David Hume - Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779)

:CO
too
CO
<
DIALOGUES
CONCERNING
NATURAL RELIGION.
Entered
in Stationers- Hall^
according
of Parliament,
to
DIALOGUES
CONCERNING
NATURAL RELIGION;
B
D A V ID
HUME,
ESQ.
THE SECOND EDITION.
&ONBON:
M.DCC.LXXIX.
r,
r\
MAY 2
*,,..,
65
8 "1965
..,.,
DIALOGUES
CONCERNING
NATURAL RELIGION,
PAMPHILUS
IT
to
HERMJPPUS.
has been remarked, my HERMIPpus, that though the ancient phi-
lofophers conveyed moft of their

inftruction in the form of dialogue, this
method of compofition has been
little
practifed
A L O d IT E S
O Is C E R N I K G
r
practifed in later ages, and has feldonl

fucceeded in the hands of thofe who
Accurate and regu

lar argument, indeed, fuch as is now
expected of philofophical inquirers, na
have attempted
it.
methodi
turally throws a man into the
cal and didactic manner ; where he can
immediately, without preparation, ex
plain the point at which he aims; and
thence proceed, without interruption,
tti
is
SYSTEM
in
deduce the proofs on which
cftablifhed.
To
deliver a
converfation, fcarcely appears natural ;

and whik the dialogue-writer delires,
by departing from the
direct:
flyle of
compoiition, to give a freer air to his

performance, and avoid the appearance
of Author and Reader^ he is apt to run

into a worfe inconvenience, and convey
the image of Pedagogue and Pupil. Or
if he carries on the difpute in the natu
of good company, by throw
ing in a variety of topics, and preferving a proper balance among the fpeakral fpirit
ers;
NA TURAL RELIGION.
ers
he often
lofes
fo
much
time in
preparations and tranfitions, that the

reader will fcarcely think himfelf comt>enfated,
by
all
the graces of dialogue,
for the order, brevity, and preeifion$

which are facrificed to them.
THERE
are fbine fubjects, however,
which dialogue-writing is peculiarly

adapted, and where it is ftill preferable
to the direct and fimple method of corn-
to
pofition.
ANY
point of doctrine, which is fo

obvious that it fcarcely admits of difpute, but at the fame time fo important
that it cannot be too often inculcated,
feems to require fome fuch method of

handling it; where the novelty of the
manner may compenfate
the tritenefs of
the iubjecl:; where the vivacity of converfation may enforce the precept; arid
where the variety of
by
lights, prefented
various perfonages and characters,
mav
DIALOGUES CONCERNING
nor redun
appear neither tedious
may
dant.
ANY
the
queftion of philofophy, on
other hand, which is fo obfcure and un
certain^ that
human reafon
can reach no
with regard to it
if it ftiould be treated at all, feems to lead
fixed determination
us naturally into the ftyle of dialogue

and converfation. Reafonable men may
be allowed to
differ,
where no one can
reafonably be pofitive
Oppofite fentiments, even without any decifion, af

ford an agreeable amufement: and if
:
the fubje6t be curious and inter efting^

the book carries us, in a manner, in
to
company
and unites the two great-
and pureft pleafures* of human

ftudy and fociety.
eft
HAPPILY,
to
life,
thefe circumftances are
be found in the fubje6l of
all
NATU
RAL RELIGION. What truth
fo
ob
vious, fo certain, as the BEING of
God,
NATURAL RELIGION,
God, which
the moft ignorant ages have

acknowledged, for which the mod re
fined genuifes have ambitioudy driven
produce new proofs and arguments ?

What truth fo important as this, which
to
is
the
ground of all our hopes, the fured
foundation of morality, the firmed flipport of fociety, and the only principle
which ought never to be a moment abieiit from our thoughts and medita
tions? But in treating of this obvious
and important truth
what obfcure
;
quedions occur, concerning the NA

TURE of that divine Being; his attri
butes, his decrees, his plan of provi
dence? Thefe have been always fubjected to the clifputations of men Con
:
cerning thefe, human reafon has not

reached any certain determination: But
thefe are topics fo intereding, that
we
cannot redrain our redlefs inquiry with

regard to them though nothing but
;
4oubt, uncertainty, and contradiction,

A 3
have
have
as yet
been the
refult of
our moft
accurate refearches,
THIS
while
had
lately occafion to obferve,
paffed 5 as ufual, part of the
mer-feafon with
CLEANTHES,
fum~
and
was prefent at thofe converfations of

his with PHILO and DEMEA, of which
I gave you lately fome imperfecl ac
count.
me, was
Your
curioiity,
fo excited, that
you then told

I muft of ne-
more exadl detail of

their reafonings, and difplay thofe va
rious fy Herns which they advanced with
ceffity enter into a
regard to fo delicate a fubjecl: as that of

Natural Religion. The remarkable con
trail in their characters
ftill
farther rai-
fed your expectations ; while you oppofed the accurate philofophical turn of
CLEANTHES
to the carelefs fcepticifm
of PHILO, or compared either of their

difpofitions with the rigid inflexible or
thodoxy of DEMEA. My youth ren*me a mere auditor of their difputes
NATURAL RELIGION.
and that
curiofity natural to the

early fcaibn of lite, has fo deeply im
printed in
memory the whole chain
pates
my
and connection of
that,
hope,
I fliall
their arguments,
not omit or con
found any confiderable part of them in

the
fjscitaL
PART
PART
I.
FTER I joined thecompany, whom

found
library,
CLEANTHES S
CLEANTHES fome
fitting in
DEMEA
paid
compliments, on the great care which

he took of my education, and on his
unwearied perfeverance and conftancy
in
all
his friendfhips.
The
father of
PAMPHILUS, faid he, was your intimate

The foil is your pupil; and may
friend:
indeed be regarded
were we
to
as
your adopted fon,
judge by the pains which
you beftow in conveying to him every

ufeful branch of literature and fcience.
You are no more wanting, I am perfuadecl, in
I fliall,
prudence than in induilry,
therefore,
communicate
to
you
a
PART
14
i>ART
o-vx>
maxim which I have obfcrved with

regard to my own children, that I may
learn how far it agrees with your
prac
tice.
The method I follow in their ea
ducatiou
is
founded on the faying of an
That jludcnts of philofophy

ought frft to karn Logics, then Ethics,
"
ancient,
"
"
next Phvfics, Lift of all the Nature

of
the Cods
This fcience of Natural
*."
Theology, according to him, being the

moft profound and abftrufe of any, re
quired the matured judgment in its ftudents ; and none but a mind, enriched
with
the other faiences, can

fafely be
entruiled with it.
all
ARE you
fo late, fays PiiiLO,in teach*
ing your children the principles of re

ligion? Is there no danger of their neglefting, or reje&ing altogether, thofe
which they have heard fo

during the whole courfe of their
opinions, of
little
education
It is
only
as a fcience, re
plied
*
Chryfippus apud pint, de repug. Stoicorum,
NATURAL RELIGION.
DEMEA, fubjeaed
plied
to
human
15
rea-
that
poflpone
ibning and difputation,
the ftudy of Natural Theology. To feaI
Ibn their minds with early piety, is my

and by continual precept
chief care
;
and
hope too by ex
on their tender
ample, I imprint deeply
mine s an habitual reverence for all the
of religion. While they pafs
and
instruction,
principles
through every other
fcience,
I ftill
re
the uncertainty of each part the

eternal deputations of men; the obfcu-
mark
philofophy; and the ftrange,

ridiculous conclufions, which fome of
rity
of
all
the greateft: geniufes have derived from

the principles of mere human reafon.
Having thus tamed their mind to a pro

I
per fubmirTion and felf-diffidence,
have no longer any fcruple of opening
to them the greateft mylleries of reli
nor apprehend any danger from
that afTuming arrogance of philofophy,
gion
which may lead them to reject the mod

eitabiifhed doctrines and opinions.
YOUR
16
FART
YOUR
precaution, fays PHILO, of feafoning your childrens minds early with

piety, is certainly very reafonable ; and
no more than is requifite in this pro

But what I
fane and irreligious age.
chiefly
tion,
is
admire in your plan of educa

your method of drawing advan
from the very principles of philoibphy and learning, which, by infpirivig pride and felf-fufficiency, have
commonly, in all ages, been found fo
tage
deftruclive to the principles of religion,
The
who
vulgar, indeed, we may remark,

are unacquainted with fcience and
profound inquiry, obferving the endIcfs dilputes of the learned, have com
a thorough, contempt for Philolofophv; ami rivet themfelves the fatter,
monly
means, in the great points of

theology which have been taught them,
by
ii
iat
Thefe who enter a
little
into ftudy
and
inquiry, finding many appearances of

evidence in do6lrin.es the newefl and
moil extraordinary, think nothing too

difficult
NATURAL RELIGION.
difficult for
17
reafon; and, prefumptuoufly breaking thro all fences,

profane the inmoil fanctuaries of the
But CLEANTHES
temple.
PART
human
will,
hope,
agree with me, that, after we have abandoned ignorance, the furefl remedy,
there
one expedient left to pre

profane liberty. Let DEMEA S
is ilill
vent this
principles be
improved and cultivated
become thoroughly
Let us
the weaknefs,
of
and narrow
human
of
limits,
conilder
blindnefs,
fenfible
its
reafon: Let us duly

uncertainty and endlefs
even in fubjects of com

and practice: Let the errors
contrarieties,
mon
and
life
deceits of
our very fenfes be
fet
before us
the infuperable difficulties

;
which attend firil principles in all fy*
items
the contradictions
which ad
here to the very ideas of matter, caufe
and
tion
kinds,
mo
extenfion, fpace, time,

and, in a word, quantity of all
effect,
the object of the only fcience
that can fairly pretend to
any certainty
or
i8
When
PART or evidence.
thefe topics are dilplayed in their full light, as they are by

and almoil all di
tome
philofophers
vines ;
who
can retain fuch confidence
in this frail faculty of reafon as to pay

any regard to its determinations in
points fo fublime, fo abftrufe, fo re
mote from common
life
and experience ?
When
the coherence of the parts of a

ftone, or even that compofition of parts
which renders it extended; when thefe
familiar objedlsj
fay, are fo inexpli
and contain circumftances fo

with
repugnant and contradictory
cable,
what afiurance
can we
decide concern-
cerning the origin of worlds, or trace

their hiftory
from
eternity to eternity?
WHILE PHILO
pronounced
thefe
words, I could obferve a fmile in the

countenance both of DEMEA and CLE-
ANTHES.
That of
DEMEA
feemed
to
imply an unreferved fatisfaclion in the

do&rines delivered: But, in CLEAN-
NATURAL RELIGION.
THES
air
of
19
features, I could diflinguim an PART

finefTe ; as if he
perceived fome
raillery or artificial malice in the rea-
fonings of PHILO.
You
propofe then, PHILO, faid CLE-
ered religious faith on

philofophical fcepticifm; and you thinly
ANTHES,
to
that if certainty or evidence be

expelled
from every other fubjecl of

inquiry,
will all retire to thefe
it
theological doc
and there acquire a

fuperior force
and authority. Whether
your fcepti
cifm be as abfolute and fincere as
you
trines,
pretend, we {hall learn

the company breaks
by and by, when
up:
We
{hall
then
whether you go out at the door or

the window; and whether
you
lee,
really
doubt, if your body has gravity, or can

be injured
by its fall; according to po
pular opinion, derived from our falla
cious fenfes, and
rience.
may,
And this
more
fallacious expe
confideration,
DEMEA,
think, fairly ferve to abate our

ill-
20
iu
wiu
to this
humorous
feel
of the
they be thoroughly in
earned, they will not long trouble the
If
fceptics.
world with
their doubts, cavils,
and
difputes: If they be only in jeft, they

are, perhaps,
bad
raillers
but can ne
ver be very dangerous, either to the

(late, to philofophy, or to religion.
IN
PHILO, continued he,
reality,
it
feems certain, that though a man, in a

fluili of humour, after intenfe reflection
on the many contradictions and imper

fections of
renounce
human
all
reafon,
belief
may
entirely
and opinion;
it
is
impoflible for him to perfevere in this

total fcepticifm, or make it appear in
his conduct for a
objedts prefs in
few hours.
upon him:
External
Paflions fo-
licithim: His philofophical melancholy

ven the utmoft vio
diffipates ; and
lence
upon
his
own
tetnper will not be

time, to preferve the
during any
poor appearance of fcepticifm.
able,
And for
what
NATURAL RELIGION.
11
what reafon impofe on himfelf fucli

violence? This is a point in which
will be impoiTible for
him ever
a
it
to fatis-
fy himfelf, confiflently with his fceptiSo that upon the whole
cal principles
nothing could be more ridiculous than

the principles of the ancient PYRRHO-
NIANS
if in reality
they endeavoured,
as is pretended, to extend,
the fame
fcepticifm,
throughout,
which they had
learned from the declamations of their

fchools,
and which they ought
to
have
confined to them.
IN
view, there appears a great

refemblance between the feels of the
this
STOICS and PYRRHONIANS, though per

petual aiitagoniils and both of them
ieem founded on this erroneous maxim,
That what a man can perform fome:
and in fome difpofitions, he can

perform always, and in every difpofition.
times,
When
is
the mind,
by
Stoical reflections,
elevated into a fublime enthufiafm of
virtue,
22
PART
and ftrongly fmit with
cits of honour or public good, the utmoft bodily pain and fufFerings will
virtue,
not prevail over fuch a high fenfe of
duty; and it is poffible, perhaps, by

in
its means, even to fmile and exult
If this foinethe midil of tortures.
times may be the cafe in fadl and rea
lity,
much more may
in his fchool,
a philofopher,
or even in his clofet,
work himfelf up
to fuch
an enthufiafm,
and fupport in imagination the acuteft

pain or moft calamitous event which he
can poflibly conceive. But how fhall he
fupport this enthufiafm itfelf ? The bent
of his mind relaxes, and cannot be re
him
him un
called at pleafure: Avocations lead
aftray:
Misfortunes
awares:
And
attack
the philojbpher links

degrees into the plebeian.
I
by
ALLOW of your comparifon between
the STOICS and SCEPTICS, replied PHILO.

But you may obferve, at the fame
time,
NATURAL RELIGION.
23
PART
time, that though the mind cannot, in
Stoicifm, fupport the higheft flights of
philofophy
er, it
even when
yet,
dill retains
it
fomewhat of
and the
effects
its
low
former
of the Stoic
difpofition ;
reafoning will appear in his
common
finks
conduct in
life, arid
through the whole
tenor of his actions.
The ancient fchools,
particularly that of ZENO, produced ex

amples of virtue and conflancy which
feem aftoniihing
to prefent times ,
Vain Wifdom all and falfe Pbilfophy.

Yet with a pleafing forcery could charm
Pain, for a while, or anguiih ; and excite
Fallacious Hope, or arm the obdurate breaft
With
In
like
ftubborn Patience, as with triple
manner,
ed himfelf
if a
man has
fteel.
accuflom-
to fceptical considerations
the uncertainty
and narrow
limits
on
of
reafon, he will not entirely forget them

when he turns his reflection on other
fubjects
principles
in his
but in
all
his philofophical
and reafoning,
dare not fay
common conduct, he will be found
different
24
PART different
from
thofe,
who
either never
formed any opinions in the cafe, or

have entertained fentiments more fa
vourable to
human
reafon.
To
whatever length any one may

pufh his fpeculative principles of fcepticifm, he muft ait, I own, and live,
and converfe,
conduit
like other
men
and for
not obliged to give

any other reafon, than the abfolute neIf he
ceffity he lies under of fo doing.
this
lie is
ever carries his fpeculations farther than

this iieceffity conftrains him, and philofophifes either on natural or moral
fubjeits,
fur e
and
he
is
allured
fatisfaition
employing himfelf
by a certain pleawhich he finds in
after that
manner.
He confiders befides, that every one, even

in common life, is conftrained to have
more or lefs of this philofophy that
from our earlieft infancy we make con
tinual advances in forming more gene
ral principles of conduit and reafon;
ing;
NATURAL RELIGION.
ing; that the larger experience
quire, and the ftronger reafon
we
we
25
ac- PART
are
endued with, we always render our

principles the more general and comprehenfive; and that what we call phinothing but a more regular
and methodical operation of the fame
lofophy
is
kind.
To
on fuch fubjects
different from realife
and we may
philofophiie
is
nothing eflentially
foning on common
only expect greater (lability, if not great

er truth, from our philofophy, on ac
its exacter and more
fcrupumethod of proceeding.
count of
lous
BUT when we
look beyond human

and the properties of the furrounding bodies When we carry our
fpeculations into the two eternities, be
fore and after the prefent ftateof things
into the creation and formation of the
univerfe
the exifhence and properties
of fpirits the powers and operations of
affairs
one univerfal
Spirit,
exifting without
beginning
$6
PART
beginning and without end; omnipo*

tent, omnifcient, immutable, infinite,
We muft be
and incomprehenfible
:
far
removed from the
fmalleft tendency
fcepticifm not to be apprehenfive,

that we have here got quite beyond the
to
reach of our faculties.
So long
as
we
confine our fpeculations to trade, or

morals, or politics, or criticifm, we
make
moment, to com*mon fenfe and experience, which ftrengappeals^ every
then our philofophical conclusions, and
remove (at lead, in part) the fufpicion

which we fo juftly entertain with regard
to every reafoning that is very fubtile
and refined. But, in theological rea-
we have
not this advantage ;

while at the fame time we are employ
fonings,
ed upon objects, which, we muft be

fenfible, are too large for our grafp,
and, of
all
others, require
moft
to
be
We
familiarifed to our apprehenfion.

are like foreigners in a ftrange country,
to
whom
every thing muft feem fufpicious.
NATURAL RELIGION.
cious,
27
and who are in danger every
moment of tranfgrelTmg againft the laws

and cuftoms of the people with whom
they live and converfe. We know not
how far we ought to trail our vulgar

methods of reafoning in fuch a fubjedt
fince, even in common life, and in that
;
province
which
priated to
them, we cannot account
is
peculiarly appro*for
them, and
are entirely guided by a kind

of inftincS or neceffity in employing
them.
ALL
fceptics pretend, that, if reafon
be confidered in an abftracl view, it

furnimes invincible arguments againft
itfelf ;
and that we could never
retain
any conviction or alTurance, on any

fubjecl:, were not the fceptical reafonings fb refined and fubtile, that they
are not able to counterpoife the more
folid and more natural arguments de-
riêd from the fenfes and experience.
But
it is
evident,
whenever our argu-
B 4
inents
PART
28
PART
me nts
this
lofe
wide of
and ruii
that the moft re
advantage,
common
life,
fined fcepti.dfm comes to be upon a

footing with them, and is able to op-
and counterbalance them. The

one has no more weight than the other*
The mind mufl remain in fufpenfe be
pofe
tween them; and

fpenfe or balance,
it
is
which
that very fu
is
the triumph
of fc^pticifm.
/
BUT
obferve,
CLEANTHES,
fays
with regard to you, PIIILO, and
all
fpe-
culative fceptics, that your do<5lrine and

practice are as much at variance in the
moft abftrufe points of theory as in the

conduct of common life. Where-ever
evidence difcovers
to
it,
itfelf,
you adhere
notwithflancling your pretended
fcepticifm ;
of your
and I can obferve,
feft to
who make
be
too,
fome
as decilive as thofe
greater profeffions of cer

affurance. In reality, would
tainty and
not a man be ridiculous,
who
pretended
to
NATURAL RELIGION.
NEWTON
29
explication of the
wonderful phenomenon of the rainbow,
to reject
becaufe that explication gives a minute

anatomy of the rays of light ; a fubjecl,
forfooth, too refined for human com-
And what would you fay

?
who
to one,
having no thing particular to
prehenfion
object to the arguments of COPERNICUS

and GALILTEO for the motion of the
earth,
mould with-hold
his aflent,
on
that general principle, That thefe fub*

and remote
jecls were too magnificent
to
be explained by the narrow and
lacious reafon of
THERE
is
mankind
fal
indeed a kind of brutifh
and ignorant fcepticifm, as you well

obferved, which gives the vulgar a ge
neral prejudice againfl what they do
not eafily underfland, and makes them
reject
every principle which requires
elaborate reafoiiing to prove
blim
fatal
and
efla-
This fpecies of fcepticifm is

to knowledge, not to religion;
it.
fince
30
fince
we
that thofe
find,
who make
greateft profeffion of it, give often their

affent, not only to the great truths of
Theifm and natural theology, but even

to the moft abfurd tenets which a tra
fuperftition has
ditional
ed to them.
recommend
firmly believe in
witches ; though they will not believe
nor attend to the moft fimple propofition of
They
EUCLID.
But the refined and
philofophical fceptics
fiftence
fall
into an incon-
of an oppofite nature.
They
pufh their refearches into the moft abftrufe corners of fcience;

and their
affent attends
them
in every ftep, pro
portioned to the evidence which they

meet with. They are even obliged to
acknowledge, that the moftabftrufe and

remote objects are thofe which are beft
by philofophy. Light is in
anatomized: The true fyftem
explained
reality
of the heavenly bodies
is
difcovered and
But the nourimment of

by food is ftill an inexplicable
afcertained.
bodies
myftery
NATURAL RELIGION.
cohefion of the parts of PART
my fiery The
:
matter
is flill
incomprehensible.
therefore,
fceptics,
31
Thefe
are obliged, in e-
very queflion, to confider each parti

cular evidence
apart,
and proportion
their afTent to the precife degree of evi
dence which occurs.

tice in all natural,
and
political
the fame,
I
?
religious
This
is
their prac
mathematical, moral,
And why not
fcience.
afk, in the theological
Why mud
conclusions
and
of
nature be alone rejected on the

general prefumption of the infufficiency
this
of
human
reafon, without
any
parti
cular difcuffion of the evidence? Is not
fuch an unequal conduct a plain proof

of prejudice and pailion ?
OUR
fenfes,
you
fay, are fallacious;
our underflanding erroneous our ideas

even of the moft familiar objects, extenfion, duration, motion, full of ab;
furdities
me
and contradictions. You defy
to folve the difficulties, or reconcile
the
PART fa^
repugnancies, which you difcover
I have not capacity for fo
in them.
great an undertaking I have not leifure

for it: I perceive it to be fuperfluous.
Your own condudl, in every circum:
and
your principles
ihows the firmefl reliance on all the re
fiance,
ceived
refutes
maxims of fcience, morals, pru-
dence, and behaviour.

