almighty cannot make it think while it remains matter; because this implies a contradiction.

12. The UNION of the soul and body is another of those things which human understanding cannot comprehend. That body and spirit cannot be implicated or twisted together like two bodily substances, we know. But how two substances of so widely different natures, can be joined at all, we know not. All we can tell is this: God has ordered that certain perceptions in the soul should constantly follow certain motions of the body, and certain motions of the body such perceptions in the soul.

13. How mankind began, is another point, which is too hard for our reason to determine. That men always existed, is no way probable, were it only on this account, the late invention of arts. For since it appears, at what time the most necessary arts were invented, we cannot reasonably suppose, that men began to exist long before that period: seeing, if they had always existed, no reason’ can be given, why these, and many more arts, were not invented long before. Arid yet the accounts given of the origin of mankind, by the wisest of the heathen philosophers, are so above measure ridiculous, that they serve as a melancholy proof of the weakness of barely natural reason.

14. The scriptural account is this: God made the body of man out of the earth, and breathed into him the breath of’ life; not only an animal life, but a spiritual principle, created to live for ever. Even his body was then perfect in its kind; neither liable to death nor pain. But what the difference was, between the original and the present body, we cannot determine.

But, to form it even as it is now, no less. than a Divine power was requisite. No less could mix earth, water, air, and fire, in So exact a proportion, and then frame so many different parts, of so various figure texture and magnitude. God alone was able to form the original fibres; to .weave those fibres into hollow tubes; to dispose these tubes, filled with their several humours and variously interwoven with each other, into different organs: and of those organs connected together in a continued series and due situation, to finish so complicated and wonderful a machine as the human body.

15. Nothing was wanting now, but that the immortal spirit should be sent into its habitation, to bear the image of its Creator, and enjoy his glory. But the manner wherein this was done we cannot tell: this knowledge is too wonderful for us.

And it is of no use to indulge mere conjecture, where knowledge is unattainable.

Even the present production of the body by generation is what no man can fully explain. But this we know: the female OVARIES, which hang on each side of the womb, contain abundance of small vesicles, filled with a transparent liqour. Some suppose, that each of these contains, in miniature, all the parts of a human body: that when one of them is penetrated by the male seed, it is rarified and expanded thereby, till it breaks the membranous shell, and by the fallopian tube, falls down into the womb. Here, being slightly fastened to the sides of the womb, it receives nourishment from the mother, till the heart is formed and begins to propel the blood to the extremities of the still increasing body. When i,t is come to its full size, by rolling to and fro, it tears asunder the enclosing membranes, and having burst as it were the prison-bars, emerges into light.

The first thing that appears of a foetus is the PLACENTA, like a little cloud on one side of the outer coat of the egg. About the same time, the spine becomes visible; and a little after, the brain and cerebellum appear like two small bladders. Next the eyes stand prominent in the head: then the punctium saliens, the heart-beating is plainly to be seen; and last of all, the extremities. When formed, the foetus lying in the womb, is almost of an oval figure. For the head hangs down with the chin upon the breast. Its back is round. With its arms it embraces the knees, which are drawn up to the belly, and its heels arc close to the buttocks. Its head is upward, and its face to the mother’s belly. About the ninth month, the head, which till then was lighter, becomes heavier than any other part. In consequence of this, the head falls down in the liquor that contains it; the feet get loose, and the face turns toward the mother’s back. But being now in an uneasy posture, it struggles and brings on the mother’s throes.

Mr. Dodart, nicely observing an embryo, one and twenty days old, found the placenta more than half of the whole; and thence concludes the younger the embryo is, the larger is the placenta in proportion to it: a plain reason, why miscarriages, though the foetus is less, are more dangerous than regular deliveries. For though the embryo in a miscarriage makes a way sufficient for itself, it does not make a way for so large a placenta as is to follow it.

The embryo itself was only seven lines long, from the top of the head to the bottom of the spine, where it terminated. The thighs were not unfolded; they only appeared like two little warts at the bottom of the trunk. The arms made the same appearance on the shoulders. The head was one third of the whole length. On this were two small black points, which would have been eyes. The mouth was very big; a plain indication that it fed thereby. There was no eminence for time nose; but two little, almost imperceptible pits for the nostrils,. Always the younger the embryo, the bigger tire head is, in proportion to the body. The parts nearer the head are likewise bigger, in proportion to the rest.

It weighed less than seven grains, which is an extraordinary lightness, for a body seven lines long. It was so soft, that no part of it could be touched, without making a change in its figure Upon opening it, Mr. Dodart discovered the heart and the right auricle. All the other parts in the thorax and the lower belly, were simple outlines, all vesicular, except a part on the left side, probably the spleen.

Some suppose, that millions of animalcula swim in the seed of male animals, which are so many embryos, .for which a receptacle only is provided in the eggs of the female. But all agree, that either the male seed, or the female egg, contains all the parts of the body; so that generation is no more than the growth or unfolding of the parts there delineated. But how these seeds, whether male or female, are elaborated and prepared, abundantly transcends the highest reach of human understanding.

