Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

fome fort, to this day. It is that, though the foul of a man is immortal, that of a brute is not; and yet it is evident that brutes have the rudiments of all our faculties, without exception; fo that they differ from us in degree only, and not in kind. But the confequence of fuppofing the foul of a man and that of a brute to be of the fame nature, was abfolutely inadmiffible; for they must then, it was thought, have been provided for in a future ftate as well as our own.

It has been seen that the Platonists thought there was fomething corporeal even in the human foul. It is no wonder then that the fouls of brutes fhould have been thought to be wholly so, and therefore mortal, which was the opinion, I believe, of all the chriftian world till very lately. Even the great Lord Bacon entertained this opinion. Anima fenfibilis, fays he, five brutorum, plane fubftantia corpore acenfenda eft. Gale, p. 326. The celebrated anatomift Willis alfo profeffed the fame. ib.

The opinion of Defcartes was much more extraordinary, for he made the fouls of brutes to be mere automata, and his disciples in general denied that they had any perception. Malebranche fays that they eat without pleasure, and cry without pain, that they fear nothing, know nothing; and if they act in fuch a manner as fhews understanding, it is because God, having made them to preferve them, has formed

their bodies fo as mechanically to avoid whatever might hurt them.

The learned Dr. Gale maintains at large that the fenfitive foul is corporeal, Philofophia Generalis, p. 323, and the very juftly celebrated Dr. Cudworth has revived, for the fake of helping this great difficulty, the long-exploded notion of the foul of the world, from which the fouls of brutes iffue, and to which he fuppofes they return, without retaining their feparate consciousness after death. “They 66 may, if they if they please," fays he, p. 45, "suppose the souls of brutes, being but fo

66

many particular irradiations, or effluxes, "from that life above, whenfoever and where"foever there is any fitly prepared matter ca"pable to receive them, and to be actuated

by them, to have a fenfe and perception of "themselves in it, fo long as it continues fuch. But fo foon as ever thofe organized bodies of theirs, by reafon of their indifpofition, become incapable of being farther acted upon by them, then to be refumed again, "and retracted back to their original head and

[ocr errors]

fountain. Since it cannot be doubted but "what creates any thing out of nothing, or "fends it forth from itself, by free and vo"luntary emanation, may be able either to "retract the fame back again to its original "fource, or else to annihilate it at pleasure.” P. 45.

This writer, however, fuggefts another method of folving this difficulty, much more li

beral

[ocr errors]

beral and rational; fuppofing the immortality of the foul not to follow neceffarily from its immateriality, but from the appointment of God. But he injures the brutes very much when, to account for the difference in the di-' vine difpenfations to them and us, he fupposes them to be deftitute of morality and liberty, p. 45.

I am moft furprised to find Mr. Locke among those who maintain, that, though the fouls of men are, in part, at leaft, immaterial, those of brutes, which resemble men so much, are wholly material. It is evident, however, from the manner in which he expreffes himself on the fubject, not only that this was his own opinion, but that it was the general opinion of his time. He fays (Efay, vol. i. p. 148) "Though to me fenfation be comprehended "under thinking in general, yet I have spoke "of fenfe in brutes as diftinct from thinking; "—and to fay that flies and mites have im"mortal fouls will probably be looked on as "going a great way to ferve an hypothesis. "Many, however, have been compelled by "the analogy between men and brutes to go "thus far. I do not fee how they can stop "fhort of it."

It would be endless to recite all the hypothefes that have been framed to explain the difference between brutes and men, with refpect to their intellects here, and their fate

hereafter,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

hereafter. I fhall, however, mention that of Mr. Locke, who fays, "This, I think, I may "be pofitive in, that the power of abstraction "is not at all in them, and that the having " of general ideas is that which puts a perfect "diftinction between men and brutes. For "it is evident we obferve no footsteps in "them of making ufe of general figns for "univerfal ideas, from which we have rea"fon to imagine that they have not the fa "culty of abftracting, or making general "ideas, fince they have no use of words, or any general figns." Efay, vol. i. P. 126. In fact, however, as brutes have the fame external fenfes that we have, they have, of course, all the fame inlets to ideas that we have; and though, on account of their wanting a fufficient quantity of brain, perhaps, chiefly, the combination and affociation of their ideas cannot be fo complex as ours, and therefore they cannot make fo great a progress in intellectual improvements, they muft neceffarily have, in kind, every faculty that we are poffeffed of. Alfo fince they evidently have memory, paffions, will, and judgment too, as their actions demonftrate, they muft, of course, have the faculty that we call abftraction as well as the reft; though, not having the use of words, they cannot communicate their ideas to us." They muft, at leaft, have a natural capacity for what is called abftraction, it being nothing more than a particular cafe of the association of

ideas,

ideas, of which, in general, they are certainly poffeffed as well as ourselves.

Befides, if dogs had no general or abstract ideas, but only fuch as were appropriated to particular individual objects, they could never be taught to distinguish a man, as fuch, a bare, as fuch, or a partridge, as fuch, &c. But their actions fhew that they may be trained to catch hares, fet partridges, or birds in general, and even attack men, as well as to diftinguish their own mafter, and the fervants of the family in which they live.

Whether brutes will furvive the grave we cannot tell. This depends upon other confiderations than their being capable of reafon and reflection. If the refurrection be properly miraculous, and entirely out of all the eftablished laws of nature, it will appear probable that brutes have no fhare in it; fince we know of no declaration that God has made to that purpose, and they can have no expectation of any fuch thing. But if the refurrection be, in fact, within the proper courfe of nature, extensively confidered, and confequently there be fomething remaining of every organized body that death does not destroy, there will be reafon to conclude that they will be benefited by it as well as ourselves. And the great mifery to which fome of them are expofed in this life, may incline us to think, that a merciful and juft God will make them fome recompence for it hereafter. He is their

4

maker

« FöregåendeFortsätt »