I
SHALL never
afTent to fo harfh
au
opinion as that of a celebrated writer *,

who fays, that the fceptics are not a fetft
of philofophers They are only a fed;

of liars. I may, however, affirm, (I hope,
:
without offence) that they are a

jefters
or
whenever
railers.
I
find
But for
my
my
I fhall
entertainment of a
of
part,
myfelf difpofed
mirth and amufement,

chufe
fe6l
to
certainly
lefs
per
plexing and abflrufe nature.

comedy,
a novel, or at moft a hiftory, feems a
more
*
L art
de penfer.
NATURAL RELIGION.
more natural
33
recreation than fuch
taphyficai fubtilties
and
me- P *
abftraclions.
IN vain would the fceptic make a diftintlion between fcience and common
and ano
life, or between one fcience
The arguments employed
ther.
if juft, are
all,
of a fimilar nature, and con
fame force and evidence.
tain the
if there
in
Or
be any difference among them,
the advantage
lies
entirely
on the
fide
of theology and natural religion. Many

principles of mechanics are founded on
yet no man
very abftrufe reafoning
who has any preventions to fcience, even
;
no
fpeculative fceptic, pretends to en
doubt with regard to

The COPERNICAN fyftem con
tertain the leaft
them.
moft furprifing paradox, and

the moft contrary to our natural con
tains the
ceptions, to appearances,
fenfes: yet even monks
are
now
and to our very

and inquifitors
conftrained to withdraw their
oppofition to
it.
And
{hall
PHILO, a
man
R1E
34
I>ART
man
of fo liberal a genius, and exten-*
knowledge, entertain any general

undiflinguifhed fcruples with regard to
five
the religious hypothefis, which is found

ed on the firnpleil and moft obvious ar-^
guments % and, unlefs
it
meets with
has fuch eafy accefs and admiffion into the mind of

artificial
obftacles,
man?
AND
here
we may
obferve,
con
tinued he, turning himfelf towards

DEMEA, a pretty curious circumftance
in the hiftory of the fciences. After the
union of philofophy with the popular
religion, upon the firft eflablifhment of
Chriflianity, nothing
among
all
was more ufual,
religious teachers, than de
clamations againfl reafon, againft the

fenfes, againft every principle derived
merely from
human
refearch and in
quiry. All the topics of the ancient Academics were adopted by the Fathers;
and thence propagated for
feveral ages
in
NATURAL RELIGION.
35
In every fchool and pulpit throughout
Chriftendom. The Reformers embraced ^~r

the fame principles of reafoning, or ra
ther declamation; and all panegyrics
on the excellency of
faith
were fure to
be interlarded with fbme fevere flrokes

of
fa tire agaiiift natural reafon.
ce
lebrated prelate too*, of the Romim

communion, a man of the moil extenfive learning,
who
wrote a demonflra-
tion of Chriftianity, has alfb
compofed
which contains all the cavils
of the boldeil and moil determined
a treatife,
PYRRHONISM.
been the
firfl
LOCKE feems to have

Chriftian, who ventured
openly to afTert, that^zzY^ was nothing

but a fpecies of reafon; that religion was
only a branch of philofophy; and that
a chain of arguments, iimilar to that
which
eftablifhed
any truth in morals,
T
politics, or phyiics, w as always employ
ed in difcovering all the principles of
theology, natural and revealed.
The
ill
ufe
* Monf. HUET.
36
PART
u fe w hl c h BAYLE and other libertines

made of the philofophical fcepticifm of
the fathers and
firft
reformers,
far
flill
ther propagated the judicious fendment

of Mr LOCKE: And it is now, in a man
pretenders to rcafoning and philofophy, that Atheift and

And
Sceptic are almoft fynonymous.
ner, avowed,
as
by
all
certain, that
it is
no man
is
in earnell
when he
I
profeffes the latter principle ;

fain hope, that there are as few
would
who
ferioufly
maintain the former.
DON
T you remember, faid PHIJLO,

the excellent faying of Lord BACON on
this head ? That a little philofophy, re
man an
plied CLEANTHES, makes a
religion.
great deal converts him to

That is a very judicious re
mark
faidPniLO. But what
Atheift:
in
too,
my
eye
is
have
another paffage, where,
having mentioned DAVID

faid in his heart there
is
fool,
no God,
who
this
great philofopher obferves, that the
A-
theifts
NATURAL RELIGION.
theifls
37
now-a-days have a double
fliare
for they are not contented to

folly
but
lay in their hearts there is no God,
of
they alfo utter that impiety with their

and are thereby guilty of multi
lips
;
plied
Such
and
indifcretioii
imprudence.
people, though they were ever
fo
much
in earned, cannot, methinks, be

formidable.
very
BUT though you mould

this clafs of fools,
rank
me
cannot forbear
municating a remark that occurs
from the hiftory of the
in
com
to
religious
me
and
with which you

It appears to me,
that there are flrong fymptoms of prieilcraft in the whole progrefs of this af
irreligious fcepticifm
.
have entertained us.
During ignorant ages, fuch as

thofe which followed the difTolution of
fair.
the ancient fchools, the priefts percei

ved, that Atheifm, Deifm, or herefy of
any kind, could only proceed from the

prefumptuous queflioning of received
opinions,
38
PART O n i
pi onS5 an d from a belief that human
reafon was equal to every thing. Edu
had then a mighty influence

over the minds of men, and was almoil
cation
equal in force to thofe ftiggeftions of

the fenfes and common underftanding,
by which the moil determined fcepdc

mull allow himfelf to be governed. But
at prefent,
cation
when
the influence of edu
much
diminiihed, and men,

from a more open commerce of the
is
world, have learned to compare the po-r

pular principles of different nations and
ages, our fagacious divines
have chan
whole
of
ged
fyftem
philofophy^
and talk the language of STOICS, PLATONISTS, and PERIPATETICS, not that
of PYRRHONIANS and ACADEMICS. If
their
we
diftruft
no other
human
reafon,
we have now
principle to lead us into reli
Thus, fceptics in one age, doggion.

matifhs in another ; whichever
fyftem
beft fuits the purpofe of thefe reverend
gentlemen, in giving them an afcendant

over
NATURAL RELIGION.
39
rer mankind, tHey are fure to make it PART

their favourite principle, and eftablilhed \^^j
tenet.
IT
for
is
very natural, faid
men to embrace thofe
which they
CLEANTHES,
principles, by
find they can befl defend
their doctrines
nor need
we have any
recourfe to prieftcraft to account for fo

And furely,
reafonable an expedient.
nothing can afford a ftronger prefumption, that any fet of principles are true,
be embraced, than to obferve that they tend to the confirma
tion of true religion, and ferve to con
and ought
found the
to
of Atheifts, Libertines,
and Freethinkers of all denominations.
cavils
PART
PART
T.
MUST
II.
CLEANTHES,
own,
faid PAR*
nothing can more

than
the light in which
furprife me,
yon have all along put this argument*
DEMEA,
that
By the whole tenor of your difcourfe,,

one would imagine that you were main
taining the Being of a God, againft the
cavils
of Atheifts and Infidels
neceflitated to
become
and were
champion for
that fundamental principle of all religion.
But
this, I
hope,
is
not,
by any means,
No man no man,
a queftion among
at lead, of common fenfe, I am perfua^
us.
ded, ever entertained a ferious doubt
with regard to a truth

felf-evident.
The
fo certain
queftion
is
and
not concerning
42
PART
cerning the BEING, but the NATURE,

of GOD. This I affirm, from the in
firmities
of
human
underftanding, to
be altogether incomprehenfible and un

known to us. The eflence of that Su
preme Mind,
his attributes, the
manner
of his exiftence, the very nature of his

duration
thefe, and every particular
;
which regards fo divine a Being, are

myfterious to men. Finite, weak, and
blind creatures, we ought to humble
ourfelves in his auguft prefence; and,
confcious of our frailties, adore in fi-
lence his infinite perfections,
which eye
hath not feen, ear hath not heard, nei

ther hath it entered into the heart of
man
to conceive.
deep cloud from
in a
They are covered
human
curiofity: It is
profanenefs to attempt penetrating thro

And next to
thefe facred obfcurities
:
the impiety of denying his exiftence, is

the temerity of prying into his nature
and
eflence, decrees
and
attributes.
BUT
NATURAL RELIGION.
BUT
left
lofophy^
fhall
fupport
needs any fupport,
by
my
think, that
you fhould
the better of
piety has here got
I
43
my
my
phi*
opinion, if
a very great
it
au
might cite all the divines, alChriftiamoil, from the foundation of

thority.
ever treated of this or
who have
nity,
any other
theological fubject:
ihall confine myfelf, at prefent,
But I
to one
and philoequally celebrated for piety

It is Father MALEBRANCHE,
fophy.
I
who,
remember, thus
"
felf *.
"
One ought not
he) to call
God
"
exprefs pofitively
"
"
"
"
"
4t
"
exprefles
fo
him-
much
(fays
a fpirit, in order to
what he is, as in or-
der to fignify that he
is
not matter.
Of
a Being infinitely perfect
But in the
this we cannot doubt.
He
is
we ought not to imagine, even fuppoiing him corporeal,

that he is clothed with a human body,
as the ANTHROPOMORPHITES affert-
fame manner
"
ed,
as
under colour that that figure was
C 4
* Recherche de
la Verite, liv. 3.
the
cap. 9.
44
PART
^^
"
"
"
"
"
mo ft
tne
"
"
"
we know nothing more

We
than a human mind.
as
he
comprehends the perfections of matter
without being material
he comprehends alfo the perfections

of created fpirits, without being fpirit,
"
rit:
"
fo neither
ought rather to believe, that
"
"
colour that
perfedl
"
any
ought we to imagine, that the Spirit

of God has human ideas, or bears
any refemblance to our fpirit; under
"
"
perfect of
manner we conceive fpiThat his true name is, He that is;
in the
or, in other
words, Being without re-
ftriclion, All
"
finite
and
Being, the Being infi-
univerfal,"
AFTER fo
great anauthority,DEMEA,
replied PHILO, as that which you have
produced, and a thoufand more which
you might produce,

diculous in
exprefs
my
trine.
But
it
would appear
ri
me to add my fentiment, or
approbation of your doc
furely,
where reafonable
men
NATURAL RELIGION.
men
45
treat thefe fubjects, the queftion
can never be concerning the Being ^ but

only the Nature , of the Deity. The for
mer
you well obferve, is uiiqueftionable and felf-evident. Nothing

and the original
exifts without a caufe
truth, as
caufe of this univerfe (whatever
we call GOD
every fpecies of perfection.
it
be)
him
Whoever
and piouily afcribe
to
fundamental truth, deferves every punifhment which can be
fcruples
inflicted
this
among
philofophers, to wit, the
greatefl ridicule, contempt,
probation.
But
tirely relative,
and difap-
as all perfection is
we ought
en
never to ima
gine that we comprehend the attri

butes of this divine Being, or to fuppofe that his perfections have any ana
logy or likenefs to the perfections of a
human
creature.
Wifdom, Thought,
Knowledge thefe we juftly afcribe to him; becaufe thefe words are

honourable among men, and we have
no other language or other conceptions
Deiign,
by
46
PART
by which we can
vÔ
us beware, left we think,

that our ideas any wife correfpond to
of him. But
exprefs our adoration
let
his perfections, or that his attributes

have any refemblance to thefe qualities
among men.
He
is
infinitely fuperior
view and comprehenfion ;

more the object of worfhip in the
to our limited
and
is
the temple, than of difputation in the

fchools.
IN
reality,
he, there
is
CLEANTHES, continued
no need of having recourfe
to that affected fcepticifm, fo difpleafing
come
to you, in order to
Our
at this deter
no farther
than our experience We have no expe
rience of divine attributes and opera
mination.
ideas reach
:
tions
gifm
felf.
need not conclude
my
fyllo-
You can draw the inference your-
And
a pleafure to me (and I
too) that juft reafoning and
it is
hope to you
found piety here concur in the fame
concluiion, and both of them eftabliih
die
NATURAL RELIGION.
47
the adorably myfterious and incompre- PART

henfible nature of the Supreme Being,
\
NOT
to lofe
any time in circumlocu
CLEANTHES, addreiling himDEMEA, much lefs in replying

I
pious declamations of PHILO
tions, faid
felf to
to the
mall briefly explain

matter.
how
Look round
conceive this
the world: con
template the whole and every part of
You
it:
be nothing but one

great machine, fubdivided into an infi
nite number of leffer .machines, which
will find
it
to
again admit of fubdivifions to a degree
beyond what human fenfes and facul

ties can trace and explain.
All thefe
various machines, and even their moft
minute parts, are adjufted to each other
with an accuracy, which raviihes into
admiration
all
men who have ever con
templated them. The curious adapting

of means to ends, throughout all na
ture, refembles exactly,
though
it
much
exceeds, the productions of human con

trivance ;
48
PART trivance
human
of
defign, thought,
intelligence. Since there
wifdom, and
fore the effedls refemble each other,
are led to infer,
all
by
we
the rules of ana
logy, that the caufes alfo refemble ; and

that the Author of Nature is fomewhat
fimilar to the
poffelTed of
mind of man; though
much
portioned to the
larger faculties, pro
grandeur of the work

,
which he has executed. By this argu

ment a pofteriori, and by this argument
alone, do we prove at once the exiflence of a Deity, and his fimilarity to
human mind and intelligence.
I
SHALL be
fo free,
CLEANTHES, faid
you, that from the be

could
not approve of your
ginning
concluiion concerning the fimilarity of
DEMEA,
as to tell
I
the Deity to
prove of the
endeavour to
men
flill
lefs
can
ap
mediums by which you

eftablifh it.
What! No
demonftration of the Being of God

abftraft
arguments
No proofs
No
a priori!
Are
NATURAL RELIGION.
Are
49
which have hitherto been fo

much infilled on by philofophers, all
fallacy, all fophifm? Can we reach no
thefe,
farther in this fubject than experience

I will not
fay, that this
and probability ?
is
betraying the caufe of a Deity
But
this affected candor,
you give
which they ne
ver could obtain by the mere dint of
argument and reafoning,
furely,
by
advantages to Atheifts,
WHAT
chiefly fcruple in this fub

ject, faid PHILO, is not fo much that
all religious arguments are by CLEANI
THES reduced
to experience,
that
as
they appear not to be even the mofl

certain and irrefragable of that inferior
kind.
That a done
will fall, that fire
will burn, that the earth has folidity,

we have obferved a thoufand and a
thoufand times
and when any new
inftance of this nature
is
prefented,
we
draw without hefitation the accuftomed

The exact fimilarity of the
inference.
cafes
PAR
50
P
j
*T
cafes gives us a perfect aflurance
and a ftronger evidence

never defired nor fought after.
But
fimilar event
is
of a
where-ever you depart,

from the fimilarity of the
in the leaft,
cafes,
you
di-
minifh proportionably the evidence
and may at laft bring it to a very weak

analogy^ which is confefledly liable to
error and uncertainty.
After having
experienced the circulation of the blood
in human creatures, we make no doubt
that
us
and
takes place in TITIUS and MÊVIBut from its circulation in frogs
it
fifties,
it
is
only a prefumption,
though a ftrong one, from analogy, that

it takes
place in men and other animals.
The analogical
er, when we
reafoning is much weak

infer the circulation of
the fap in vegetables from our experi

ence that the blood circulates in ani
mals
and
thofe,
who
haftily followed
that imperfeft analogy, are found,
more
by
accurate experiments, to have been
miftakeji.
IF
NATURAL RELIGION.
IF
we
51
CLEANTHES, we
fee a houfe,
conclude, with the greateil certainty,

that it had an architect or builder ; becaufe this
is
precifely that fpecies of
which we have experienced to

proceed from that fpecies of caufe. But
effect
you
furely
will not
affirm, that
the
imiverfe bears fuch a refemblance to a

houfe, that
we can with
the fame cer
tainty infer a fimilar caufe, or that the

analogy is here entire and perfect. The
diffirnilitude is fo (Inking, that the ut-
moft you can here pretend
to
is
a guefs,
a conjecture, a prefumptioii concern

ing a fimilar caufe ; and how that pretenfion will be received in the world, I
leave
you
to confider.
IT would furely be very

replied
CLEANTHES
clefervedly
and
blamed and
ill
received,
fliould
be
detefted, did I
allow, that the proofs of a Deity amounted to no more than a guefs or
conjecture.
But
is
the whole adjuft-
ment
PART
52
PART
ment of means
and in
to ends in a houfe
the univerfe fo flight a refemblance
The ceconomy of
final
caufes
The
order, proportion, and arrangement of

?
every part
contrived,
mounting and
certain and infallible.
this inference
for
walking and
them
is
Steps of a ftair are plainly

that human legs may ufe
are
in
contrived
alfo
mounting
and
Human
legs
this inference, I allow,
not altogether fo certain, becaufe of

the diffimilarity which you remark;
is
but does
it,
therefore, deferve the
name
only of prefumption or conjecture
GOOD God!
cried
DEMEA, inter
Zealous
him, where are we
?
rupting
defenders
of religion allow, that the

proofs of a Deity fall fhort of perfect
evidence!
And
you, PHILO, on whofe
depended in proving the

adorable myfterioumefs of the Divine
affiftance
Nature, do you aiTent to
vagant opinions of
all
thefe extra
CLEANTHES
For
what
NATURAL
B.ELIGION.
what other name can
why fpare my
eiples are
cenfure,
PAMPHILUS
them ? Or
prin-
fo
young
man
as
feem not
PHILO, that
in his
give
when fuch
advanced, fupported by fuch
an authority, before
You
53
to apprehend, replied
argue with
own way
CLEANTHES
and by mowing him
the dangerous confequences of his te

nets,
hope
you,
reduce
But what
opinion.
I
at laft to
obferve,
is
which CLEANTHES
flicks
him
to
our
moil with
the reprefentation
has made of the
argument a pofleriori ; and finding that

that argument is likely to efcape your
hold and vanifli into air, you think it
you can
fo difguifed, that
lieve
it
to
be
fet
in
its
fcarcely be
true light.
Now,
however much I may diffent, in other

refpecls, from the dangerous principles
of CLEANTHES, I mud allow, that he
has fairly reprefented that argument ;
and I mail endeavour fo to ftate the
matter
54
^*
T matter to
vj
no
you, that you will entertain
farther fcruples
WERE
man
with regard to
to abftracft
it.
from every
thing which he knows or has feen, he
would be altogether
from his own ideas,
incapable, merely
to determine what
kind of fcene the univerfe muft be, or

to give the preference to one ftate or
fituation of things
above another.
For
nothing which he clearly conceives

could be efteemed impoflible or imply
as
ing a contradicflionj every chimera of

his fancy would be upon an equal foot
nor could he aflign any juft reafon, why he adheres to one idea or
ing
fyftem, and rejecfls the others

are equally poflible.
AGAIN
which
he opens his eyes, and

contemplates the world as it really is,
it would be impoflible for him, at firft,
;
after
to aflign the caufe of
much
lefs
any one
event,
of the whole of things or of

the
NATURAL RELIGION.
the univerfe.
He might
fet his
55
Fancy
a rambling ; and flie might bring him

in an infinite variety of reports and reprefentations.
fible
Thefe would
but being
would never, of
all
be pofequally poflible, he
all
himfelf, give a fatis-
fadlory account for his preferring one

of them to the reft. Experience alone
can point out to him the true caufe of
any phenomenon.
Now
according to this method of
reafoning,
DEMEA,
it
follows (and
indeed, tacitly allowed by
is,
CLEANTHES
himfelf), that order, arrangement, or
the adjuftment of final caufes,

ofitfelf,
is
not,
any proof of defign; but only
been experienced to pro

ceed from that principle.
For aught
we can know a priori^ matter may con
fb far as it has
tain the fource or

fpring of order ori
ginally, within itfelf, as well as
does; and there
is
no more
mind
difficulty
in conceiving, that the feveral

elements,
from
56
PAST from
c*v^f
an internal unknown caufe, may

fall into the moft exquifite arrangement,
than to conceive that their ideas, in the

great, univerfal
mind, from- a
like in
unknown caufe, fall into that

arrangement. The equal poflibility of
ternal
both thefe fuppofitions
is
by experience we find,
CLEANTHES), that there
between them. Throw
of fteel together, without
allowed.
But
(according to
is
a difference
feveral pieces
fliape or
form
as
they will never arrange themfelves fo
mor
to compofe a watch.
Stone, and
and wood, without an architect,

never erel a houfe. But the ideas in
a human mind, we fee, by an un
tar,
known,
inexplicable oeconomy, arrange

themfelves fo as to form the plan of a
watch or houfe. Experience, therefore,
proves, that there is an original prin

mat
ciple of order in mind, not in
ter.
From
fimilar effedls
milar caufes.
to ends
is
we
infer fi-
The adjuftment of means
alike in the univerfe, as in a
machine
NATURAL RELIGION.
57
machine of human contrivance. The

caufes, therefore, muft be refembling.
I
WAS from
the beginning fcanda-
muft own, with this refeinblance, which is afferted, between the

Deity and human creatures and muft
lifed,
conceive
it
to
imply fuch a degradation
of the Supreme Being as no found

Theift could endure. With your affiftance, therefore,
DEMEA,
I fhall
en
deavour to defend what you juftly call

the adorable myfterioufnefs of the Di
vine Nature, and fhall refute this reafoning of CLEANTHES ; provided he
have made a
allows, that
fentation of
it.
WHEN CLEANTHES
PHILO,
fair repre-
had
after a fliort paufe,
aflented,
proceeded in
the following manner.
THAT
all
inferences,
concerning fad, are
CLEANTHES,
founded on expe-
rience;
58
and that all experimental reafonings are founded on the fuppofition,
rience
that fimilar caufes prove fimilar effects,

and fimilar effeds fimilar caufes ; I {hall
not, at prefent,
much
But obferve,
intreat you,
extreme caution
difpute with you.
with what
juft reafoners pro

ceed in the transferring of experiments
to fimilar cafes.
Unlefs the cafes be
all
exactly fimilar, they repofe no perfect

confidence in applying their paft obfer-
vation to any particular phenomenon.