If time animalcula, of which all animals arc formed, are originally in the male, yet they never can be formed into animals, without the egg of the female. That all animals spring from animalcula, seems probable from the following considerations:

1. That something may be observed in the tread of an egg, even before incubation, like the rudiments of an animal, in form of a tadpole.

2. That after incubation, all the parts of the animal suddenly appear, the stamina, which existed before, being then expanded.

After three days incubation, the punctum saliens of a chick is discovered by the naked eye. On the fifth day, the rudiments of the head and body appear, which were before discernable by glasses. After thirty hours, we see the head, the eyes, the heart, and the carina, with the vertebr distinct. And by glasses we see all those parts, after forty hours, which the naked eye cannot discern till the fifth day. Whence it is probable, that even the first discovery of them by the microscope, is not the discovery of the parts newly formed, but of those that existed before incubation. Though not then dilated enough to be visible.

3. That there is a near analogy between animals and plants. Now we know, the seeds of these are only little plants, folded up in membranes. Hence we may easily infer, that animals proceed from animalcula folded up, till they are gradually enlarged and unfolded.

And that these animalcula are originally in the seed of the male, is probable. For, 1. Numberless animalcula are observed in the seed of animals. 2. ‘We observe the rudiments of a foetus in eggs fecundated by the male, but not in others. 3. The rudiments in the egg, both before and after incubation, exactly resemble the animalcuta in the seed. 4. This gives a rational account of many foetuses at one birth, especially that of the countess of Holland. It accounts also for a whole cluster of eggs in a hen, being fecundated at once. 5. This best suits the analogy between animals and plants. Every herb and tree bears its own seed, and a little plant of the same kind, which being thrown into the womb of the earth, spreads forth its root and receives its nourishment from the earth, but has its form within itself.

Yet, that no animal can be formed without the egg of the female, is evinced by time following considerations:

1. No animaicula can come forward, if it do not fall into a proper nidus. So though a thousand should fall into one egg, none of them would come forward, but that which was in the very centre of the cicatricula, or thread. And perhaps the nidus necessary for their formation is so proportioned to their’ bulk, that it can hardly contain more than one animalcula. This is certainly the case in oviparous kinds. And all the difference between the viviparous and the oviparous is, that in the former, the egg is nothing but the cicatricula with its yolk: so that the fetus must draw its nourishment from the womb. Whereas, in the oviparous, the egg itself is a kind ‘of womb, containing all that is needful for the animal, till it is hatched.

2. It is acknowledged, that the foetus in the womb, is not connected with It, for a considerable time after conception: that it is wholly loose from it, and is only a little round egg, with the embryo in the midst, which sends forth its umbilical vessels by degrees, and at last lays hold on the womb. Hence it is plain, that the cicatricula, which nourishes the animalcula, does riot spring from the womb, but only falls into it, as a fit soil, whence it may draw nourishment for the fetus.

Yet there is a difficulty which presses equally on those, who suppose the animal to spring either from the male or female parent. It is the case of monsters. In a mule, for instance: the body is of the form of a mare: whereas the feet, the tail, and the ears, resemble those of its sire. If the male supplied the animalcula, one would imagine the foetus should always be of time same species with the male. If the female, it should be of her kind: whereas monsters are of both: as if the main part of the animal lay in the egg, and the impregnation only conveyed or changed the extremities.

Yet, that some animals first exist, not in the seed of the male, but wholly in the egg of the female, undeniably appears from the case of frogs and toads. And why may it not be the same thing with other animals The eggs of these are not impregnated by the male, till they issue from the womb. It is while they are ejected, ‘that lie fecundates them. with his seminal liquor. And there is no circumstance, by which the fecundated egg can be known from the unfecundated. It appears therefore, that tadpoles exist before fecundation. For the unfecundated eggs do not differ in the least from those that are fecundated. But these are only tadpoles coiled up. Such, therefore, are the unfecundated tadpoles; they exist before fecundation; only they cannot unfold themselves without time liquid of time male. Frogs then should not be placed among oviparous animals, but among viviparous: if they do not rather constitute a class between both. Thus nature seems to delight in diversifying the modes of animal generation.

This may be the case with regard to one, or perhaps a few species of animals. But, in general, where to place the preexistent animal or embryo, in the animalcula or time egg, is still the question. A division of vital, essential, and original stamina, is impossible. Yet innumerable instances in monsters, mules, and many natural subjects, concur to prove, that the young partakes of the nature and qualities of both the parents, even to their defects and diseases, which are often hereditary. How then can we suppose unalterable stamina Can the visible species of’ any production be determined by them, if every sensible quality may be influenced indiscriminately by either parent.

