at a diftance, feems to the eye to be round; but our reafon, perhaps, tells us it is fquare; a thing which appears to be but small to the one, appears to be great to the other ;-the former takes the extremities of two lines in a long avenue to meet; whereas the latter apprehends them to be parallel. Though a clap of thunder feems to the ear to fucceed a flash of lightning; yet philofophy acquaints us, that they are inftantaneous. Sugar to a diftempered palate, may feem to be bitter, though our reafon dictates to us, that it is sweet. Some vainly imagine, that those who have seen moft, have the most qualifications to recommend them ;alas! a very little obfervation will confute fuch an idle furmife; for too many great travellers have returned home as weak and ignorant as they were when they first fet out. An horse has as quick fenfes as his rider; and yet neither of them perhaps is the wiser for what they have feen; from whence it follows, that it is not mere fight that improves a man's judgment, but proper obfervation. The quickness of the fenfe is one thing, the faculty that directs it another; as a fpy is one thing, the intelligence he gets another; and, the prudence of him that fent him is diftinct from both. Nay, fenfe and reafon are often contrary. The former dictates to us, that we fhould not put ourselves to pain; the latter, that we should fubmit to the amputation of one member for the preservation of the whole body. If we had feen a Cranmer refolutely thrust his hand into the flames with the utmost intrepidity and ferenity of mind, we should have concluded him at once to be void of fenfe, fo mightily doth reafon controul it appetite is the bent of the former, and the will, the inclination of the latter; and as the understanding often corrects the fenfes, and is repugnant to them, fo the will checks the fenfual appetite, reftrains it from drinking in one diftemper, fleeping in a fecond, and eating in a third. Befides, the more a man gratiVOL. III. fies M fies his appetites, the lefs his will has the afcendant over him; and the more understanding he has, the less he regards the judgment of fenfe. Had a man, like the brutes, a fenfitive part only, could a child be capable of driving whole flocks of fheep, or herds of cattle where he pleafed, though against their inclination -How comes it to pafs, that the birds obferve one general method in the building of their nefts, and tune their notes fo little different from one another? Men, on the other hand, are fometimes governed by laws directly oppofite; and their polities, modes of building, and methods of thinking are widely diftant from each other. Now can any thing treasure up fo many contrarities, but that to which nothing is contrary? He therefore that denies there is in man a power beyond that of sense, must be void of fense and understanding too. Again, fays an objector, "this rational faculty, which is in"deed the man, is corruptible, as well as the fenfes."-Though we are perfuaded that the contrary has been already clearly proved, yet it may not be altogether ufelefs to inquire a little farther into fuch fallacious way of reafoning. "The form or "shape of any thing, fay they, perishes with its matter; now "the foul is the form of the body, and therefore dies with it."— The argument indeed, would be conclufive were the foul a material form; but we have already proved it is immaterial, and can exift without the body; and the more it abftracts itself from matter, the more it retains its proper form, and therefore is not affected by the corruption of the body. Again, "if the foul, fay they, furvives the body, why has no "one ever come back to decide the controverfy?"-A very fubtle interrogatory truly! Shall we deny there is fuch a place as Otaheite, because, perhaps, we have never feen any of the natives of the place ?-May not they, by a parity of reafon, deny that that there is fuch a place as England, because we never went to them; and if there be fo little communication between perfons in this world, can we be reasonably furprised, that there should be none between us and the world of fpirits?-Suppose a man fhould be banished from his native country to a place both unhealthful and unpleasant;-would he have a wish think you, when once recalled, of returning to his late uncomfortable fituation? And can we imagine, that the fpirits of just men made perfect in heaven, their native country, should be willing to descend to these lower regions again, where there is no fuch thing as perfection? Befides, as one who is a prifoner cannot discharge himself, at pleasure, from his confinement, though his inclination for liberty be ever fo ftrong; fo may we not fuppofe, that a departed foul cannot return from the other world, without permiffion from the Almighty? The reftraint of the latter, indeed, is most agreeable to his choice; whereas that of the former is repugnant to his inclination. But is it not unreasonable to expect, that God should gratify our curiofities fo far, as to fend a spirit hither to convince us that there is another world, when the belief of fo important a truth is an advantage to ourselves, and none to him? In a word, is not this altogether as unreasonable, as to defire any one to return into his mother's womb, for no other purpose but to inform the babe, with which she may be pregnant, that there is a world befides the gloomy prifon he inhabits? Again, " you grant, fay they, that we have but one foul, though it has feveral faculties, and why fhould not the rational "foul die, as well as the vegetative and fenfitive ?" But to this I anfwer, we may as well fay, a man ceases to be a fkilful fencer, or musician, becaufe by accident he drops his fword, or his hand becomes lame. Thus, when the fenfes are incapable of exercis ing their feveral functions, the foul is the fame, which, though M 2 it it fometimes does, yet it does not always make use of corporeal inftruments. In fenfation, it makes ufe of the body, as a mufician does of a lute, whofe skill remains when the inftrument is broken to pieces; and though he cannot make that speak, fupply him but with another, and he will play as harmoniously as before. A man in years would fee, as well as when he was a youth, were his optic nerves but as ftrong and vigorous; and grow as well, had he but as good a digestion, and was the kindly heat of his body no ways abated. The foul, however, can ac without the leaft dependance on the body; and the more intent and contemplative it is, the less does it regard the objects of sense that are round about it; the lefs the reflects on earthly and cor ruptible objects, the more fprightly and active fhe is. We under stand and will divers things about which our fenfes are no ways employed; the foul performs thefe operations without the least aid or affistance from the body; the foul therefore may exist, and act regularly, and be perfectly happy, without being united to the body. It may be objected again, "that idiots and melancholy per"fons are frequently deprived of their reafon; from whence it "is evident that reafon may be corrupted, and if corrupted, it "may die; for what is death but an utter corruption ?—The foul therefore is fubject to death." But many who have laboured under thefe unhappy circumftances, have frequently recovered by taking proper medicines, and confining themselves to fome particular diet; which fhews, beyond all contradiction, that they were not actually deprived of their fenfes, but that they were confufed, because the bodily organs through which they looked, as through a glafs or a cloud, were dim, and their imaginations dark. Thus, though the fun may fometimes feem to be a dark body, yet, if it be dim, or in an eclipfe, the reafon is, either because fome vapours obftruct our fight of it, or the moon interferes between that that and the earth. It is, in reality, as much a lucid body as of |