Every alteration of circumftances occafions a
doubt concerning the event
requires new experiments to

prove certainly, that the new circum
ftances are of no moment or impor
and
it
tance.
change in bulk,
fituation,
arrangement, age, difpofition of the air,

or furrounding bodies
any of thefe
;
particulars
mod
may
be attended with the
And
unexpected confequences
tmlefs the objects be quite familiar to us,
it is the higheft temerity to expedl with
:
afTurance,
NATURAL RELIGION.
59
an
aflurance, after any of thefe changes,
fell
event fimilar to that which before
under our obfervation. The flow and
if
deliberate fleps of philofophers, here,
from the
any where, are diftinguifhed
march of the vulgar, who,
precipitate
hurried on
the fmalleft fimilitude,

of all difcernment or con-
by
are incapable
fideration.
can you think, CLEANTHES,

that your ufual phlegm and philofophy
in fo wide a ftep as
have been
BUT
preferved
when you compared to

you have taken,
the univerfe, houfes,
fliips,
furniture,
in
machines ; and from their fimilarity
fome circumftances inferred a fimilari

caufes ? Thought, defign,
ty in their
intelligence,
fuch as
we difcover in men
one
and other animals, is no more than
the uni
of the fprings and principles of
as heat or cold, attradion
verfe, as well
or
repulfion,
which
fall
and a hundred
others,
under daily obfervation.
It
is
6o
** T is
an a6tive caufe, by which fome par-
ticular parts of nature,
we
find,
pro
duce alterations on other parts.

can a conclufion, with any
But
propriety,
be transferred from parts to the whole ?

DOC-S not the great
difproportion bar all
co nparifon and inference ? From obferving the growth of a hair, can we
ieara
any thing concerning the gene
ration of a man
Would the manner of a
leafs blowing, even

though perfectly
known, afford us any inilruclioii con
cerning the vegetation of a tree
BUT
allowing that we were to take

the operations of one part of nature
up
on another for the foundation of our
judgment concerning the
origin
of the
whole, (which never can be admitted)

yet
why
bounded
felecT:
fo
minute, fo
weak,
a principle as the reafon
defign of animals
this planet ?
is
found
to
fo
and
be upon
What peculiar privilege has
this little agitation
of the brain which
we
NATURAL RELIGION.
we call
it
thought^ that
we mufl thus make
our
partiality in
indeed
prefeiit it
on
own
favour does
occafions
all
but
found philofophy ought carefully

guard again!! fo natural an illufion.
So
far
to
from admitting, continued
PHILO, that the operations of a part can

afford us
any juft conclusion concerning
the origin of the whole, I will not, allow

any one part to form a rule for another
part, if the latter
the former.
Is
be very remote from

there
any reafonable
conclude, that the inhabi

tants of other planets pofTefs thought,
ground
to
intelligence, reafon, or
any thing fimi-
lar to thefe faculties in
men
When
nature has fo extremely diverfified her

manner of operation in this fmall globe;
can
P ART
model of the whole univerfe? v^L,
the
Our
6j
we
imagine, that
pies herfelf
univerfe?
flie
inceffantly co
throughout fo immenfe a
And
if
thought, as
we may
well fuppofe, be confined merely to
this
narrow
62
PART
narrow corner, and has even there fo

limited a fphere of adlion with what
;
propriety can we affign it for the ori

ginal caufe of all things ? The narrow
views of a peafant,
who makes
his
do-
meftic ceconomy the rule for the go

vernment of kingdoms, is in compari-
fon a pardonable fophifm.
BUT were we
ever fo
much
allured,
and reafon, refembling

the human, were to be found through
out the whole univerfe, and were its ac
tivity elfewhere vaftly greater and more
that a thought
commanding than
appears in this
cannot fee, why the opera
it
globe; yet I
tions of a world conftituted, arranged,
can with any propriety be

extended to a world which is in its
adjufted,
embryo-date, and
is
advancing towards
and arrangement. By
obfervation, we know fomewhat of the
ceconomy, atftion, and nouriiliment of
a fmiihed animal ; but we muft tranfthat conftitution
fer
NATURAL RELIGION.
63
with great caution that obfervation

to the growth of a foetus in the womb,
and flill more to the formation of an
fer
male pa
even from our
animalcule in the loins of
its
Nature, we find,
limited experience, poffeiTes an infinite
rent.
number of fprings and principles, which

inceffantly difcover themfelves
on every
change of her pofition and fituation.

And what new and unknown princi
actuate her in fo new and
ples would
unknown
a fituation as that of the for
mation of a univerfe, we cannot, with

out the utmoft temerity, pretend to de
termine.
part of this great fyflem, during a very fhort time, is very

imperfectly difcovered to us ; and do
VERY fmall
we thence pronounce decifively concern

ing the origin of the whole ?
ADMIRABLE
brick,
iron,
conclusion! Stone, wood,
brafs,
have not,
at this
time,
64
PART
time, in this minute globe of earth, an

order or arrangement without human
art
and contrivance: therefore the uni-
verfe could not originally attain
der and arrangement,
its
or
without fome-
thing fimilar to human art. But is a part

of nature a rule for another part very
wide of the former ?

whole?
Is it
a rule for the
a very fmall part a rule for

the univerfe ? Is- nature in one fituaIs
tion, a certain rule for nature in
ther fituation vaflly different
ano
from the
former ?
AND can you blame me, CLEANTHES,

if I here imitate the
prudent referve of
SIM ON IDES, who, according to the no

ted (lory, being afked by HIERO, What
God was ? defired a day to think of it,
and then two days more and after that
manner continually prolonged the term,
;
without ever bringing in his definition

or defcription ? Could
you even blame
me,
if I
had anfwered
at firft, that
I did
not
NATURAL RELIGION.
65
P* R
know, and was fenfible that this fubject lay vaftly beyond the reach of my
not
You might cry out fceptic

rallier, as much as you pleafed but
faculties
and
having found, in
fo
much more
jecls
,fe6lions
man
other fub-
familiar, the imper-
and even contradictions of hu
reafon,
fuccefs
many
from
never fhoujd expect any
its
feeble conjectures, in a
fubject fo fublime,
and
fo
remote from
the fphere of our obfervation.
When
fpecies of objects have always been

obferved to be conjoined together, I can
two
infer ^
by cuflom,
the exiflence of one
wherever I fee the exiflence of the other:

and this I call an argument from expe
But how this argument can
rience.
have place, where the objects,
as in the
prefent cafe, are fingle, individual, with

out parallel, or fpecific refemblance,
may be difficult to explain. And will

any man tell me with a ferious counte
nance, that an orderly univerfe muft arife
from fome thought and
art,
like
the
66
human; becaufe we have experi

ence of it? To afcertain this reafoning,
it were requifhe, that we had experience
PART the
of the origin of worlds

fufficient, furely, that
and
cities
arife
and
it
is
we have feen
from human
not
{hips
art
and
contrivance.
PHILO was proceeding in this vehe

ment manner, fomewhat between jeft
and earneft, as it appeared to me when
he obferved fome figns of impatience
;
inCLEANTHES, and then immediately

flopped fhort. What I had to fuggeft,
faid
CLEANTHES, is only that you

would not abufe terms, or make ufe of
popular expreffions to fubvert philofophical reafonings. You know, that the
vulgar often diftinguifh reafon from ex
perience, even where the queftion re
lates only to matter of fa6l and exift-
ence; though
it
is
found, where that
reafon is properly analyzed, that it is
thing but a fpecies of experience.
no
To
prove
NATURAL RELIGION.
67
PART
prove by experience the origin of the
univerfe from mind, is not more con-
trary to common fpeech, than to prove

the motion of the earth from the fame
all
And
a caviller might raife

the fame objections to the COPER-
principle.
NIC AN fyftem, which you have urged

againfl
my reafonings.
earths,
might he
feen to
move ? Have
fay,
Have you other

which you have
YES! cried PHILO, interrupting him,

we have other earths. Is not the moon
another earth, which we fee to turn
its centre? Is not Venus another
round
where we obferve the fame phe

nomenon? Are not the revolutions of
earth,
the fun alfo a confirmation, from ana

logy, of the fame theory? All the pla
they not earths, which revolve

about the fun? Are not the fatellites
nets, are
moons, which move round Jupiter and

Saturn, and along with thefe primary
planets
round the fun ? Thefe analogies

and
68
PART an(j
refemblances, with others
which
have not mentioned, are the fole proofs

of the COPERNICAN fyftem: and to
belongs to confider, whether you
have any analogies of the fame kind to
you
it
fupport your theory.
IN reality, CLEANTIIES, continued he,
modern fyftem of aftronomy is now

fo much received by all inquirers, and
has become fo efTential a part even of
the
our
earlieft
education, that
commonly very
we
are not
fcrupulous in examin
ing the reafons upon which it is found

ed. It is now become a matter of mere
curiofity to ftudy the firft writers on
that fubjedl, who had the full force of
prejudice to encounter, and were obli
ged
to turn their
fide in
arguments on every
order to render them popular
and convincing. But if we perufe GALILJEO S famous Dialogues concerning

the fyftem of the world, we {hall find,
that that great genius, one of the fublinieft
NATURAL RELIGION.
limeft that ever exifted,
firft
bent
all
endeavours to prove^ that there

was no foundation for the diftinction commonly made between elemen
his
and
tary
fubftances.
celeilial
fchools, proceeding
from the
The
illufions
of
had carried this diftindion very

and had eftabliflied the latter fub-
fenfe,
far;
fiances to be ingenerable, incorruptible,

unalterable, impaflible ; and had afto the
ligiied all the oppoiite qualities
former. But GALILJEO, beginning with

the moon, proved its iirnilarity in every
particular to the earth; its convex
gure, is natural darknefs when not
luminated,
to folid
its
and
denfky,
its
fi
il
diftinclioii in
liquid, the variations of its
phafes, the mutual illuminations of the

earth and moon, their mutual eclipfes,
the inequalities of the lunar furface, &c*

After many inftances of this kind, with
the planets, men plainly

faw that thefe bodies became proper ob
regard to
jects
all
of experience
and
that the fimilarity
^r
70
RT
larity
of their nature enabled us to ex
tend the fame arguments and pheno

mena from one to the other.
IN
proceeding of the
aftronomers, you may read your own
this cautious
condemnation, CLEANTHES; or rather
may
fee,
that the fubjedl in
are engaged exceeds
all
which you
human
reafon
and inquiry. Can you pretend to {how

any fuch fimilarity between the fabric
of a houfe, and the generation of a univerfe
Have you
any fuch
ever feen Nature in
fituation as refembles the
fir ft
arrangement of the elements? Have

worlds ever been formed under your
eye and have you had leifure to ob;
whole progrefs of the pheno

menon, from the firft appearance of
order to its final confummation ? If you
ferve the
have, then cite your experience,

deliver
and
your theory.
PART
PART
III.
TTOW the moil abfurd argument, replied
of a
may
CLEANTHES,
in the hands
man
of ingenuity and invention,

acquire an air of probability Are
!
you not aware, PHILO, that it became

necefTary for COPERNICUS and his firft
prove the fimilarity of the
and celeflial matter becaufe
difciples to
terreftrial
feveral philofophers, blinded
by
old fy-
ilems, and fupported by fome fenfible

appearances, had denied this fimilarity?
but that it is by no means neceiTary,
that Theifts
mould prove
the fimilarity
of the works of Nature to thofe of Art;

becaufe this fimilarity is felf-evident
and undeniable? The fame matter, a
like
PAR *
72
ART
form: what more is requifite to

Ihow an analogy between their caufes,
\\]^Q
and to afcertain the origin of all things

from a divine purpofe and intention?
Your objections, I muft freely tell you,
are no better than the abftrufe cavils of
thofe philofophers
who
denied motion;
and ought to be refuted in the fame

manner, by illuftrations, examples, and
inftances, rather than
by
ferious argu
ment and philofophy.

SUPPOSE, therefore, that an articu
late voice were heard in the clouds,
much
louder and
any which human
more melodious than

art
could ever reach:
Suppofe, that this voice were extended

in the fame inftant over all nations, and
{poke to each nation in
its
own
lan
guage and dialecfl: Suppofe, that the

words delivered not only contain a juft
fenfe
and meaning, but convey fome
worthy of a be
nevolent Being, fuperior to mankind:
Could
inftrudlion altogether
NATURAL RELIGION.
Could you poffibly
hefitate a
moment
concerning the caufe of this voice ? and

muft you not inftantly afcribe it to fome
defign or purpofe ? Yet I cannot fee but
all the fame objections (if they merit
that appellation)
which
lie
againft the
fyftem of Theifm, may alfo be produ

ced againft this inference.
MIGHT you
not fay, that aH conclu-
Cons concerning fact were founded on

experience: that when we hear an arti
and thence in
fer a man, it is only the refemblance of
the effects which leads us to conclude
culate voice in the dark,
that there
caufe
by
is
a like refemblance in the
but that
its
this extraordinary voice,
loudnefs, extent,
and
flexibility
languages, bears fo little analogy

to any human voice, that we have no
to
all
reafon to fuppofe any analogy in their

caufes
and coiifequently, that a ra
:
tional, wife, coherent fpeech proceeded,
you knew not whence, from fome ac-
cidental
73
74
ART cidental
whiftling of the winds, not

from any divine reafon or intelligence ?
You
your own objections in

and I hope too, you fee
fee clearly
thefe cavils
cannot poffibly have

more force in the one cafe than in the
clearly, that they
other,
BUT
bring the cafe ftill nearer the

prefent one of the univerfe, I mall make
two fuppofitions, which imply not any
to
Suppofe,
abfurdity or impoflibility.
that there is a natural, univerfal, inva
common to every in
dividual of human race; and that books
riable language,
are natural productions,

tuate themfelves in the
which perpe
fame manner
with animals and vegetables, by defcent

and propagation. Several expreilions of
our paflions contain a univerfal lan
guage all brute animals have a natural
fpeech, which, however limited, is very
;
intelligible to their
own
fpecies.
as thore are infinitely fewer parts
And
and
lefs
NATURAL RELIGION.
75
contrivance in the fineft compofition of eloquence, than in the coarfeft
lefs
organized body, the propagation of an
ILIAD or
^NEID
is
an
eafier fuppofition
than that of any plant or animaL
SUPPOSE, therefore, that you enter

into your library, thus peopled by na
tural volumes, containing the moft re
fined reafon
and moft
exquifite beauty:
could you poffibly open one of them,
and doubt, that its original caufe bore
the ftrongeft analogy to mind and in

diftelligence? When it reafons and
courfes;
when
it expoftulates, argues,
views and topics ; when

and enforces
it applies fometimes to the pure intel
its
lect,
it
fometimes to the affedions ;
collects, difpofes,
when
and adorns every
confideration fuited to the fubjed: could

that all this, at
perfift in afferting,
you
the bottom, had really no meaning ;

and that the firft formation of this
volume in the
loins
of
its
original parent
PART
76
PART rent
proceeded not
from thought and

Your obflinacy, I know, reaches
defign ?
not that degree of firmnefs
even your
fceptical play arid wantomiefs would be
abafhed at fo glaring an abfiirdity.
:
BUT if there be any difference, PHILO,

between
this
fuppofed cafe and the real

it is all to the ad
one of the univerfe,

vantage of the latter.
an animal
The anatomy of
affords
many ftronger inftances of defign than the perufal of

LIVY or TACITUS: and any objection
which you flart in the former cafe,
by
carrying
me
back
to fo unufual
and ex
traordinary a fcene as the firft forma

tion of worlds, the fame
objection has
on
the
place
fuppofition of our
vegeta-^
ting library.
Chufe, then, your party,

without
PHILO,
ambiguity or evafion:
affert either that a rational
no proof of
volume
is
a rational caufe, or admit
of a fimilar caufe to
all
the works of
LET
NATURAL RELIGION.
77
LET me here obferve too, continued

^
GLEANTHES, that this religious arguinent, inftead of being weakened by
i
,.
that fcepticifm fo much

you, rather acquires force
affected
from
it,
becomes more firm and undifputed.

exclude
all
every kind,
The
nefs.
by
and
To
argument or reafoning of
is
either affectation or
mad-
declared profeflion of every
reafonable fceptic
is
only to reject ab-
remote, and refined arguments ;

adhere to common fenie and the plain
flrufe,
to
inflindls
of nature; and to
afTent,
where-
ever any reafons (hike him with fo full

a force, that he cannot, without the
greateft violence, prevent
arguments
for
Natural
it.
Now
the
Religion are
plainly of this kind ; and nothing but

the mod perverfe, obftinate metaphyfics
can
reject
them.
Confider, anatomize
the eye ; furvey its flruclure and con

trivance ; and tell me, from your own
feeling, if the idea
of a contriver does
not immediately flow in upon you with
PART
78
PART a force iik e tnat o f fenfation.
obvious conclufion, furely,

defign ; and
The moft
is
in favour
it
requires time, reflection,

and ftudy, to fummon up thofe frivo
lous, though abftrufe objections, which
can fupport Infidelity. Who can be

hold the male and female of each fpecies,
the correfpondence of their parts and inflindls, their paflions, and whole courfe
before and after generation, but

muft be fenfible, that the propagation
of
life
of the fpecies
intended by Nature?
Millions and millions of fuch inftances
is
prefent themfelves through every part

of the univerfe; and no language can
convey a more intelligible, irrefiftible

meaning, than the curious adjuftment
of final caufes. To what degree, there
of blind dogmatifm muft one
have attained, to rejedl fuch natural and
fore,
fuch convincing arguments
SOME
beauties
in writing
we may
meet with, which feem contrary
to
rules,
NATURAL RELIGION.
rules,
and which gain the
79
affedlions,
and animate the imagination, in oppofition to
and
all
mafters of
for
the precepts of criticifm,

of the eftablifhed
to the authority
Theifm
art.
And
be, as
if the
argument
you pretend, contra
dictory to the principles of logic ; its

univerfal, its irrefiftible influence proves
clearly, that there
may be arguments of
a like irregular nature.

vils
may be urged
Whatever ca
an orderly world,
as well as a coherent, articulate fpeech,