If they are placed in the animalcula or the egg, how are they transmitted If in the animalcula, why is the process attended with so vast an expense, so great a waste of millions of entities, each containing a series of the most perfect, and most wonderful productions, when one only of those millions is to take place And how are these animals generated If in the common way, not only the process will be boundless, these in their seed will have others, and so on in an endless series; but they cannot then be unalterable, because they are capable of being generated. Further, if they float in the air, or lie hid in food, how is it that the stamina of one species does not sometimes insinuate themselves into a parent of another species Or if they are excluded, by proper strainers, in distant species, they cannot be so in those that are near akin. For if the spermatic animal, which in the matrix of a mare, produces a horse, is yet so fitted to that of an ass, that it can possess a cellude there, exclusive of every other, which shews an exact co-aptitude; certainly time same animal, if contained in food or air, common to both horse and ass, might pass indiscriminately the strainers of either: and so we might have mules without the promiscuous congress of the two species.

In another view, if we consider the extreme tenuity of one of these stamina, in its first origin at the distance of many ages, compared to time smallest fibre of the animal it is said to constitute: can so minute a filament serve as a substratum for a cylinder, comparatively immense Can the terraqueous globe derive its present dimensions, from time dilatation of an atom Such is a muscular fibre in its present state, compared to what it was in its origin. Consequently, what must have been the increase of extraneous matter, either by apposition or incorporation, which is now as much a part of the fibre, as the original stamen And if thus much can be mechanically assimilated, why not the whole formed by mechanical causes or. why must so insignificant a part of it, be supposed to be concreted with the universe

The difficulty still increases immensely, if we look int the vegetation of plants and the wonderful reproduction of the parts of the polypus, lobsters, and many other animals. ,The original stamina, how minute soever, questionless, are diffused through the whole production: since in this system all animal and vegetable growth is made by developement only. But if diffused, then some or all may be lost by successive bisection. And if lost, how can they be reproduced if reproduced, how were they concreted with the universe These and a thousand other difficulties can in no, wise be evaded, but by multiplying supposition on supposition, which renders the hypothesis so complex, as utterly contradicts the ordinary process of nature.

It is more reasonable to say, that so many secretory ducts, so many strainers, so many preparatory vessels in animals, and such a curious disposition in plants, for the continuation of every species, impl.y a digestion, secretion, and preparation of principles, invariably productive of every individual, when they fall into their respective matrixes, and find aliment proper to assimilate. Are not these principles contained in nourishment taken by the parent plant or animal, the same that continually vegetate in it, and increase it till it is adult, then exuberate, while it is by new preparations fitted, invariably to propagate its kind else why this digestion why this secretion why so many strainers, receivers, ducts and valves and why is some food more productive of these principles than others

And if every mixt body is made up by the combination of certain principles, we cannot doubt but God may have established forces in nature, by which such principles may, in certain circumstances, be invariably united, without any danger of deviating so as to render generation equivocal. And if every production in question is a mixt body, we know that how various soever they are, a small number of principles differently combined, will yield. variety enough to produce them all. Thus we reduce nature to what it is ever found to be, simple in the beginning of its course, but afterwards, when it is distributed, magnificent beyond expression.

Modern naturalists all agree, that every plant proceeds from its specific seed; every animal from an egg, or something analogous, pre-existing in its parent. But what do we mean by seeds and eggs these in the common sense of the words, are certain mixt bodies, that immediately furnish those productions. They are said to contain not only the pre-existent germ, but the fit nidus also, and aliment to be assimulated in proper circumstances. They are therefore heterogeneous bodies, that coalesce in a known time. And their principles are so far from being united at the creation, that they sensibly come together from distant places, in all hermaphrodite plants, and from different individuals in all those species, where the male and female are distinct.

But it is vain for us to lay down any certain rule, and to say to nature, “this is thy scheme; from this thou shalt not deviate." If she makes it a law in many species, that every individual requires the co-operation of a male and female parent; she has, at the same time, her hermaphrodites, both in plants and animals. And if in some hermaphrodies, the sexes are so distinct, that she seems not to deviate far from her primitive law; she will, in another instance, that of the pucerons, act either with or without the co-operation of a male. Again: in some species, the female may be so impregnated, that the impregnation shall diffuse itself to five or six generations. Yet again: in many kinds of polypus, generation proceeds without male or female, egg, or seed. And farther still; there are some species of polypus, where a whole family, after branching out by real vegetation, as far as nature designs, jointly concur to furnish one egg, as the source of a future progeny. If at last you resolve to stand by this, that at least every individual proceeds from a parent like itself; even this is overthrown by late experiments. For we have now a cloud of instances, of a class of beings hitherto unknown, wherein animals grow upon, are produced by, and in the strictest sense of the word, brought forth from plants. Then, by a strange vicissitude, they become plants of another kind. These again become animals of another, and thus on, for a series farther than the utmost power of glasses can carry the most inquisitive observer.

And as to the animalcula supposed to be discovered in the male seed, the microscope discovers the same in the seminal liquor of females. Probably neither the one, nor the other are real animals, but only inanimate particles in strong fermentation.