,
will
ftill
be received as an inconteftable
proof of defign and intention,
IT Ibmetimes happens,
own, that
the religious arguments have not their

due influence on an ignorant favage and
barbarian; not becaufe they are obfcure and difficult, but becaufe he ne
ver afks himfelf any queflion with re
gard to them. Whence arifes the cu
rious flrtidure of an
copulation
of
its
animal?
From
parents.
And
thefc
PART
8o
PART
^^v>l
h efe whence
From
few removes
fet
diftance, that to
the
their parents I
darknefs and confuiion

tuated
But
are loft in
nor
is
he ac
them
curiofity to trace
by any
farther.
fuch a
objecfls at
him they
this
is
neither
dogma-
tifm nor fcepticifm, but ftupidity; a

ftate of mind very different from your
fifting,
genious friend.
from
effedls
diftant
You can
in
trace caufes
You can compare the mofl
and remote
and your
from barren-
objecfls
greateft errors proceed not
nefs
my
inquifitive difpofition,
of thought and invention; but
from too luxuriant a

fupprefles
fertility,
your natural good
which
fenfe,
by a
profufion of unneeeflary fcruples and
obje&ions.
HERE
could obferve, HERMIPPUS,

that PHILO was a little embarrafTed and
I
confounded
in
delivering
But while he
hefitated
an anfwer, luckily for

him.
NATURAL RELIGION.
DEMEA
81
broke in upon the dif- PA *T

courfe, and faved his countenance.
him,
YOUR inftance, CLEANTHES, faid he,

drawn from books and language, being
familiar, has, I confefs, fo much more
force
on that account
but
is
there not
fome danger too in this very circumftance

and may it not render us pre;
fumptuous, by making us imagine we

comprehend the Deity, and have fome
adequate idea of his nature and attri
butes ? When I read a volume, I enter
into the mind and intention of the au
thor:
become him, in a manner, for

and have an immediate
and conception of thofe ideas
the inftant;
feeling
which revolved in his imagination while

employed in that competition. But fo
near an approach we never furely can
make
to the Deity.
His ways are not
our ways. His attributes are perfect,

but incomprehenfible.
And this vo
lume of Nature contains a
great
and in
explicable
82
PART
explicable riddle, more than any intel*

ligible difcourfe or reafoning.
THE ancient PLATONISTS, you know,

were the moft religious and devout of
all
the Pagan philosophers
yet
many
of them, particularly PLOTINUS, exprefsly declare, that intellect or underis
{landing
not to be afcribed to the
Deity ; and that our moft perfe6l worfhip of him confifts, not in a6ls of ve
neration, reverence, gratitude, or love ;
but in a certain myfterious felf-annihilation, or total extinction
culties.
Thefe ideas
far ftretched;
but
knowledged,
that,
ac
reprefenting the
Deity as
henfible,
and
and compre-
fo fimilar to a
human
are guilty of the grofTeft
and
and make ourthe model of the whole univerfe.
moft narrow
felves
our fa
mufl be
it
fo intelligible
mind, we
all
are, perhaps, too
ftill
by
of
partiality,
ALL thefentiments of the human mind,

gratitude,
-
NATURAL RELIGION.
83
gratitude, refentment, love, friendship,
approbation, blame,
pity,
emulation,
envy, have a plain reference to the (late

and fituation of man, and are calcula
ted
for preferving the exiftence
and
promoting the activity of a fuch a be

It feems
ing in fuch circumflances.
therefore unreafonable to transfer fuch
fentiments to a fupreme exiftence, or to

fuppofe him actuated by them ; and the
phenomena,
of the univerfe will
befides,
not fupport us in fuch a theory. All

ideas derived from the fenfes are
our
confefledly falfe
and
illufive;
and can
not, therefore, be fuppofed to have place
in a fupreme intelligence: And as the

ideas of internal fentiment, added to
thofe of the external fenfes, compofe the
whole furniture of human underftanding, we may conclude, that
materials of thought are in
limilar in the
human and
intelligence.
Now
thinking;
how
can
none of the
any refpect
in the divine
as to the
manner of
we make anycomparifoa
PART
84
P ART
parifon between them, or fuppofe them

any wife refembling? Our thought is
fluctuating, uncertain, fleeting, fuccef-
and compounded and were we to

remove thefe circumftances, we abfolutely annihilate its effence, and it would
in fuch a cafe be an abufe of terms to
five,
apply to
fon.
and
At
it
the
leaft,
refpe<5lful
name of thought
if, it
(as
or rea-
appear more pious
it
really is)
ftill
to
when we mention the

Supreme Being; we ought to acknow
retain thefe terms,
ledge, that their

is
meaning, in that cafe,

totally incomprehensible and that the
infirmities of
our nature do not permit
us to reach any ideas which in the
leafl
correfpond to the ineffable fublimity of

the divine attributes.
PART
PART
TT feems
IV.
ftrange to me, laid

THES, that you, DEMEA,
CLEANwho are
fo fincere in the caufe of religion, fhould
maintain the myiterious, incompreh^nfible nature of the Deity, and

ftill
fhould
infill
fo ftrenuoufly that
no manner of
human
he has
likenefs or refemblance to
creatures.
readily allow,
The
poffeffes
Deity,
can
many powers
which we can have no

But
if our ideas, fo far
comprehenfion
as they go, be not juil, and adequate,
and
attributes, of
:
and correfpondeiit to
know not what there
worth inniling on.
his real nature, I
in this fubjecl:
the name, with
is
Is
out any meaning, of fuch mighty im-
portance ?
PART
86
A T
r
^ portance? Or how do you MYSTICS,

vo who maintain the abfolute
incompre-
henfibility of the Deity,
Sceptics or Atheifls,
the firft caufe of all
from
differ
who aflert, that

is unknown and
unintelligible? Their temerity
mud
be
very great, if, after rejecting the pro

duction by a mind ; I mean, a mind
refembliiig the
no
human,
(for
know
other), they pretend to affign,
of
with
certainty, any other fpecific intelligible

caufe: And their confcience muft be
be very fcrupulous indeed,
if
they re-
fufe to call the univerfal, unknown caufe

a God or Deity ; and to beftow on him
fublime eulogies and unmean

ing epithets as you mall pleafe to re
quire of them.
as
many
WHO could imagine, replied DEMEA,

that
cal
CLEANTHES, the calm, philofophiCLEANTHES, would attempt to re
fute his antagonifts,
name
to
them
by
affixing a nick
and, like the
common
bigots
NATURAL RELIGION.
87
and mquiiitors of the age, have

recourfe to invective and declamation,
inftead of reafoning? Or does he not
bigots
re
perceive, that thefe topics are eafily
torted, and that ANTHROPOMORPIIITE
is
an appellation
and im
as invidious,
dangerous confequences, as the

he has
epithet of MYSTIC, with which
plies as
honoured us? In reality, CLEANTHES,

confider what it is you affertwhen you
reprefent the Deity as fimilar to a
man mind and

is
the foul of
What
underftanding.
man?
hu
competition of
various faculties, paflioiis, fentiments,

ideas ; united, indeed, into one felf or
perfon, but Hill diftinct from each other.
When it reafons, the ideas, which are
the parts of its difcourfe, arrange
felves in a certain form or order
;
themwhich
not preferved entire for a moment,

but immediately gives place to another
is
arrangement.
fions,
new
New
opinions,
affections,
which continually
F
new
new
diverfify the
2
paf-
feelings arife,
mental
fcene,
88
PART f
cene) an
riety
<i
How
able.
perfect
which
it the greatefl vafucceffion imagin
produce in
and moft rapid

is
this
compatible with that
immutability
all
and
fimplicity
true Theifts afcribe to the
the fame a6t, fay they, he

fees paft, prefent, and future: His love
and hatred, his mercy and juftice, are
Deity
By
one individual operation: He is entire

in every point of fpace ; and complete
in every inflant of duration.
No fuc
ceffion,
no change, no
diminution.
acquisition,
no
What he is implies not in it
any fhadow of diftindlion or diverfity.

And what he is, this moment, he ever
has been, and ever will be, without any
new judgment,
fentiment, or operation.
ftands fixed in one fimple, perfecft
ftate
nor can you ever fay, with any
He
propriety, that this aft of his is different

from that other; or that this judgment
or idea has been

lately formed, and will
give place, by fucceffion, to any differ

ent judgment or idea.
1
NATURAL RELIGION.
89
I c AN
readily allow, faidCLE A NT HE s,
that thofe who maintain the perfect (im-
of the Supreme Being, to the ex

tent in which you have explained it,
plicity
are complete MYSTICS, and chargeable

with all the confequences which I have
drawn from
in
it.
their opinion.
They are,
a word, ATHEISTS, without knowing
be allowed, that the
attributes of which we
For though
it
Deity pofTefTes
have no comprehenfion
never to afcribe to
yet ought
him any
attributes
which
are abfolutely incompatible

that intelligent nature efTential to
A mind, whofe
acts
we
with
him.
and fentiments and
ideas are not diftinct
and
fucceffive
wholly fimple, and totally

immutable; is a mind, which has no
thought, no reafon, no will, no fenti-
one, that
is
ment, no love, no hatred ; or in a word,

It is an abufe of
is no mind at all.
terms to give
we may
it
that appellation;
as well fpeak
and
of limited extenlion
90
PART
-g
on
w ithout
figure, or
of number with
out competition.
PRAY
confider, faid
PHILO,
whom
you
are at prefent inveighing againft.
You
are
honouring with the appellation

of Atheijl all the found, orthodox di
vines, almoft,
who have
and you
treated of this
will at laft be,
yourreckon
your
the
found
in the world.
Theifl
ing,
only
But if idolaters be Atheifts, as, I think,
fubjecT:
felf, found, according to
may
juftly
be
aflerted,
and Chriftian
what becomes
Theologians the fame

of the argument, fo much celebrated,
derived from the univerfal confent of
;
mankind
BUT becaufe I know you are not

much fwayed by names and authorities,
I
mall endeavour to fliow you, a
more
little
diftindlly, the iiiconveniencies
of
Anthropomorphifm, which you

have embraced and mall prove, that
that
there
NATURAL RELIGION.
91
of *
no ground to fuppofe a plan

in the divine
the world to be formed
there
is
mind, confiiling of
diftinft ideas, dif
in the fame manner

ferently arranged;
in his head the
as an architeft forms
to
of a houfe which he intends
plan
execute,
IT
is
not eafy,
own,
to fee
what
whether
fuppofition,
this
gained by
we judge of the matter by Reafon or by
We are ftill obliged to
is
Experience.
order to find the

higher, in
had afcaufe of this caufe, which you
and conclufive,
figned as fatisfaaory
mount
IF
Reafon
(I
mean
abflracl reafon,
derived from inquiries a priori) be not

alike mute with regard to all queftions
this fenconcerning caufe and effect ;
tence at leaft it will venture to pro
That a mental world, or uni-
nounce,
verfe of ideas, requires a caufe as much,
univerfe of
as does a material world, or
F 4
objeas;
92
PART
pbjefts
and, if fimilar in
its
arrange^
ment, muft require a fimilar caufe. For

what is there in this fubjeft, which
fhould occafion a different conclufion or
inference?
In an abftracl view, they
are entirely alike ; and no difficulty at

tends the one fuppofition, which is not
common
to
both of them.
AGAIN, when we
will needs force
fome fentence,
which lie beyond
Experience to pronounce
even on thefe fubjedts,

her fphere; neither can
me
perceive,
any
material difference in this particu
lar,
between thefe two kinds of worlds ;
but finds them to be governed by fimi

lar principles, and to depend upon an
equal variety of caufes in their opera
We
have fpecimens in minia

ture of both of them.
Our own mind
tions.
refembles the one:
mal body the
A vegetable or
other.
ani
Let Experience,
judge from thefe famples.

Nothing feems more delicate, with re
therefore,
gard
NATURAL RELIGION.
93
and as
thefe caufes never operate in two perfons after the fame manner, fo we never
find two perfons who think exactly aNor indeed does the fame perfon
like.
think exactly alike at any two different
gard to
its
caufes, than thought
difference of age,
periods of time.
of the difpofition of his body, of wea
of food, of company, of books,

of paffions any of thefe particulars, or
ther,
more minute,
others
are fufficient to
machinery of thought,
and communicate to it very different
movements and operations. As far as
we can judge, vegetables and animal
alter the curious
bodies are not
more
delicate in their
motions, nor depend upon a greater

of
variety or more curious adjuflment
fprings
How
and
principles.
therefore mall
we
fatisfy
our-
concerning the caufe of that Be

whom
fuppofe the Author of
felves
ing,
you
Nature, or, according to your fyftem
of
94
of Anthropomorphifm, the ideal world,
^j
into
which you
Have we not
trace
the material
the fame reafon to trace
that ideal world into another ideal world,
or
new
intelligent principle
But
if
we
flop,
and go no farther
Why
How
not flop at the material world ?

can we fatisfy ourfelves without
going on
what
in
infnitum?
why go fo far
And
after
all,
fatisfacftion is there in that infinite
progreflion ? Let us remember the ftory

of the INDIAN philofopher arid his ele
phant.
It
was never more applicable
than to the prefent fubjecl. If the ma

terial world refts upon a fimilar ideal
world, this ideal world muft reft upon
fome other ; and fo one, without end.
It
were
better, therefore, never to look
beyond the prefent material world, By

fuppofing it to contain the principle of
its order within itfelf, we
really affert it
to
be God; and the fooner we arrive at
that divine Being, fo
much
the better.
When you go one ftep beyond the inundane
NATURAL RELIGION.
Jane fyftem, you only
fitive
humour, which
excite
is
it
95
an inquiimpoffible
ever to fatisfy.
To fay, that the different ideas, which

compofe the reafon of the Supreme Be
of themfelves, and
ing, fall into order,
own
their
by
really to talk
If it has
precife meaning.
without any
a meaning,
nature,
would
is
fain
why it
know,
fenfe to fay, that the parts

of the material world fall into order, of
is
not
as
good
themfelves, and
by
their
own
nature.
opinion be intelligible,
while the other is not fo ?
Can
the one
WE have, indeed,
experience of ideas,
which fall into order, of themfelves,

and without any knoivn caufe But, I
:
am
fure,
we have
rience of matter,
as in all inftances
getation,
much
larger expe
which does the fame;

of generation and ve
where the accurate
the caufe exceeds
all
analylis of
human comprehenfion,
96
We
henfioii.
have
alfo experience
particular fyfterns of thought
of
and of
matter, which have no order of the

of the fecond, in
firft, in madnefs ;
then fhould we think,
corruption.
:
Why
that order
the other
is
more
And
effential to
one than
if it requires a caufe in
both, what do we gain by your fyftem,

in tracing the univerfe of objects into a
fimilar univerfe of ideas ? The firft ftep,
which we make,
leads us
on
for ever,
were, therefore, wife in us, to limit

all our
inquiries to the prefent world,
It
without looking farther. No fatisfaction can ever be attained by thefe fpeculations, which fo far exceed the nar
row bounds of human underflanding.

IT was ufual with the PERIPATE
TICS, you know, CLEANTHES, when
the caufe of any phenomenon was de
manded,
to
have recourfe
to thtir facul
or occult qualities; and to fay, for

inftance, that bread nourifhed by its nu
ties
tritive
NATURAL RELIGION.
97
and ferma purged by

But it has been difcoits purgative
vered, that this fubterfuge was nothing
but the difguife of ignorance and that
tritive faculty,
:
thefe philofophers, though lefs inge

nuous, really faid the fame .thing with
the fceptics or the vulgar, who fairly

not the caufe
confeffed, that they knew
In like manner,
when it is afked, what caufe produces
order in the ideas of the Supreme Be
of thefe phenomena.
can any other reafon be affigned

by you, Anthropomorphites, than that
it is a rational faculty, and that fuch is
ing
the nature of the Deity?
But
why
fimilar anfwer will not be equally fatisfadlory in accounting for the order of
the world, without having recourfe to

any fuch intelligent creator as you in
fill
on,
may
be
difficult to
determine.
only to fay, that fuch is the nature

of material objects, and that they are
It is
originally poffefTed of a faculty of

Thefe are only
order and proportion.
all
more
98
PART
more learned and
iv.
elaborate
conreffing our ignorance
one hypothecs any
real
the other, except in
mity
to
You
its
ways of
nor has the
advantage above
greater confor
vulgar prejudices.
have difplayed
this
argument
with great emphafis, replied CLEANTHES You feem not fenfible, how eafy
:
it
to
is
it.
Even
if I affign a caufe for
life,
is it
anfwer
any
objection,
in
common
any event j
PHILO, that
can^
not aflign the caufe of that caufe, and
anfwer every new queftion which ruay

inceffantly be ftarted ? And what phi-*
lofophers could poffibly fubmit to fo rigid a rule ? philofophers, who confefs
ultimate caufes to be totally unknown ;

and are fenlible, that the moft refined
principles, into
phenomena,
cable
as
are to the
are
which they trace the

ftill to them as
inexpli
phenomena themfelves
The order and ar
vulgar.
thefe
rangement of nature, the curious
ad*-
juftment
NATURAL RELIGION.
99
final caufes, the plain ufe PART
juftment of
and intention of every part and orall
organ;
thefe befpcak in the clear-
language an intelligent caufe or

The heavens and the earth
author.
efl
join in the fame teftimony
chorus of Nature
raifes
praifes of its Creator:
mofl alone, diflurb
mony.
vils, and
is
You
one
You
this
The whole
hymn to
the
alone, or al-
general har
doubts, ca
ftart abftrufe
objections: You afk me, what

the caufe of this caufe ? I know not ;
I care
not
that concerns not
have found a Deity; and here
my inquiry.
are wifer or
me.
flop
Let thofe go farther,
who
more
PRETEND
to
enterprifing.
be neither, replied
PHILO and for that very reafon, I

mould never perhaps have attempted to
:
am
fo far; efpecially when I

fenfible, that I muft at lafl be contented
go
to
fit
down with
the
fame anfwer,
which, without farther trouble, might

have
^-v-^
100
have
fatisfied
am
If I
rance of
ftill
me from
the beginning^
to remain in utter igno
caitfes,
and can abfolutely give
an explication of nothing,
efteem
for a
it
any advantage
moment
lhall
never
move
to
a difficulty, which,
off
you
acknowledge, muft immediately, in

full force, recur
upon me.
its
Naturalifts
indeed very juftly explain particular
by more
general caufes ; though

thefe general caufes themfelves mould
remain in the end totally inexplicable
efFedls
but they never furely thought
it fatis-
fadlory to explain a particular effecfi: by

a particular caufe, which was no more
to be accounted for than the effeft itfelf.
An
ideal fyftem, arranged of it-
without a precedent defign, is not

a whit more explicable than a material
felf,
one,
which
attains
its
order in a like
manner; nor is there any more
difficul
ty in the latter fuppofition than in the

former.
PART
PART
"OtTT
to
mow
you
V.
flill
more
veniencies, continued
incori- PART
PHILO, in
your Anthropomorphifm ; pleafe to

take a nexv furvey of your
principles.
Like effedh prove like caufes.
This is
the experimental
argument
and
this,
you fay too, is the fole theological ar

gument. Now it is certain, that the
liker the effects are which are
feen,
and the liker the caufes which are in
ferred,
the ftronger
Every departure on
niflies the
is
the argument.
dimiand
renders
the
probability,
either fide
experiment lefs conclufive. You can

not doubt of the principle
neither
:
ought you
to reject
its
conferences
ALL
J02
ALL
new
the
in aft.ro-
difcoveries
nomy, which prove the immenfe gran

deur and magnificence of the works of
Nature, are fo
additional argu
ments for a Deity, according to the true
fyflem of Theifm: but, according to
many
your hypothefis of experimental Theifm,

they become fo
moving
the
many
effecft ftill
refemblance to the
and contrivance.
by re
from all
objections,
farther
effedts
of human art
For if LUCRETIUS
*,
even following the old fyftem of the

world, could exclaim,
Qujg regerc immenfi fummam, quis habere profund
Indu roanu validas potis eft moderanter habenasi
1
Quis pariter
Ignibus
coelos
omnes convertere
et
omnes
aetheriis terras fuffire fcraces ?
Omnibus inque
TULLY
locis cfie
omni tempore
praîlo:
efteemed this reafoning fo

natural as to put it into the mouth of
If
-\
EPICUREAN
mmi mtuer fotu it
his
ûibus enim oculis aPlato fab? icam

*vejler
illam tanti
opens, qua confirm a
Deo atque
(zdijicari
Lib.
xi.
1094.
f De
nat.
Deor-
lib,
NATURAL RELIGION.
muiidum fadt ?
tidifcdri
err amenta?
quds molitio? quiz
qui veftes?
qu<s
mcchin&f
qui mmiftri tanti muneris fuerunt? quern-
admodum autem
obedire et parere volun-
tati arcbitecli aer,
ignis,
aqua, terra po-
tuerunt? If this argument,

any force in former ages ;
fay,
had
how much
when
greater mufl it have at prefent
the bounds of Nature are fo
infinitely
enlarged, and fuch a magnificent fcene
;
is
opened to us ?
It is flill
more unrea-
fonable to form our idea of fo unlimit

ed a caufe from our experience of the
narrow productions of human defign
and invention.
THE
difcoveries
by
microfcopes, as
they open a new univerfe in miniature^

are flill objections, according to you,
arguments, according to me. The far

we pufh our refeafches of this kind,
ther
we
are
caufe of
flill
all
led to infer the univerfal

to
be vaftly different from
man**
04
RT
mankind, or from any objecft of human

obfervation.
experience and
AND
what fay you
to the difcoveries
anatomy, chemiftry, botany?

Thefe furely are no objections, replied
in-
CLEANTHES: they only

inftances of art
ftill
difcover
and contrivance.
the image of
mind
mind like
know of no
on
Add,
PHILO.
the human, faid
other, replied
It is
reflected
us from innumerable objects.

a
new
CLEANTHES,
And theliker the better, infilled PHILO.

To be fure, faid CLEANTHES.
Now, CLEANTHES,
an
air
PHILO, with
faid
of alacrity and triumph, mark
the confequences.
Firft.,
By
this
me-
all
fhod of reafoning, you renounce
claim to infinity in any of the attributes
of the Deity. For as the caufe ought
to the effect;
only to be proportioned
and the effed, fo far as it falls under our
cogaifance,
is
not
infinite
what preterilions,
NATURAL RELIGION.
tenfions
have we, upon your fuppofi-
dltions, to afcribe that attribute to the
You will dill infill, that,

by removing him fo much from all fimilarity to human creatures, we give
vine Being
into the moil arbitrary hypothefis, and

at the fame time weaken all proofs of
his exiftence.
Secondly^
You have 110 reafon, on your
the
theory, for afcribing perfection to
Deity, even in his finite capacity; or for
fuppofing
him free from every error, mi-
flake, or incoherence, in his
underta
There are many inexplicable dif

ficulties in the works of Nature, which,
if we allow a perfedl author to be proved
kings.
a priori^ are eafily folved, and
only feeming
row
capacity
difficulties,
become
from the nar
of man, who
cannot trace
infinite relations.
But according to your
method of
become all
and perhaps
reafoning, thefe difficulties

real;
infifted on, as
new
will
be
inflances of likenefs
03
to
io6
human art and
contrivance. At lead,
muft
acknowledge, that it is impofyou
lible for us to tell, from our limited
to
views, whether this fyftem contains any

great faults, or deferves any confiderable praife, if cornpared to other pofCould a
fible, and even real fyftems.
peafant, if the JNEID were read to him 3
pronounce that poem to be abfolutely
faultlefs, or
even affign to
it its
proper
rank among the productions of human

wit he, who had never feeii any other
;
production?
BUT
were
this
a production,
certain,
it
whether
world ever
muft
all
flill
fo perfect
remain un
the excellencies of
the work can juftly be afcribed to the

workman. If we furvey a ihip, what an
exalted idea muft we form of the inger
nuity of the carpenter
who framed
complicated, ufeful, and beautiful a

chine? And what furprife muft we
when we
find
him
fo
ma
fee],
a ftupid mechanic,
who
NATURAL RELIGION.
107
\vho imitated others, and copied an art $

which, through a long fucceffion of ages,
after
multiplied
trials,
miftakes, cor
and controve.rhad
been
fies,
gradually improving ?
Many worlds might have been botched
and bungled, throughout an eternity,
ere this fyflein was (truck out; much
rections, deliberations,
labour
and
loft
many fruitlefs
a flow, but continued
carried
on during
trials
made
improvement
infinite ages in the art
In fuch fubjecfts,
of world-making.
who can determine, where the truth;
nay,
who can conjecture where
bability, lies
the pro
amidft a great number

may be propofed,
of hypothefes which
and a
ftill
greater
number which may
be imagined ?
AND what
fliadow of an argument,
continued PHILO,
can you produce,
from your hypotheiis, to prove the unity
great number of men

in
a
join
building houfe or fhip, in rear-
of the Deity?
ing
xoS
PART
n g a city, in framing a commonwealth

why rftay not feveral deities combine in
contriving and framing a world ? This
j
is
only fo
human
among
much
affairs.
feveral,
greater
fimilarity to
By iharing the work

we may fo much far
ther limit the attributes of each,
and get
rid of that extenfive power and
know
which muft be fuppofed in one

deity, and which, according to you, can
only ferve to weaken the proof of his
ledge,
exiftence.
And
fuch
if
foolilh,
fuch vi
man
can yet often

unite in framing and executing one
cious creatures as
how much more thofe deities or

daemons, whom we may fuppofe feveral
plan
degrees
To
fity, is
more
perfect ?
multiply caufes, without necefindeed contrary to true philofo-
phy: but
this principle applies
the prefent cafe.

cedently proved
Were one
by your
not to
deity ante
theory,
who
\vere poflefled of every attribute requiVite
NATURAL RELIGION.
fite
it
of the univerfe
to the production
would be
needlefs, I
109
;
own, (though not ^
abfurd), to fuppofe any other deity exiftent.

But while it is ftill a queflion,
Whether
all
thefe attributes are united
in one fubject, or difperfed among feveral independent beings ; by what phe
we pretend to de
cide the controverfy ? Where we fee a
body raifed in a fcale, we are fure that
nomena
in nature can
there
in the oppofite fcale,
is
however
concealed from light, fome counterpoifing weight equal to
lowed
to doubt,
it
but
it is flill al
whether that weight
be an aggregate of feveral diflin6l bodieSe or one uniform united mafs. And

y
if the
weight requifite very
much
ex
ceeds any thing which we have ever

feen conjoined in any {ingle body, the
former fuppofition becomes
flill
more
probable and natural. An intelligent

being of fuch vail power and capacity
necefTary to produce the univerfe,
pr, to fpeak in the language of ancient
as
is
philofophy,
no
philofophy, fo prodigious an animal,
exceeds all analogy, and even compre-
henfion.
BUT
farther,
CLEANTHES: Men
are
mortal, and renew their fpecies by ge

neration ; and this is common to all li
ving creatures. The two great fexes of

male and female, fays MILTON, animate
the world.
Why muft this circumftance,
fo univerfal, fo effential,
be excluded
from thofe numerous and limited
dei
Behold, then, the theogeny of

ancient times brought back upon us.
ties
AND why
not become a
thropomorphite
Why
perfecfl
not
afTert
Anthe
deity or deities to be corporeal, and to

have eyes, a nofe, mouth, ears, &c. ? E-
PICURUS maintained,
that
ever feen reafon but in a
no man had
human
figure;
muft have a human

argument, which is de-
therefore the gods
And this
fervedly fo much
figure.
ridiculed
by CICERQ,
becomes,
NATURAL RELIGION.
iij
pARt
becomes, according to you, folid and
philofophical.
IN a word, CLEANTHES, a man,
who
follows your hypothefis, is able, per

haps, to afTert, or conjecture, that the
imiverfe, fometime, arofe
from fome-
thing like defign: but beyond that pofition he cannot afcertain one fingle cir-
cumftance
and
is left
afterwards to
fix
every point of his theology, by the utmoft licenfe of fancy and hypothefis.
This world, for aught he knows,
is
very
and imperfect, compared

perior flandard; and was only the firft
rude eflay of fome infant deity, who af
terwards abandoned it, afhamed of his
lame performance: it is the work only
of fome dependent, inferior deity and
to a fu^-
faulty
is
it
the object of derifion to his fuperiors:

is the
production- of old age and dotage
fome fuperannuated deity

fince his death, has run on
in
$ure$,
from the
firft
and ever
at adven-
impulfe and active

force
ji2
!PART
force
which
it
received
You
DEMEA, at
from him.
juftly give figns of horror,
thefe ftrange fuppofitions
but
thefe,
and a thoufand more of the fame kind,
CLEANTHES S fuppofitions, not

mine. From the moment the attributes
are
of the Deity are fuppofed finite, all thefe

have place. And I cannot, for my part,
think, that fo wild and unfettled a fyftem of theology is, in any refpedl, pre
ferable to
none
at all.
THESE
own,
fuppofitions I abfolutely difcried CLEANTHES: they flrike me,
however, with no horror;
when
in
efpecially,
propofed in that rambling
which they drop from you.
way
On
the
contrary, they give me pleafure, when

I fee, that,
by the utmoft indulgence of
your imagination, you never get rid of

the hypothefis of defign in the univerfe ;
but are obliged at every turn to have
recourfe to
it.
To
this conceffion I
ad
here fteadily ; and this I regard as a fufficient foundation for religion.
PART
TT muft
VI.
faid
flight fabric, indeed,
which can be ereftecl on fo
be a
DEMEA,
While we are
tottering a foundation.
uncertain, whether there is one deity
or
whether the deity or dei

to whom we owe our exiflence, be
many
ties,
perfect
preme,
or imperfect, fubordinate or fudead or alive ; What truft or con
repofe in them ?
devotion or worihip addrefs to
fidence can
we
What
them ?
What veneration or obedience pay them ?
To
all
the purpofes of
life,
the theory of
becomes altogether ufelefs and

even with regard to fpeculative confe:
religion
quences,
its
to
uncertainty, according
you,
ii4
PART
mu ft render it
yO11 muft
you,
and unfatisfactory.
^
totally precarious
To render it ftill more unfatisfaftory,

faid PHILO, there occurs to me another
hypothecs, which muft acquire an air
of probability from the method of reafoning fo
That
THES.
caufes
much
on by CLEANeffedls arife from like
infifted
like
this principle
he fuppofes the
foundation of all religion. But there is

another principle of the fame kind, no
and derived from the fame

fource of experience That where fevelefs certain,
ral
known
circumftances are obferved
unknown will alfo be

Thus, if we fee the
limbs of a human body, we conclude,
that it is alfo attended with a human
to be fimilar, the
found
fimilar.
head, though hid from us.

Thus, if
we fee, through a chink in a wall, a
fmall part of the fun, we conclude,
were the wall removed, we fliould

the whole body.
In fliort, this
that,
fee
method
NATURAL RELIGION.
115
method of reafoning is fo obvious and

familiar, that no fcruple can ever be
made with
Now
far as
if
regard to
its folidity.
we
it falls
furvey the univerfe, fo

under our knowledge, it
bears a great refemblance to an animal

or organized body, and feems actuated
with a
like principle
of
life
and motion.
continual circulation of matter in
a continual
produces no diforder
wafle in every part is incellantly re
it
the clofeft fympathy is per

paired
ceived throughout the entire fyflem
and each part or member, in perform
:
ing
its
its
own
whole.
is
proper
both to
offices, operates
prefervation and to that of the
The world,
an animal
therefore,
and the Deity
SOUL
of the world, actuating

actuated by it.
You
have too
much
AJNTHES, to be at
all
infer,
is
the
it,
and
learning,
CLE-
furprifed at this
opinion,
n6
PART
^^j
opinion, which,
tained by almoft
you know, was main-*

all
the Theifts of anti
quity, and chiefly prevails in their difFor though

courfes and reafonings.
fometimes the ancient philofophers rea-
fon from final caufes, as if they thought

the world the workmanfhip of God ;
yet it appears rather their favourite no
tion to confider it as his body, whofe
organization renders
And
him.
it
it
fubfervient to
muft be
confefled, that
as the univerfe refembles
body than
art
it
more
does the works of
and contrivance;
if
human
human
our limited
analogy could ever, with any propriety,

be extended to the whole of nature, the
inference feems jufter in favour of the
ancient than the modern
theory.
THERE
are
many
other advantages,
too, in
the former
theory, which re
commended it to the ancient Theolo
gians.
their
Nothing more repugnant

notions,
to all
becaufe nothing more
repugnant
NATURAL RELIGION.
117
PART
repugnant to common experience, than
mind without body a mere fpiritual
;
fubftance, which
not under their
fell
nor comprehenfion, and of which

they had not obferved one fingle in-
ienfes
ftance
nature.
all
throughout
Mind
and body they knew, becaufe they felt

both an order, arrangement, organi
:
zation, or internal machinery, in both,
they likewife knew, after the fame man

ner and it could not but feem reafon:
able to transfer this experience to the

univerfe; and to fuppofe the divine
mind and body

to have,
to
be
alfo coeval,
and
both of them, order and ar
rangement naturally inherent in them,

and infeparable from them,
HERE,
therefore,
is
new
fpecies
of Anthropomorphifm^ CLEANTHES, on
which you may deliberate and a the

ory which feems not liable to any
;
confiderable difficulties.
much
fuperior,
furely,
You
are too
to fyftematical
preju-
n8
PART
prejudices , to find
^^^
fuppofing an animal body

nally, of itfelf, or from unknown caufes,
pofleiTed of order and organization, than
in fuppofing a fimilar order to
belong
to mind. But the
vulgar prejudice^ that
any more
difficulty in
to be, origi
body and mind ought always to accom

pany each other, ought not, one fhould
think, to be entirely negleded
fince
founded on vulgar experience, the

only guide which you profefs to follow
it is
in
if
thefe theological
And
inquiries.
you aflert, that our limited experi
all
ence
an unequal ftandard,
by which
to judge of the unlimited extent of na
ture
you entirely abandon your own
hypothefis, and miift thenceforward
adopt our Myfticifm, as
call
is
you
it,
and admit of the abfolute
incompre-
henfibility of the Divine Nature.
THIS theory,
own,
replied
CLEAN-
THES, has never before occurred to me,

though a pretty natural
and I
one;
cannot
NATURAL RELIGION.
119
cannot readily, upon fo fhort an exanimation and reflection, deliver any

opinion with regard to
it.
You
are
very fcrupulous, indeed, faid PHILO:

I to examine
any fyftem of yours,
were
I
mould not have
acfled
with half that
caution and referve, in flarting objec

tions
and
difficulties to
it.
However,
any thing occur to you, you will

oblige us by proposing it.
if
WHY
then,
replied
CLEANTHES,
it
feems to me, that, though the world

does, in many circumitances, refemble
an animal body
alfo defective in
mo ft
yet
many
is
the analogy
circumflances,
no organs of fenfe ;
no feat of thought or reafon; no one
precife origin of motion and acflion. In
the
material
feems to bear a flronger refemblance to a vegetable than to an ani
fhort,
it
mal, and your inference would be fo

of
far inconclufive in favour of the foul
the world.
BUT
20
PART
g UT ^ n
next pl ace , your theory

feems to imply the eternity of the world ;
and that is a principle, which, I think,
t|ie
can be refuted by the ftrongeil reafons

and probabilities. I fliall fiiggeft an
argument
lieve,
to this purpofe, which,
be
has not been infifted on
who
writer,
reafon
by any
from the
Thofe,
of arts and fciences, though
their inference wants not force, may
late origin
perhaps be refuted by considerations

derived from the nature of human fbciety,
which
is
in continual revolution,
between ignorance and knowledge, li

berty and flavery, riches and poverty;
fo that
it is
from our
impoflible for us,
limited experience, to foretell with affurance what events may or may not
be expeeled. Ancient learning and hiftory feem to have been in great danger
of entirely periiliing after the inunda
tion of the barbarous nations
thefe convulfions continued a
er,
or been a
little
more
N
and had
little
long
violent,
we
fhould
NATURAL RELIGION.
fhould not probably have
121
now known
what
pafled in the world a few centuries

before us. Nay, were it not for the fuperftition of the Popes,
who
prefer ved
jargon of LATIN, in order to

iitpport the appearance of an ancient
a
little
and univerfal church, that tongue muft

have been utterly loft in which cafe,
:
the Weftern world, being totally bar

barous, would not have been in a fit
difpofition
for
receiving the
GREEK
language and learning, which was con

veyed to them after the facking of CON
STANTINOPLE.
books had been
mechanical
When
learning
extinguished, even the
would have fallen condecay and it is eafily ima

arts
;
fiderably to
gined, that fable or tradition
afcribe to
and
them a much
later
might
origin
than the true one.
This vulgar argu

ment, therefore, againfl the eternity of
the world, feems a little precarious.
BUT
here appears to be the founda-
tion
122
PART
on o f a better argument. LUCULLUS

was the firft that brought cherry-trees
from ASIA to EUROPE; though that tree
ti
thrives
fo
many EUROPEAN
well in
climates, that
grows in the woods
it
without any culture.
Is it poflible, that,
throughout a whole eternity, no
EURO
PEAN had
ever faffed into ASIA, and

thought of tranfplanting fo delicious a
fruit into his own country ? Or if the
tree
was once
gated,
rilh?
how
tranfplaiited
could
Empires
it
and propa
ever afterwards pe-
may rife and fall;
liberty
and
flavery fucceed alternately ; igno^

ranee and knowledge give place to each
other; but the cherry-rtree will flill re

main in the woods of GREECE, SPAIN,
and ITALY, and
by
will never
the revolutions of
IT
is
be
human
affecfled
fociety.
not two thoufand years fince
vines were tranfplaiited into FRANCE;

though there is no climate in the world
more favourable
to
them.
It is
not three
centuries
NATURAL RELIGION.
123
centuries fince horfes, cows, meep, fwine,

in AMERICA,
dogs, corn, were known
Is it
that, during the revolu
poffible,
tions of a
whole
never
eternity, there
COLUMBUS, who might open the

communication between EUROPE and
arofe a
We may
and that continent?

imagine, that all
as
men would wear
well
flock-
and never
ings for ten thoufand years,
have the fenfe to think of garters to tie
them. All thefe feem convincing proofs
of the youth, or rather infancy, of the
world as being founded on the ope
;
ration of principles more conftant and

human foReady than thofe by which
No
governed and directed.

convulfion of the
thing lefs than a total
ciety
is
elements will ever deftroy
ROPEAN
are now
all
the
EU
animals and vegetables which

to
be found in the Weftern
world.
AND what argument have you againfl

fuchcoiivuUions, replied PHILO, Strong
PART
and almofl inconteftable proofs may be

traced over the whole earth, that every
part of this globe has continued for
many ages entirely covered with water.
And though
order were fuppofed infeparable from matter, and inherent in

it ; yet may matter be fufceptible of
many and
great revolutions, through

the endlefs periods of eternal duration.
The
inceffant changes, to
part of
it is
fubje6t,
feem
which every
to intimate
fome fuch general transformations tho

at the fame time it is obfervable, that
all the changes and
corruptions of which
we have ever had experience, are but
paffages from one ftate of order to
;
an->
other ; nor can matter ever reft in total
deformity and confufion.
What w e
r
fee
in the parts, we may infer in the whole 5

at lead, that is the method of
reafoning
on which you
And
were
your whole theory.

obliged to defend any par
reft
ticular fyftem of this nature
(which
never willingly fliould do), I efteem none
more
NATURAL RELIGION.
125
PART
plaufible than that which afcribes
eternal inherent principle of order
more
an
world
though attended with
revolutions and al
and
continual
great
to the
This at once folves
terations.
culties
general,
and
is
fatisfaclory,
we
all diffi
by being fo
complete and
if the folution,
not entirely
is
it
at leaft a
muft, fooner or
later,
theory that
have recourfe
whatever fyflem we embrace. How

could things have been as they are, were
to,
there not an original, inherent principle

of order fome where, in thought or in
matter?
And
it
is
very indifferent to
which of thefe we give the preference.

Chance has no place, on any hypotheiis,
fceptical or religious.
Every thing is
furely governed by fleady, inviolable
laws.
And were the inmofl effence of
things laid open to us, we fhould then

difcover a fcene, of which, at prefent,
we can have no
idea.
Inflead of
admi
ring the order of natural beings, we

fhould clearly fee, that it was abfolutely
impoffible
126
PART
impoffible for them, in the fmalleft artide, ever to admit of any other difpofition.
WERE
any one inclined to revive the

ancient Pagan Theology, which main
tained, as we learn from Heliod, that
this globe was governed by 30,000 dei
who
from the unknown

powers of nature you would naturally
ties,
arofe
CLEANTHES, that nothing

gained by this hypothefis and that
objedl,
is
as eafy to fuppofe all
mals, beings
perfedl,
from a
to
like
men and
is
it
ani
more numerous, but
lefs
have iprung immediately

Pufh the fame in
origin.
ference a ftep farther ; and you will find

a numerous fociety of deities as expli
cable as one univerfal deity, who poffefles, within himfelf, the powers and
All
perfections of the whole fociety.
thefe fyftems, then, of Scepticifm, Poly-
theifm, and Theifm,
on your
principles, to
you muft allow,

be on a like foot
ing:
NATURAL RELIGION.
ing,
and that no one of them has any
advantage over the others. You may

thence learn the fallacy of your prin
ciples.
PART
127
PART
T>UT
here, continued
VII.
PHILO, in ex- PART
amining the ancient fyflem of the

foul of the world, there flrikes me,
all
on a fudden, a new idea, which, if juft,

muft go near to fubvert all your reafoning, and deftroy even your firft in
ferences, on which you repofe fuch con
If the univerfe bears a greater
likenefs to animal bodies and to vege
fidence.
tables,
it is
than to the works of
more probable,
that
human art,
its
caufe re-
fembles the caufe of the former than

that of the latter,
rather to
and
be afcribed
vegetation than
to
its
origin ought
to generation or
reafon
or
defign.
Your conclufion, even according to your
own
DIALOG UES CONCERNING
130
PART owll
principles,
defective.
therefore lame
is
and
PRAY open up this argument a little

For I do not
farther, faid DEMEA.
rightly apprehend
manner in which
it,
in
that concife
you have
exprefTed
it.
OUR
friend
CLEANTHES,
replied
PHILO, as you have heard, aflerts, that

fince no queftioii of fadl can be proved
otherwife than
by
experience, the exift-
ence of a Deity admits not of proof

from any other medium. The world,
fays he, refembles the works of human
contrivance: Therefore
alfo
its
caufe muft
refemble that of the other.
Here
we may remark,
that the operation of

one very fmall part of nature, to wit
man, upon another very fmall part, to
wit that inanimate matter lying within

his reach,
is
the rule
THES judges of the
by which CLEAN
origin of the whole;
and
NATURAL RELIGION.
and he meafures objeds, fo widely difproportioned, by the fame individual
ftandard.
But to wave all objections
drawn from this topic; I affirm, that
there are other parts of the uiiiverfe
(belides the machines of human inven
tion) which bear ftill a greater refemblance to the fabric of the world, and
which therefore
afford a better conjec

ture concerning the univerfal
origin of
Thefe parts are animals

The world plainly revegetables.
this fyftem.
and
fembles more an animal or a vegetable,

than it does a watch or a
knitting-loom.
more probable,
refembles the caufe of the former. The
Its caufe, therefore, it is
caufe of the former
generation or ve
caufe, therefore, of the
is
The
we may infer
getation.
to be fomething iiworld,
milar or analogous to generation or ve
getation.
BUT how
MEA,
conceivable, faid DEthat the world can arife from

is it
any
thing
DIALOGUES CONCERTINO
132
PART
thing fimilar to vegetation or genera

tion?
VERY
manner
eafily, replied
In like
as a tree iheds its feed into the
neighbouring
trees
PHILO.
fields,
and produces other
fo the great vegetable, the world,
or this planetary fyftem, produces with

in itfelf certain feeds, which, being fcattered into the furrounding chaos, vege
tate into new worlds.
comet, for in-
ftance,
it
is
the feed of a world
has been fully ripened,
and
by
after
pafling
and ftar to ftar, it is at

laft toffed into the unformed elements
which every where furround this uni-
from fun
verfe,
to fun,
and immediately fprouts up into
new fyftem.
OR
if,
for the fake of variety (for
no other advantage), we mould fuppofe this world to be an animal; a co

met is the egg of this animal and in
fee
like
manner
as
an oftrich lays
its
egg
in
NATURAL RELIGION.
133
in the fand, which, without any farther care, hatches the egg, and produces
new animal
you, fays
fo
DEMEA
..... I underftand
But what wild, ar
bitrary fuppofitions are thefe? What

data have you for fuch extraordinary
concluiions ? And is the flight, imagi
nary refemblance of the world to a ve

getable or an animal fufficient to eftablilh the
both
fame inference with regard
Objects, which
to
are in general fo
widely different; ought they to be a

ftandard for each other ?
This is the
RIGHT, cries PHILO
topic on which I have all along infilled.
I
have flill afferted, that we have no
:
data to eftablifh any fyilem of cofmo-.

gony. Our experience, fo imperfect in
itfelf,
and
fo limited
both in extent and
can afford us no probable

conjecture concerning the whole of
But if we muft needs fix on
things.
duration,
fame hypothefis
by what
I
rule, pray,
ought
134
ought we
to
determine our choice
Is
any other rule than the greater

fimilarity of the objects compared?
there
And
does not a plant or an animal,

which fprings from vegetation or gene
ration, bear a ftronger refemblance to
the world, than does any

chine,
which
arifes
artificial
ma
from reafon and
defign ?
BUT what
generation
is
this
vegetation
of which you
DEMEA? Can you
talk,
and
faid
explain their opera
tions, and anatomize that fine internal

ftrudlure on which
they depend?
As much, at leaft, replied PHILO,

as CLEANTHES can
explain the opera
tions of reafon, or anatomize that in
ternal ftructure
on which
it
depends.
But without any fuch elaborate

difquifitions,
when
that
fprang from generation
it
I fee
an animal,
that with as great

certainty as
I infer,
;
and
you con
clude
NATURAL RELIGION.
135
elude a houfe to have been reared by
Thefe words, generation, rea-
defign.
powers and
whofe effects are
energies in nature,
known, but whofe efTence is incomprehenfible ; and one of thefe principles,
fon,
mark only
more than
the other, has
made
for being
certain
no
privilege
a ftandard to the whole
of nature,
IN
reality,
DEMEA,
it
may
reafon-
that the larger the

ably be expected,
views are which we take of thine s, the
better will they conduct us in our conclufions concerning fuch extraordinary
and fuch magnincer

little
4
:
.^.ojects.
In
t lis
corner of the world alone, there
are four principles, Reafon, Inftinft, Ge

which are limilar
neration,
Vegetation,
to each other,
milar
and are the caufes of
fi-
a number of other
What
may we naturally
effects.
fuppofe in
the immenfe extent and variety of .the
principles
vmiverfe, could
we
I
travel
2
from planet
to
>
and from fyftem to fyftem,
in order to examine each part of this
to planet
fabric
mighty
Any
one of thefe four
mentioned (and a hun

dred others, which lie open to our con
principles above
jecture)
which
world
afford us
may
to
a theory,
by
judge of the origin of the
and
a palpable and egre

gious partiality, to confine our view
entirely to that principle by which our
;
own minds
it is
operate.
Were
this
prin
more
intelligible on that account,

ciple
iuch a partiality might be fomewhat
excufeable But reafon, in its internal
:
fabric
known
and
ftrucliure, is really as little
to us as inftinft or vegetation
and perhaps even that vague, undeterminate word, Nature, to which the
not at the
vulgar refer every thing,
is
bottom more
The effects
known to us
inexplicable.
of thefe principles are
all
from experience: But the principles

themfelves, and their manner of opera
tion, are totally unknown: Nor is it lefs
intelligible^
NATURAL RELIGION,
intelligible, or lefs
137
conformable to ex- ?**
arofe by v^perience, to fay, that the world

med
feed
from
a
by another
vegetation
world, than to fay that it arofe from a

divine reafon or contrivance, according
to the fenfe in
derilands
BUT
which CLEANTHES un*
it.
methinks, faid
DEMEA,
if the
world had a vegetative quality, and

could fow the feeds of
new worlds
into
the infinite chaos, this power would bq

ftill an additional argument for defign
in
its
author.
For whence could arife
wonderful a faculty but from defign ?

Or how can order fpring from any
fo
thing which perceives not that order

which it beftows ?
You
need only look around you, re

plied PHILO, to fatisfy yourfelf with
regard to this queftion. A tree beftows
order and organization on that
which fprings from

I
tree
it,
without know-
in S
138
an animal, in the fame

a bird, on
manner, on its offspring
its neft
and inftances of this kind are
even more frequent in the world, than
ing the order
thofe of order,
which
arife
from reafon
and contrivance. To fay that all this

order in animals and vegetables proceeds
ultimately from delign, is begging the
nor can that great point be
queftion
afcertained otherwife than by proving,
a priori^ both that order is, from its na
:
ture, infeparably attached to
and
that
it
can never, of
original unknown
thought
itfelf,
or
from
principles, belong to
matter*
BUT
farther,
DEMEA;
this objection,
which you urge, can never be made

ufe of
by CLEANTHES, without
re
nouncing a defence which he has al

ready made againfl one of my objec
When I inquired concerning

the caufe of that fupreme reafon and
tions.
intelligence, into
which he
refolves e~
verv
NATURAL RELIGION.
very thing
pollibility
139
he told me, that the imof fatisfying fuch inquiries

;
could never be admitted as an objec

We
tion in any fpecies of philofophy.
he nor
ever
is it
;
muftjlopfome where, fays
within the reach of human capacity
to
ex
or fho<w the loft conplain ultimate caufes,

It is Jufficient, if
ne ft ions of any objetts.
as
thejleps, fo far
and
experience
<we
go, arefupported by
Now, that
obfervation.
as
vegetation and generation,
well as
to be principles
reafon, are experienced
of order in nature, is undeniable. If
of cofmogony on the
I reft
my
fyftem
it is
at
former, preferably to the latter,

The matter feems entirely
choice.
my
And when CLEANTHES
arbitrary.
me what
is
the caufe of
my
great vege
tative or generative faculty, I
afk
ly intitled to
him
on
fides
Thefe queforbear
on
chiefly his intereft

occafion to ftick to this
and
the prefent
am equal
the caufe of his
great reafoning principle.

ftions we have agreed to
both
alks
it is
agree-
140
Judging by our limited
agreement.
j
and imperfedl experience, generation

has fome privileges above reafon For
we fee every day the latter arife from
the former, never the former from the
:
latter.
COMPARE,
befeech you, the confe-
quences on both fides. The world, fay

animal therefore it is
I, refembles an
;
an animal, therefore
ration.
The
it
arofe
from gene
fteps, I confefs, are
wide;
fome fmall appearance of
yet there is
analogy in each ftep. The world, faysCLEANTHES, refembles a machine;
therefore
arofe
a machine, therefore it
The fteps here are
defign.
it
from
is
equally wide, and the analogy

king.
And
if
he pretends
lefs ftri-
to carry
on
a ftep farther, and to in

fer defign or reafon from the great prin
my hypothefis
ciple of generation,
on which
I infift
may, with better authority, ufe the

fame freedom to puih farther his hy
po thefis^
NATURAL RELIGION.
141
and infer a divine generation PART

or theogeny from his principle of reaI have at lead fome faint fhadow
fon.
of experience, which is the utmoft that
pothefts,
can ever be attained in the prefent fubjecL Reafon, in innumerable inftances,

obferved to arife from the principle
of generation, and never to arife from
is
any other
principle,
HESIOD, and
logifls,
all
the ancient
were fo (truck with
Mytho-
this analogy,
that they univerfally explained the ori
gin of nature from an animal birth, and

PLATO too, fo far as he is
copulation,
intelligible,
feems to have adopted fome
fuch notion in his
THE BRAMINS
arofe
from an
TIMÛS.
afTert,
that the
infinite fpider,
world
who fpun
whole complicated mafs from his

bowels, and annihilates afterwards the
this
whole or any part of it, by abforbing

it again, and refolving it into his own
effence.
142
PART eflence.
which
Here
a fpecies of cofmogony,
appears to us ridiculous; becaufe
a fpider
is
is
little
contemptible animal,
whofe operations we are never likely to

take for a model of the whole univerfe.
But ftill here is a new fpecies of analogy,
And were
even in our globe.

planet
wholly inhabited
(which
is
by
there a
fpiders,
very poffible), this inference
would
there appear as natural and irre

fragable as that which in our planet afcribes the origin of. all things to defign
and
intelligence,
ANTHES.
"s
explained
by CLE-
Why an orderly
fyftem may
not be fpun from the belly as well as
from the brain, it will be difficult for
him
I
to give a fatisfadlory reafon,
MUST
confefs,
PHILO, replied CLE-
ANTHES, that of all men living, the tafk

which you have undertaken, of railing
doubts and objections, fuits you beft,
and feems, in a manner, natural and un
avoidable to you. So great
is
your
fer
tility
NATURAL RELIGION.
tility
of invention, that
am
143
not ama-
acknowledge myfelf unable, on

a fudden, to folve regularly fuch out-
med
to
of-the-way difficulties
dart upon
as
me though
:
general, their fallacy
you incefTantly
I
and
clearly fee, in
And I
error.
are yourfelf,at prequeftion not, but you

have not the
fent, in the fame cafe, and
folution fo ready as the objection: while

muft be fenfible, that common fenfe
you
and reafon are entirely
againft you;
and
that fuch whimfies as you have deli

con
vered, may puzzle, but never can
vince as.
PAR T
PART
T^THAT
of
you
VIII.
afcribe to the fertility PART
my
invention, replied PHILO,

entirely owing to the nature of the
fubjedt. In fubjeds, adapted to the nar
is
row compafs of human
reafon, there
is
commonly but one determination, which

carries probability or convidlion
it;
all
and
with
man
of found judgment,
other fuppofitions, but that one, ap
to a
pear entirely abfurd and chimerical.

But in fuch queftions as the prefent, a
hundred contradictory views may preferve a kind of imperfect analogy ; and

invention has here full fcope to ex
Without any great
ert itfelf.
thought,
effort
of
believe that I could, in an inilant,
146
PART
an t, propofe other fyftems of cofmov^wj gony, which would have fome faint ap
pearance of truth though it is a thouft
fand, a million to one, if either yours or

any one of mine be the true fyftem,
FOR
inftance
the old
is
what
EPICUREAN
commonly, and
if I fliould revive
hypothefis ? This
believe juftly, e-
fleemed the mofl abfurd fyftem that

has yet been propofed ; yet,
know
not,
whether, with a few alterations, it might

not be brought to bear a faint appear
ance of probability. Inftead of fuppofing matter infinite, as
EPICURUS did;
us fuppofe it finite.
finite num
ber of particles is only fufceptible of fi
let
nite tranfpofitions
and
it
muft happen \
in an eternal duration, that every poffible order or pofition muft be tried an

infinite
number of times.
therefore,
with
all its
This world,
events, even the
moft minute, has before been produced

and deftroyed, and will again be produ
ced
NATURAL RELIGION.
147
ced and deftroyed, without any bounds P AR

and limitations. No one, who has a con- ^v
ception of the powers of infinite, in comparifon of finite, will ever fcruple this
determination.
BUT
this fuppofes, faid
DEMEA,
that
matter can acquire motion, without any
voluntary agent or
AND
where
is
firfh
mover.
the difficulty, replied
PHILO, of that fuppofition? Every event,

before experience,
is
equally difficult
and incomprehenfible; and every event,

after experience, is equally eafy and in
telligible.
from
Motion, in
gravity,
leclricity,
known
from
many
inftances,
elafticity,
from
e-
begins in matter, without any
voluntary agent
and
pofe always, in thefe cafes, an
to fup-
unknown
voluntary agent, is mere hypothefis ;

and hypothefis attended with no advan
tages.
matter
The beginning of motion

itfelf is as
in
conceivable a priori as
its
148
its
communication from mind and in
telligence.
BESIDES
why may not motion
have
been propagated by impulfe through all

eternity; and the fame flock of it, or
nearly the fame, be ftill upheld in the
univerfe? As much as is loft by the
compoiition of motion, as
ed by
its
refolution.
caufes are, the fadl

ter
is,
is
And whatever
certain, that
and always has been,
agitation, as far as
tradition reaches.
the
mat
in continual
human experience
There
bly, at prefent, in the
one
much is gain
is
or
not proba
whole univerfe,
particle of matter at abfolute reft.
AND this very confideration too, con

tinued PHILO, which we have ftumbled
on in the courfe of the argument, fuggefts a
new
that
not abfolutely abfurd and
is
probable.
hypothesis of cofmogony,
IsT:here a fyftem,
im
an order,
an (Economy of things, by which mat

ter
H9
NATURAL RELIGION.
can preferve that perpetual agitation which feems eiTential to it, and
ter
yet maintain a confiancy in the forms
which
produces ? There certainly
it
is
fuch an ceconomy for this is actually

The
the cafe with the prefent world.
:
continual motion of matter, therefore^

in
than infinite tranfpofitions, muft
lefs
produce
ceconomy or order; and
this
by its very nature, that order, when once

eflablilhed,
fupports
itfelf,
for
many
not to eternity.
But when
ages,
ever matter is ib poized, arranged, and
if
adjufted, as to continue in perpetual mo

tion, and yet preferve a constancy in the
its
forms,
fituation
mud, of
neceffity,
the fame appearance of art and

contrivance which we obferve at pre
fent.
All the parts of each form muft
have
all
have a relation
whole
to
each other, and to the
and the whole
itfelf
mull have
a relation to the other parts of the uni-*

verfe; to the element, in which the
form
fubfifts
;,
to the materials,
with
which
VIII>
150
vnV w k* cn
and
*c
re P a i rs
lts
wafte and decay;
to every other form,
which
is
ho-
any of
thefe particulars deftroys the form and
the matter, of which it is compofed, is
again fet loofe, and is thrown into irre
ftile
or friendly.
defedl in
gular motions and fermentations, till it

unite itfelf to fome other regular form.
If
it,
no fuch form be prepared to receive

and if there be a great quantity of
this corrupted matter in the univerfe,
entirely difordered ;
be the feeble embryo of a
the univerfe itfelf
whether
world in
it
its firft
is
beginnings that
is
thus
deftroyed, or the rotten carcafe of one

languishing in old age and infirmity. In
either cafe, a chaos enfues; till finite,
though innumerable revolutions pro

duce at laft fome forms, whofe parts
and organs are fo adjufted as to fupport.
the forms amidfl a continued fucceffion of matter.
SupposE,(forwefhall endeavour to vary

the
NATURAL RELIGION.
151
the expreflion) that matter were thrown PART

into any position, by a blind, ungraded
force;
tion
it is
mud
evident, that this
in
all
firft
pofi-
probability be the moft
confufed and moft diforderly imagin

able, without any refemblance to thofe
works of human contrivance, which, along with a fymmetry of parts, difcover

an adjuftment of means to ends, and a
tendency to felf-prefervation. If the ac
tuating force ceafe after this operation,
matter muft remain for ever in diforder,
and continue an imrnenfe chaos, with~

out any proportion or activity. But
fuppofe, that the actuating force, what
ever
it
be, dill continues in matter, this
polition will immediately give place

to a fecond, which will likewife in all
firft
probability be as diforderly as the
and
firft,
on through many fucceflions of

changes and revolutions. No particular
fo
order or pofition ever continues a
ment
ftill
mo
The
unaltered.
original forcej
in
remaining
activity, gives a per-
petual
152
RT
petual reftleffhefs to matter. Every pof-
produced, and inftantly

deftroyed. If a glimpfe or dawn of or
der appears for a moment, it is inftantly
fible fituation is
hurried away, and confounded, by that

never-ceafing force which actuates every part of matter.
THUS
the univerfe goes on for
many
ages in a continued fucceffion of chaos

and dilbrder. But is it not poffible that
it
may
fettle at laft, fo as
motion and adive force
not to lofe
its
(for that
we
have fuppofed inherent in it), yet fo as

to prefer ve an uniformity of appearance,
amidft the continual motion and fluc
tuation of
its
parts
This
we
find to be
the cafe with the univerfe at prefent.

Every individual is perpetually chan
ging, and every part of every indivi

dual; and yet the whole remains, in ap
pearance, the fame.
May we not hope
for fuch a polition, or rather be affured
of
it,
from the
eternal revolutions of
imguided
NATURAL RELIGION.
153
unguided matter; and may not this account for all the appearing wifdom and
contrivance which
is
in the univerfe
Let us contemplate the fubjedl a
and we
fhall find, that this
little,
adjuflment,
by matter, of a feeming flability in the forms, with a real and per

petual revolution or motion of parts,
if attained
affords a plaufible, if not a true folution
of the
IT
difficulty.
is
in vain, therefore, to infift
upon
the ufes of the parts in animals or ve

getables, and their curious adjuflment
to each other.
would
an animal could
were
fo adjufled
fain
know, how
fubfift, unlefs
?
Do we
its
parts
not find, that
immediately perifhes whenever this

adjuftment ceafes, and that its matter
it
corrupting
tries
fome new form ?
It
hap
pens, indeed, that the parts of the world

are fo well adjufted, that fome regular
form immediately lays claim to this cor

rupted matter: and if it were not fo,
could
154
*
RT
Muft it not
animal, and pafs
could the world fubfift

diffolve as well as the
through new pofitions and fituations

till in a great, but finite fucceffion, it
5
fall at laft
into the prefent or
fome fuch
order ?
IT
is
well, replied
CLEANTHES^ you
told us, that this hypothefis was fuggefted on a fudden, in the courfe of the
Had you had
argument.
leifure to ex
amine it, you would foon have percei^

ved the infuperable objections to which
No
it is
expofed.
fubfift, unlefs
it
form, you fay, can
poffefs thole
powers and
organs requifite for its fubfiftence fome

new order or ceconomy muft be tried,
:
and
laft
fo on,
fome
maintain
without intermiffion
order,
itfelf,
cording to this
till
at
which can fupport and

is fallen
upon. But ac
hypothefis, whence arife
the
many conveniencies and advantages

which men and all animals poffefs Two
?
eyes,
two
ears, are
not abfolutely neceffary
NATURAL RELIGION.
153
fary for the fubfiftence of the fpecies.

Human race might have been propaga-
ted
and
cows,
fruits
prefer ved, without horfes, dogs,

fheep, and thofe innumerable
and
producfts
fatisfacTion
which
and enjoyment.
ferve to our
If
no ca
mels had been created for the ufe of
man
in the fandy deferts of AFRICA and

ARABIA, would the world have been
had been fra

med to give that wonderful and ufeful
direction to the needle, would human
fociety and the human kind have been
difTolved ? If no loadflone
immediately extinguifhed ? Though the

maxims of Nature be in general very
frugal, yet inftances of this kind are far
from being
is
and any one of them

proof of defign, and of a
rare;
a fufficient
benevolent defign, which gave rife to

the order and arrangement of the univerfe.
AT
leaft,
you may
fafely infer, faid
PHILO, that the foregoing hypothefis
is
fo
156
and imperfect which

not fcruple to allow. But can we
fo far incomplete
I fhall
ever reafonably expect greater fuccefs in

any attempts of this nature ? Or can we
ever hope to erect a fyftem of cofmogony, that will be liable to no excep
tions, and will contain no circumflance
our limited and imperfect

experience of the analogy of Nature?
Your theory itfelf cannot furely pretend
to
repugnant
any fuch advantage; even though you

have run into Anthropomorphijm^ the bet
to
conformity to common
Let us once more put it to
ter to preferve a
experience.
In
trial.
all
ever feen, ideas are

jects,
which we have
copied from real ob
inftances
and are ectypal, not archetypal,
to exprefs myfelf in learned terms
You
and give thought the

In all inftances which we
precedence.
ever
have
feen, thought has no influ
ence upon matter, except where that
reverfe this order,
matter
is
fo conjoined
with
it
as to
have
an equal reciprocal influence upon
it.
No
NATURAL RELIGION.
157
animal can move immediately any P A**

thing but the members of its own body;
No
and indeed, the equality of action and

re-action feems to be an univerfal law
of Nature: But your theory implies a
contradiction to this experience. Thefe
inftances, with many more, which it
were eafy
to cbllecfl, (particularly the
fuppoiition of a mind or fyflem of

thought that is eternal, or, in other
words, an animal ingenerable and im

mortal) ; thefe inftances, I fay, may teach
all of us fobriety in condemning each
other
and
let
us
fee,
no fyflem
be received
that as
of this
kind ought ever
from a
flight analogy, fo neither
to
ought
on
of
a
fmall
account
be
rejected
any
is an inconve
For
that
incongruity.
to
nience from which
nounce no one
to
we can
juftly pro
be exempted.
ALL
religious fyftems, it is confefTed,

are fubject to great and infuperable dif
ficulties.
Each difputant triumphs in

his
158
PART hi s turn while he carries

;
on an
offen-
war, and expofes the abfurdities,

barbarities, and pernicious tenets, of his
five
antagonift.
But
all
of them, on the
whole, prepare a complete triumph for
who
them, that no fyflem ought ever to be embraced with

regard to fuch fubjedls For this plain
the Sceptic;
tells
no abfurdity ought ever to

be aflented to with regard to any fubreafon, that
A total
fufpenfe of judgment is
here our only reafonable refource. And
if every attack, as is commonly obfer-
jedl.
ved, and no defence,

gians,
is
fuccefsful
among Theolo
how complete muft
be his victory, who remains always, with

all mankind, on the offenfive, and has
himfelf no fixed ftation or abiding city,
which he
is
ever,
on any
occafion,
ob
liged to defend ?
PART
PART
if fo
many
BUT
argument a
IX.
difficulties
n
pojteriori,
/*
attend the
i
laid
-r-v
DE ME A;
had we not better adhere to that fimple

and fublime argument a priori, which,
by
offering to us infallible demonflra-
tion, cuts off at
once
all
doubt and dif
By this argument, too, we may

the INFINITY of the divine at
ficulty ?
prove
which, I am afraid, can never

be afcertained with certainty from any
tributes
For
other topic.
which
either
how
is finite,
know, may be
fo
can an
effect,
aught we
can fuch an ef
or, for
how
prove an infinite caufe ? The

unity too of the Divine Nature, it is
very difficult, if not abfolutely impoffect, I fay,
fible,
160
deduce merely from contemplating the works of nature; nor will

the uniformity alone of the plan, even
fible, to
were
allowed, give us any affurance of

that attribute.
Whereas the argument
it
a priori
You
feem
to reafon,
if thofe
pofed CLEANTHFS, as
tages
DEMEA,
and conveniencies in the
inter-
advan
abftradl
argument were full proofs of its fohdity.

But it is firft proper, in my opinion, to
determine what argument of
ture
you choofe
{hall afterwards,
from
to infift
from
this
na
on; and we
itfelf,
better than
confequences, endeavour
to determine what value we ought to
its ufeful
put upon
it.
THE argument, repliedDE ME A, which

would infift on, is the common one.
Whatever
exifts,
reafon of
its
muft have a
exiftence
lutely impoffible for
it
caufe. or
being abfo-
any thing
to pro
duce
NATURAL RELIGION.
duce
itfelf,
or be the caufe of
161
its
own
In mounting up, therefore,
exiflence.
from effects to caufes, we mufl either

go on in tracing an infinite fucceflion,
without any ultimate caufe at all ; or
mufl at laft have recourfe to fome ulti
mate
caufe, that
Now that the

may
is
necefjarily exiftent:
firft
fuppofition is abfurd,
be thus proved. In the infinite
chain or fucceffion of caufes and
each fingle
effect is
effects,
determined to
exift
by the power and efficacy of that caufe

which immediately preceded but the
;
whole eternal chain or

together,
is
not determined or caufed
by any thing
that
it
much
fucceflion, taken
and yet
is
evident
requires a caufe or reafon,

as
any particular
begins to exift in time.

is flill
it
reafonable,
Why
as
object which
The
queflion
this particular
from eterni
ty, and not any other fucceflion, or no
fucceflion at all.
If there be no nefucceffipn of caufes exifled
ceffarily-exiftent being,
any fuppofition
which
PART
62
FART
which can be formed

fible
nor
is
in Nothing
equally pof-
more abfurdity
having exifted from eter
there any
than there
nity,
is
is
in that fucceffion
of caufes which conftitutes the univerfe.
What was
which de
then,
it,
termined Something to exift rather than

Nothing, and beftowed being on a par
ticular poffibility, exclufive of the reft ?
External caufes^ there are fuppofed to be
none.
Chance
is
word without
meaning. Was it Nothing? But that

can never produce any thing.
We
muft, therefore, have recourfe to a neceflarily-exiftent Being,
REASON
who
carries the
of his exiftence in himfelf ;
and who cannot be fuppofed not to

exift, without an exprefs contradiction.
There is confequently fuch a Being ;
that
is,
there
is
SHALL not
a Deity.
leave
it
CLEANTHES, (though
flatting objections
is
to
PHILO, faid
know
that the
his chief delight)

to
NATURAL RELIGION.
163
to point out the weaknefs of this

It feems to
phyfical reafoning.
meta- ? AR
me
fo
obvioufly ill- grounded, and at the fame

time of fo little confequence to the
and
religion, that I
myfelf venture to
mow the fallacy
caufe of true piety

{hall
of
it.
SHALL begin with
there
is
obferving, that
an evident abfurdity in pretend
ing to demonftrate a matter

to prove
Nothing
it
is
of
by any arguments
demonstrable,
fact,
or
a priori.
unlefs
contrary implies a contradiction.

thing, that is diftinctly conceivable,
the
No
im
Whatever we
conceive as exiftent, we can alfo con
ceive as non-exiftent.
There is no
being, therefore, whofe non-exiftence
plies
a contradiction.
implies a contradiction. Confequently

there is no being, whofe exiftence is
demonftrable. I propofe this argument
as entirely decifive,
reft
and
am
the whole controverfy
willing to
upon
it.
IT
164
PART
IT
is
pretended that the Deity
is
neceffarily-exiftent being; and this ne~

is
attempted to be
ceffity of his exiftence
aflerting, that, if we
by
explained
knew
his whole effence or nature, we fhould

perceive it to be as impoffible for him
not to
exift as for twice
four.
But
it
is
two not
to
be
evident, that this can
never happen, while our faculties re
main
the fame as at prefent.

It will
flill be poffible for us, at
any time, to
conceive the non-exiftence of what we
formerly conceived to exift; nor can

mind ever lie under a neceffity of
the
fuppofing any objedl to remain always

in being; in the fame manner as we lie
under a
twice
neceffity of always conceiving

two to be four. The words,
therefore,
necejjary
meaning
none that
or,
is
exiftence,
which
is
the fame thing,
confiftent.
BUT farther: Why may

terial
have no
not the
ma
univerfe be the necefTarily-exiftent
NATURAL RELIGION.
tent Being,
acording to this pretended
We
dare not
explication of neceffity?
affirm that we know all the
qualities of
matter ; and for aught we can deter
mine,
it
may
contain fome
qualities,
which, were they known, would make

its non-exiflence
appear as great a con
tradiction as that twice
two
is
five.
find only one argument

employed to
prove, that the material world is not
the neceflarily-exiftent
Being ; and this
is
derived
from
the contin
argument
gency both of the matter and the form

of the world.
Any particle of mat
"
ter,"
it is
faid *,
be annihilated
1
"
may be conceived to
and any form may
be conceived to be
altered.
Such an
annihilation or alteration, therefore,

is not
But it feems a
impoffible."
great partiality not to perceive, that the
fame argument extends equally to the

Deity, fo far as we have any concep
tion of him
and that the mind can at
;
L
*
Dr CLARKE-
lead
166
imagine him to be non-cxiftent,
or his attributes to be altered. It muft
leaft
be fome unknown, inconceivable qua

can make his non-exiflities, which
tence appear impoflible, or his attri
butes unalterable And no reafon can
:
thefe qualities may

not belong to matter. As they are al
be afllgned,
together
why
unknown and
inconceivable,
they can never be proved incompatible

with it.
ADD
to this, that in tracing
an
eter
nal fucceflion of objeds, it feems abfurd to inquire for a general caufe or

firft
exifts
How
can any thing, that

from eternity, have a caufe; fince
author.
that relation implies a priority in time,

and a beginning of exiflence ?
IN fuch a chain,
objedls, each
part
too, or fucceflion of
is
caufed
by
that
which preceded it, and caufcs that

which fucceeds it. Where then is the
difficulty?
NATURAL RELIGION.
difficulty?
But the
WHOLE,
167
you
fay,
wants a caufe. I
anfwer, that the uni
ting of thefe parts into a
like the
whole,
uniting of feveral diftindt counties into
one kingdom, or feveral diftindt
mem
bers into one
body,
is
performed mere
an
ly by
ad
of the mind, and
arbitrary
has no influence on the nature
of things.
Did
{how you the particular caufes of

each individual in a collection of
twenty
particles of matter, I mould think it
I
very unreafonable, fhould you after

wards afk me, what was the caufe of the
whole twenty. That is
fufficiently ex
plained in explaining the caufe of the
parts.
THOUGH
have urged,
the
reafonings which
CLEANTHES, may
you
well
excufe me, faid

PHILO, from flarting
farther
any
difficulties; yet I cannot
forbear infilling flill
upon another to
It
is
obfetved
pic.
by arithmeticians,
that the ptodudts of
9 compofe always
either
PART
i68
PAR r either
9, or
^^
fome
lefTer
produdt of 9
if
you add together all the characters, of

which any of the former produdls is
compofed. Thus, of 18, 27, 36, which
you make 9 by ad-
are produdls of 9,
i
ding
369
add
to 8, 2 to 7, 3 to 6.
a producft alfo of 9
is
and
3, 6,
9,
you make
Thus, of
and if you
18, a lefler
To
a fuperficial obferver, fo wonderful a regularity may

be admired as the effect either of chance
producft of 9 *.
or defign
but a
im
work
fkilful algebraift
mediately concludes it to be the

of neceffity and demonftrates, that it
mufl for ever refult from the nature of
;
thefe
aflc,
numbers.
not probable, I
that the whole oeconomy of the
univerfe
is
Is
it
conducted by a
like
necef
though no human algebra can

furnifh a key which folves the difficul
fity,
ty ?
And
inftead of admiring the order
of natural beings, may it not happen,

that, could we penetrate into the inti
mate
*
Republfque des Lettres, Aout. 1685.
NATURAL RELIGION.
169
mate nature of bodies, we fliouid clear- PART

ly fee why it was abfolutely impoffible
they could ever admit of any other difpofition?
duce
this
So dangerous is it to intro
idea of neceflity into the pre-
fent queftion and fo

naturally does it
afford an inference
directly oppofite to
!
the religious hypothefis
BUT
dropping
continued PHILO
felves to
more
all
;
thefe abftradions,
and confining our-
familiar topics
mall
venture to add an obfervation, that the

argument a priori has feldom been
found very convincing, except
to
peo
ple of a metaphyfical head, who have

accuftomed themfelves to abftracl rea-
foning,
and who finding from mathe
matics,
that
fcurity,
and contrary
the
underflanding fre
quently leads to truth, through obto
firft
appear
ances, have transferred the
fame habit
where it ought
of thinking to fubjecfts
not to have place. Other people, even
L 3
of
170
PART o f OOCl fen fe ancl the beft inclined to

g
fome deficiency in
feel
always
religion,
fuch arguments, though they are not
where
perhaps able to explain diftinctly
it lies.
did,
certain proof, that men ever

ever will, derive their religion
and
from other fources than from

cies
this fpe-
of reafoning.
FAR T
PART
TT
is
my
opinion,
that each
DEMEA,
X.
own,
man
replied
feels, in a
PART
<~^>
manner, the truth of religion within

his own breaft ; and from a confcioufnefs of his imbecillity
tlier
and mifery^ ra-
than from any reafoning,
is
led to
protection from that Being, on

whom he and all nature is dependent.
feek
So anxious or
fo tedious are
beil fcenes of
life,
the objedl of
all
We
that futurity
our hopes and
is
ftill
fears.
look forward, and enprayers, adoration and fa-
iiiceflantly
deavour, by
crifice,
to
powers,
whom we
fo
even the
able
to
appeafe
find,
afflidl
L 4
unknown
thofe
by
and
experience,
opprefs us.
Wretched
172
PART
Wretched creatures that we
are
what
refource for us amidft the innumerable
did not religion fuggefl

fome methods of atonement, and ap-
ills
of
life,
peafe thofe terrors with

inceflantly agitated
which we are
and tormented
AM
indeed perfuaded, faid PHILO,

that the beft, and indeed the only,
I
method of bringing every one to a due

fenfe of religion, is by jufl reprefentations of the mifery and wickednefs of
men. And for that purpofe a talent of
eloquence and ftrong imagery is more
than that of reafoning and ar
gument. For is it neceflary to prove,
what every one feels within himfelf ?
requifite
It is
only neceflary to make us
if poflible,
feel it,
more intimately and fen-
fibly.
THE
people, indeed, replied
DEMEA,
are fufficiently convinced of this great

The miferies
truth.
and melancholy
of
NATURAL RELIGION.
of
life
""""general
173
the unhappinefs of man

corruptions of our nature
the
the
of pleafures,
unfatisfaclory enjoyment
thefe phrafes have
riches, honours
;
in
become almoft proverbial

guages.
all
men
And who
declare
diate feeling
all
lan
can doubt of what
from
own imme
their
and exerience
PHILO, the learn

ed are perfectly agreed with the vulgar;
and in all letters, facred and profane^
IN
this point, faid
the topic of human mifery has been infifled on with the moft pathetic elo
quence that forrow and melancholy

could infpire.
The
poets,
who
fpeak
from fentiment, without a fyilem, and

whofe teftimony has therefore the more
of this
authority, abound in images
nature.
From HOMER down
to
Dr
the whole infpired tribe have

ever been fenfible, that no other re-
YOUNG,
prefentation
of things would fuit the

feeling
174
PART
feeling
dual,
As
and obfervation of each indivi-
to
authorities,
DEMEA,
replied
you need not feek them. Look round

this library of CLEANTHES.
I fliall
venture to affirm, that, except authors
of particular fciences, fuch as chymiftry or botany, who have no occafion
to treat of human life, there is fcarce
one of thofe innumerable writers, from

whom the fenfe of human mifery has
fome pafTage or other, extorted

a complaint and confeffion of it.
At
not, in
on that
leail,
the chance
fide
and no one author has ever, fo

I can
recoiled, been fo extrava
far as
gant as to deny
is
entirely
it.
THERE you mufl

PHILO: LEIBNITZ
perhaps the
is
excufe me, faid

has denied it; and
firft
who
ventured
upon
s
That fentiment had been maintained

by
and fome few others, before

of fo
great fame as that
Dr KING,
LE BNITZ though by none

GERMAN philofopher.
i
NATURAL RELIGION.
fo bold
upon
nion
175
and paradoxical an opi-
at ieaft, the
firft
who made
it
effential to his philofophical fyftem.
DE-
AND by
being the firft, replied

MEA, might he not have been fenfible
of his error ? For is this a fubjecl in
which philofophers can propofe to

make difcoveries, efpecially in fo late
an age ? And can any man hope by a
the fubjeft fcarcely
fimple denial (for
admits of reafoning) to bear down the
united teftimony of mankind, founded
on
fenfe
and confcioufnefs
man, added he,

an exemption from the lot
pretend to
of all other animals ? The whole earth,
and polbelieve me, PHILO, is curfed
AND why mould
<
luted.
perpetual
war
is
kindled a-
Neceffity,
living creatures.
the ftrong and
hunger, want, ftimulate
terror, acourageous: Fear, anxiety,
mongft
gitate
all
the
weak and
infirm.
The
firft
entrance
176
PART entrance into life

gives anguim to the
new-born infant and to its wretched
parent: Weaknefs, impotence, diftrefs,

attend each ftage of that life and it is
:
at laft finifhed in
OBSERVE
PHILO, the cu
of Nature in order to
too, fays
rious artifices
embitter the
agony and horror.
life
of every living being.
The
ftronger prey upon the weaker,

and keep them in perpetual terror and
The weaker too, in their

anxiety.
turn, often prey upon the ftronger,
and vex and moleft them without
laxation.
Confider
race of infe&s,
the
that
which
innumerable
either are bred
body of each animal, or
infix their ftings in
have others
him.
re
on
flying about
Thefe infefts
than themfelves,
which torment them. And thus on
ftill
lefs
each hand, before and behind, above

and below, every animal is furround-
ed with enemies, which inceffantly feek

his mifery
and .definition
MAN
NATURAL RELIGION.
MAN
alone, faid
177
DEMEA, feems
to
x.
an exception to this rule.

For by combination in fociety, he can
eaiily matter lions, tygers, and bears,
be, in part,
whofe greater flrength and

turally enable
them
to prey
na
agility
upon him.
ON
the contrary, it is here chiefly,

cried PHILO, that the uniform and
equal
maxims of Nature
parent.
bination,
Man,
it is
furmount
are
true, can,
all
mod
ap
by com
his real enemies,
and become matter of the whole ani

mal creation but does he not immedi
:
ately raife
up
ene
to himfelf imaginary
who
mies, the daemons of his fancy,
haunt him with fuperftitious terrors,

and blaft every enjoyment of life? His
pleafure, as he imagines, becomes, in
their eyes, a crime
his
food and repofe
his
give them umbrage and offence
very fleep and dreams furnifh new ma
terials to anxious fear
and even death,
his refuge from every other ill, prefents
:
only
^J
178
PART
on } v t fa d rea d of
^j rable woes.
Nor
and innumedoes the wolf moleft

endlefs
more
the timid flock, than

fuperftition
does the anxious breaft of wretched
mortals.
BESIDES, confider,DEME A: This very

fociety,
by which we furmount
thofe
wild beafts, our natural

enemies; what
new enemies does it not raife to us ?
What wo and
fion
mifery does
it
not occa-
Man is the greateft enemy of man.
Oppreffion,
tumely,
injuftice,
violence,
contempt, con
war,
fedition,
ca
lumny, treachery, fraud; by thefe they

mutually torment each other and they
would foon diffolve that
which
:
fociety
they had formed, were it not for the

dread of ftill greater ills, which mufl
attend their feparation.
BUT though
faid
thefe external
infults,
DEMEA, from
from
all
animals, from men,

the elements, which aflkult
us,
form
NATURAL RELIGION.
frightful catalogue of woes, they
in comparifon of thofe
form a
are
179
nothing
within ourfelves, from the

diftempered condition of our mind and
which
arife
body. How many lie under the linger

ing torment of difeafes ? Hear the pa
thetic enumeration of the great poet.
Intefline ftone
and
ulcer, colic-pangs,
Demoniac
frenzy, moping melancholy,

moon-ftruck madnefs, pining atrophy,
Marafmus, and wide-wafting peftilence.
And
Dire was the
toiling,
deep the groans
DESPAIR.
the Tick, bufieft from couch to couch.

his dart
over them triumphant
Tended
And
DEATH
Shook; but delay d ta
With vows,
ftrike,
tho oft invok d
good and
as their chief
final
hope.
THE diforders of the mind, continued

DEMEA, though more fecret, are not per
lefs
haps
difmal and vexatious.
Re-
morfe, fhame, anguifh, rage, difappoint-
ment, anxiety,
fear, dejection^ defpair;
who
has ever pafled through life with

out cruel inroads from thefe tormen
tors
any
How many have
better fenfations
fcarcely ever felt
Labour and po
verty,
180
V erty, fo abhorred by every one, are the

certain lot of the far greater number:
v
and thofe few privileged perfons, who

enjoy eafe and opulence, never reach
contentment or true
goods of
very
life
All the
felicity.
united would not
happy man
but
all
the
make
ills
united
would make a wretch indeed; and any

one of them almoft (and who can be
free from every one?) nay often the abfence of one
fefs all?)
is
good (and who can pof-
fufficient to
render
life
in
eligible.
WERE
a ftranger to drop, on a fud-
den, into this world,
fpecimen of
would
mow him,
an hofpital full
of difeafes, a prifon crowded with malefaclors and debtors, a field of battle
ftrowed with car cafes, a fleet founder
as a
its ills,
ing in the ocean, a nation languiihing
under tyranny, famine, or
peftilence.
To
turn the gay fide of life to him, and

give him a notion of its pleafures ; whi
ther
NATURAL RELIGION.
ther fliould
to
think, that
THERE
inftances,
which
Why
ball,
He might jultly
was only mowing him a
of diftrefs and forrow.
an opera,
diverfity
conduct him? to a
181
to court?
no evading fuch (Inking

faid PHILO, but by apologies,
is
farther aggravate the charge.

have all men, I afk, in all ages,
flill
complained inceffantly of the miferies

of life ?
They have no jxift reafon,
fays one thefe complaints proceed only
from their difcontented, repining, auxi:
And
can there poffibly, I reply, be a more certain foun

dation of mifery, than fuch a wretched
ous difpofition.
temper ?
BUT
as
if
they were really as unhappy
my
they pretend, fays
why do they remain in

Not
fatisfied
with
life,
life
antagonist,
- - -
afraid of death.
This
PART
182
This
the fecret chain,

fay I, that holds
are terrified, not bribed to the
is
We
us.
continuance of our exiftence.
IT
only a
is
delicacy, he may inrefined fpirits indulge,
falfe
which a few
and which has fpread
fift,
among
thefe complaints
the whole race of mankind.
And what
is this
you blame ?
Is it
delicacy,
afk,
which
any thing but a greater
fenfibility to all the pleafures and pains

of life ? and if the man of a
delicate,
refined temper, by being fo much more

alive than the reft of the world, is
only
fo much more
what
unhappy;
ment mufi we form
man
life
judg
in general of
hu
LET men remain
at reft, fays our adthey will be eafy.

They
verfary ; and
are willing artificers of their
fery
No
guor follows
reply
own mi-
an anxious lan
their repofe; difappoint-
ment,
NATURAL RELIGION.
183
P ** RT
rnent, vexation, trouble, their activity
-A..
and ambition.
obferve fomething like what
you mention in fome others, replied
CAN
CLEANTHES: but
or nothing of
that
it is
fent
it.
in myfelf ;
it
common
not fo
confefs,
as
feel little
and hope
you repre>
IF
felf,
human mifery yourDEMEA, I congratulate you
feel
you
cried
on fo happy
not
a fingularity. Others, feem-
have not been

ingly the moft profperous,
afhamed to vent their complaints in the
moft melancholy
to
Let us attend
ftrains.
the great, the fortunate
CHARLES V. when,
emperor,
with human
tired
grandeur, he refigned
his exteniive
all
dominions into the hands of his fon. In

the laft harangue, which he made on
that
memorable
avowed,
*iuhich he
that
occafion,
the
had ever
grtatcjl
enjoyed,
he publicly
frofpcrities
had been mixed

with
with fo many adverfities, that he
might
truly jay he had never enjoyed
any fatis-
faflion or contentment.
red
reti
which he fought for fhelter,

him any greater happinefs ? If we
life,
afford
But did the
in
may credit his
fon
account, his repent
ance commenced the

very day of his refignation.
CICERO
fortune, from fmall begin

nings, rofe to the greateft luftre and re
nown;
the
ills
what
of life do
yet
pathetic complaints of
his familiar
letters, as
well as philofophical
difcourfes, con
tain?
And
fuitably to his
own
experi
ence, he introduces CATO, the

great,
the fortunate
CATO, protefting in his

old age, that had he a new life in
his
offer,
he would
ASK
rejeft the prefent.
yourfelf, afk
any of your ac
whether
quaintance,
they would live
over again the
laft
ten or
twenty years
of
NATURAL RELIGION.
of their
life.
No
but the next twenty, PART
they fay, will be better
And from the

What the firft
dregs of
Thus
they find (fuch
at laft
life,
hope to receive
fprightly running could not give.

is
the great-
nefs of human mifery ; it reconciles even

contradictions) that they complain, at
once of the fhortnefs of
and of
life,
its
vanity and forrow.
And is
it
poffible,
CLEANTHES,
faid
PHILO, that after all thefe reflections,

and infinitely more, which might be
you can flill perfevere in

your Anthropomorphifm, and afTert the
fuggefled,
moral attributes of the Deity, his juflice, benevolence,

mercy, and recti
tude,
to be of the
thefe virtues in
power we allow
wills
is
fame nature with

creatures ? His
human
executed
infinite
whatever he
but neither
any other animal
is
happy
man
nor
therefore
he does not will their happinefs. His

wifdom is infinite he is never miftaken
:
in
i86
FART
n choofing the means
to
any end
the courfe of Nature tends not to
or animal felicity
therefore
eftabliihed for that purpofe.
it
but
human
is
not
Through
the whole compafs of human knowledge,

there are no inferences more certain
and
infallible
fpedt,
then,
than thefe.
do
his
In what re-
benevolence and
mercy refemble the benevolence and

mercy of men ?
EPICURUS
old queftions are yet
un-
anfwered.
he willing to prevent evil, but not

able ? then is he impotent. Is he able,
Is
but not willing ? then is he malevolent.

Is he both able and willing? whence
then is evil ?
You
afcribe,
CLEANTHES, (and
believe juflly) a purpofe and intention

to Nature.
But what, I befeech you,
is the object of that curious artifice and
machinery,
NATURAL RELIGION.
187
P
machinery, which me has difplayed in
The prefervation alone
all animals ?
of individuals, and propagation of the
feems enough for her purin

pofe, if fuch a rank be barely upheld
the univerfe, without any care or con
It
fpecies.
cern for the happinefs of the members

No refource for this
that compofe it.
no machinery, in order mere

give pleafure or eafe no fund of
purpofe
ly to
pure joy and contentment no indul

gence, without fome want or neceffity
:
accompanying
it.
At
leaf!,
the
few
phenomena of this nature are over

balanced by oppofite phenomena of flill
greater importance,
OUR
fenfe of mufic,
harmony, and
indeed beauty of all kinds, gives fatisfaction, without being abfolutely ne-
and propa
But what rack
ceffary to the prefervation
gation of the fpecies.

arife
ing pains, on the other hand,
from gouts,
gravels,
megrims, tooth~
achs,
i88
rheumatifms
achs,
where the injury

animal-machinery is either fmall
to the
or incurable?
feem
frolic,
Mirth, laughter,
gratuitous
play,
fatisfadlions,
which have no farther tendency:
fpleen,
melancholy, difcontent, fuperftition,

of the fame nature. How
are pains
then does the divine benevolence difof you Anthropomorphites ? None but we Myftics, as you were pleafed to call us, can
account for this ftrange mixture of
play
itfelf,
in the fenfe
phenomena, by deriving
it
from
attri
butes, infinitely perfect, but incomprehenfible.
AND
have you
at laft, faid
CLEAN-
THES
fmiling,
betrayed your inten
tions,
PHILO
Your long agreement
with
DEMEA
me
but
did indeed a
find
you were
little
all
furprife
the while
erecting a concealed battery againft me.

And I muft confefs, that you have now
fallen
upon
a fubjecl
worthy of your
noble
NATURAL RELIGION.
noble
verfy
189
of oppolition and contro- PART.

If yon can make out the prefent
fpirit
.
and prove mankind
point,
happy or corrupted, there

once of
all religion.
is
be un
to
an end
at
For to what pur-
pofe eilablim the natural attributes of

the Deity, while the moral are ftill
doubtful and uncertain ?
You
plied
take
umbrage very
DEMEA,
eafily, re
at opinions the
moil in
nocent, and the moft generally received

even amongft the religious and devout
themfelves
and nothing can be more
furpriiing than to find a topic like this,

concerning the wickednefs and mifery
of man,
charged with no
lefs
than
Have not
all
Atheifm and profanenefs.
pious divines and preachers, who have
indulged their rhetoric on fo fertile a
have they not eafily, I fay,

given a folution of any difficulties
which may attend it? This world is
fubjecl:;
but
point
in
comparifon
of the
univerfe
190
PART unverfe
this
life
but a
companion of eternity.
evil
phenomena,
tified
moment in
The prefent
therefore,
in other regions,
are
rec
and in fome
future period of exiftence.

And the
eyes of men, being then opened to
larger views of things, fee the whole
connection of general laws ; and trace,

with adoration, the benevolence and
of the Deity, through all the

mazes and intricacies of his providence.
recftitude
No.! replied
CLEANTHES, No! Thefe
arbitrary fuppofitions can never be ad
mitted, contrary to matter of fad, vifible and uncontroverted.

Whence can
any caufe be known but from

effe&s
Whence can any
its
known
hypothefis be
proved but from the apparent pheno

mena ? To eftablifh one hypothefis up
on another, is building entirely in the

air
and the utmoft we ever attain, by
thefe conjectures and ficflions, is to af;
certain the bare poffibility of our opi
nion;
NATURAL RELIGION.
but never can we, upon fuch
nion;
terms, eftablifh
its reality.
THE
only method of fupporting di

vine benevolence (and it is what I will
ingly embrace) is to deny abfolutely
the mifery and wickednefs of man.
Your
reprefentations are exaggerated;
your melancholy views moftly ficti

tious
your inferences contrary to fadl
and experience. Health is more com
mon than ficknefs pleafure than pain ;
And for one
happinefs than mifery.
;
vexation which
tain,
we meet
upon computation,
with,
we
at
hundred en
joyments.
ADMITTING your
PHILO, which yet
ful
you muft,
that, if
fure,
pain be
it
durable.
is
at
pofition,
replied
extremely doubt
the fame time, allow,
lefs
is
frequent than plea
infinitely
more
One hour of
violent and
it is
to outweigh a day, a week, a
often able
month of
our
192
PART our
common infipid enjoyments: And

how many days, weeks, and months, are
pafl!ed
by
ments
moft acute tor
feveral in the
fcarcely in one inftance, is ever able to reach ecftafy and

rapture: And in no one inftance can it
Pleafure,
continue for any time at
and
The
altitude.
nerves relax
its
fpirits
the fabric
higheft pitch
evaporate ; the
is
difordered
and the enjoyment quickly degenerates

into fatigue and uneafinefs.
But pain
good God, how often! rifes to
torture and agony; and the
longer it
it
becomes
ftill
more
continues,
genuine
and
torture.
Patience
is
exhauftagony
often,
ed
courage
feizes us
languilhes
melancholy
and nothing terminates our
;
mifery but the removal of its caufe, or

another event, which is the fole cure of
all evil, but which, from our natural
folly,
ror
we
regard with
ftill
greater hor
and confternation.
BUT
not to
infift
upon
thefe topics,
con-
NATURAL RELIGION.
continued PHILO, though moft obvious, PART
and important; I muft ufe the

freedom to admonifh you, CLEANTHES,
certain,
that you have put the controverfy upon

a moft dangerous iffue, and are unawares
introducing a total Scepticifm into the
moft
eflential articles
vealed theology.
of natural and re
What no method of
!
fixing a juft foundation for religion,

unlefs we allow the happinefs of human
life,
and maintain a continued
even in this world, with
all
exiftence
our prefent
and follies,
to be eligible and defirable
But this is
contrary to every one s feeling and ex
perience: It is contrary to an authority
pains, infirmities, vexations,
!
fo eftablifhed as
No
nothing can fubvert

decifive proofs can ever be produced
:
againft this authority ; nor is

for you to compute, eftimate,
pare, all the pains
in the lives of all
mals
and
men
it
poflible
and com
the pleafures
and of all ani
all
And
thus by your refting the

whole fyftem of religion on a point,
:
which,
194
* RT
Jx*
rs>
which, from its very nature, muft for
ever be uncertain, you tacitly confefs,
that that fyftem
is
equally uncertain.
BUT
allowing you, what never will

be believed ; at leaft, what you never
poffibly can prove;; that animal, or at
leafl
human
happinefs, in this
life,
ex
you have yet done

is not,
nothing
by any means,
what we expe6l from infinite power,
infinite wifdom, and infinite goodnefs.
ceeds
its
:
Why
is
mifery
For this
there any mifery at
all
in the
world? Not by chance furely. From

fome caufe then. Is it from the inten
tion of the Deity ? But he is perfeftly
benevolent.
tion ? But he
Is it
contrary to his inten
almighty. Nothing can

fhake the folidity of this reafoning, fo
is
except we
affert, that thefe fubjedls exceed all hu
man capacity, and that our common
Ihort, fo clear, fo decifive:
meafures of truth and falfehood are not

applicable to
them
a topic,
which
have
NATURAL RELIGION.
have
all
along infilled on, but which
you have from the beginning

with fcorn and indignation.
,
BUT
rejedled
will be contented to retire
ftill
from
thifc intrenchment, for I

deny that
I will al
in
can
ever
force
me
it:
you
low, that pain or mifery in man is com
power and goodyour fenfe of

thefe attributes
What are you advan
ced by all thefe conceflions ? A mere pof-
patible
with
infinite
nefs in the Deity, even in

:
fibie
compatibility
mufl prove
is
not
fufficient.
thefe pure, unmixt,
You
and un
from the prefent

mixt and confufed phenomena, and
from thefe alone. A hopeful underta
controllable attributes
king
Were the phenomena ever fo pure
and unmixt, yet being finite, they would

be
infufficient for that purpofe.
much
more, where they are

ring and difcordant ?
HERE, CLEANTIIES,
How
alfo fo jar
find myfelf at
eafe
196
eafe in
Here
my argument.
Formerly,
triumph.
when we argued concerning
the natural attributes of intelligence and

defign, I needed
all
my
fceptical
and
metaphyfical fubtilty to elude your

In many views of the univerfe,
grafp.
and of its parts, particularly the latter,
the beauty and fitnefs of final caufes
ftrike us with fuch irrefiftible force, that
all
objections appear (what
believe
they really are) mere cavils and fophifms; nor can we then imagine how
was ever poffible for us to repofe any

weight on them. But there is no view
it
of
human
life,
or of the condition of
mankind, from which,

greater! violence,
we can
without the
infer the
ral attributes, or learn that infinite
mo
be
nevolence, conjoined with infinite power
and
infinite
It
eyes of faith alone.
your turn now to tug the labouring
difcover
is
wifdom, which we muft
oar,
and
fubtilties
by the
to fupport
your philofophical
the
dictates of plaia
againft
reafbn and experience.
PART
T SCRUPLE
not to allow, faid
CLEAN-
have been apt to futhe frequent repetition of the word
THES, that
fpecl
XL
which we meet with in all theo

to favour more of pa
logical writers,
and that
negyric than of philofophy;
and even of
any purpofes of reafoning,
would be better ferved, were
infnite,
religion,
we
to reft contented
rate
The
and
more moderate
terms,
tively great,
ciently
fill
with more accu
wife,
and
holy; thefe fuffi-
the imaginations of
and any thing beyond,
no influence
affections or fentiments.
men;
befides that it
leads into abfurdities, has
on the
expreflions.
admirable, excellent, fuperla-
Thus,
in
PART
T
^*
vv^/
we abandon
human analogy, as feems your inten
tion, DEMEA, I am afraid we abandon
in the prefent fubjeCt, if
all
and
no conception of
the great object of our adoration. If we
all -religion,
recain
preferve human analogy, we muft for

ever find it impoffible to reconcile
any
mixture of evil in the univerfe with in
finite attributes
much lefs,
can
we
from the former.

fuppofing the Author of Nature
prove the
latter
finitely perfect,
mankind
though
ever
But
to be
far exceeding
a fatisfaclory account
may
then be given of natural and moral evil,
;
and every untoward phenomenon be ex

A lefs evil may
plained and adjufted.
then be chofen, in order to avoid a
greater: Inconveniencies be fubmitted
to, in
order to reach a defirable end:
And
by
in a word, benevolence,
regulated
and
limited
wifdom,
by
may
neceffity,
produce juft fuch a world
prefent.
as the
You, PHILO, who are fo prompt
at ftarting
views,
and
reflections,
and
analogies
NATURAL RELIGION
199
would gladly hear, at length,
PART
without interruption, your opinion of

new theory and if it deferve our
^v-1*
Analogies;
this
attention,
leifure,
MY
we may
reduce
it
afterwards, at
into form.
more
fentiments, replied PHILO, are
not worth being made a

myflery of;
and therefore, without any
ceremony, I
fhall deliver what occurs to me with
regard to the prefent
It muft,
fubjecT:.
be
if
a
think,
allowed, that,
very li
mited intelligence, whom we fhall
fuppofe utterly unacquainted with the uniI
verfe,
were afTured, that
it
were the
produftion of a very good, wife, and

powerful Being, however finite, he
would, from his conjectures, form be

forehand a different notion of it from
what we find it to be by experience ;

nor would he ever imagine,
merely
from thefe attributes of the caufe, of
which he is informed, that the effect
could be fo
full
of vice and mifery and
diforder,
200
PART
diforder, as
pofing
it
now,
appears in this
that
this
life.
Supperfon were
brought into the world, ftill affured

that it was the workmanfhip of fuch a
he
fublime and benevolent Being
;
might, perhaps, be furprifed at the difappointment ; but would never retradl

his former belief, if
founded on any
li
very folid argument ; lince fuch a
mited intelligence muft be fenfible of
and ignorance, and

muft allow, that there may be many
folutions of thofe phenomena, which
his
own
blinclnefs
will for ever efcape his comprehenfion.

which is the real cafe
But
fuppofing,
with regard to man, that this creatvire

of a
is not antecedently convinced
fupreme
intelligence,
benevolent, and
to gather fuch a
powerful, but is left

belief from the appearances of things
this entirely alters the cafe,
nor will he
ever find any realbn for fuch a conclu-
He may
be fully convinced of
the narrow limits of his underftanding ;
but
fiom
NATURAL RELIGION.
201
but this will not help him in forming

an inference concerning the goodnefs
of fuperior powers, fince he muft form
that
inference
from what he knows,
not from what he
ignorant of. The

more you exaggerate his weaknefs and
ignorance, the more diffident you renis
der him, and give him the greater fufpicion that fuch fubjecls are beyond the
reach of his faculties.
therefore, to reafon
You are obliged,

with him merely
from the known phenomena, and
to
drop every arbitrary fuppolition or conjefture.
DID
mow
you a houfe or -palace,

where there was not one apartment
convenient or agreeable; where the
I
windows, doors, fires, paflages, flairs,

and the whole oeconomy of the build
ing, were the fburce of noife, confu-?
and the ex
tremes of heat and cold you would
certainly blame the contrivance, withfion,
fatigue,
darknefs,
out
2O2
PART
o^
The
an y farther examination.
ar-
would in vain difplay his fuband prove to yon, that if this
chitecT:
tilty,
door or
may
would
ills
greater
be
window were
that
ftric~lly
enfue.
true
altered,
What he
The
fays
alteration of
one particular, while the other parts of

the building remain, may only augment
the inconveniencies. But ftill you would
in general,
aflert
t;hat,
if
the archi
and good intentions,

he might have formed fuch a plan of
the whole, and might have adjufted the
parts in fuch a manner, as would have
tect
had had
remedied
all
ikill
or moft of thefe incon
His
ignorance, or even
your own ignorance of fuch a plan,
will never convince you of the impofli-
veniencies.
bility
of
it.
If
you
find
many
incon
veniencies and deformities in the build

ing,
into
tect
you will always, without entering

any detail, condemn the archi
NATURAL RELIGION.
203
Is
repeat the queftion
the world, eonfidered in general, and
to us in this life, different
as it
IN
diort,
appears
from what a man, or fuch a limited

would, beforehand, expecl from
being,
a very powerful, wife, and benevolent

to
Deity ? It mud be ftrange prejudice
And from
affert the contrary.

I
thence
the
conclude, that, however confident
world
fitioris
may
be, allowing certain fuppo-
and conjechires, with the idea
of fuch a Deity, it can never afford us

an inference concerning his exidence*
The confidence is not abfolutely denied,
only the inference.
cially
where
Conjectures, efpe-
infinity
is
excluded from
the divine attributes, may, perhaps, be

fufficient to prove a confidence; but
can never be foundations for any in*

ference.
THERE feem
to
be four circumdances,
on which depend
part
of the
ills,
all,
that
or the greateft
moled
fenfible
creatures;
204
all
and
not impoffible but

thefe circumftances may be neceffary
creatures
it is
and unavoidable.
yond common
life,
or even of
common
with regard to the ceconomy
that,
life,
We know fo little be
of a univerfe, there
is
no conjecture,
however wild, which may not be juft

nor any one, however plaufible, which
;
may
not be erroneous.
longs to
human
All that be
underftanding, in this
deep ignorance and obfcurity,
is
fceptical, or at leaft cautious
and not
to
to
be
admit of any hypothecs whatever
much
lefs,
to
the caufes of evil,
of any which is fupported

by no appearance of probability. Now
this I affert to be the cafe with regard
all
cumftances on which
of them appear to
the
leaft
degree,
it
and the
cir
depends. None
human
neceffary
reafon, in
or
una^
nor can we fuppofe them

fuch, without the utmoft licenfe of
voidable
imagination,
NATURAL RELIGION.
205
circumftance which intro- PART
duces
nomy
evil, is that
contrivance or ceco-
of the animal creation, by which
pains, as well as pleafures, are employ

ed to excite all creatures to action, and
make them
vigilant in the great
felf-prefervation.
Now
work of
pleafure alone,
various degrees, feems to human

underftanding fufEcient for this purin
its
pofe.
All animals might be conftantly
of enjoyment: but when

urged by any of the neceffities of na
ture, fuch as thirft, hunger, wearinefs ; inftead of pain, they might feel
in a
ftate
a diminution of pleafure,
by which
that
they might be prompted to feek
fubobject which is neceffary to their
Men
purfue pleafure as eager

at leaft, might
ly as they avoid pain ;
fiflence.
have been
fo
conflituted.
It
feems,
therefore, plainly poffible to carry
the bufmefs of
life
on
without any pain.
any animal ever rendered

Why
If ani
?
fufceptible of fuch a fenfation
mals
then
is
^^j
2o6
Can ^ e ^ree ^rom
an hour, they
might enjoy a perpetual exemption from
it
and it required as particular a con
trivance of their organs to produce that
ll
feeling, as to
endow them with
fight,
Shall
hearing, or any of the fenfes.
we conjecture, that fuch a contrivance
was
neceflary, wi-.hout
of reafon
conjecture,
truth ?
BUT
and
as
any appearance
we build on that
on the mofl certain
fhall
a capacity of pain
alone produce pain, were
it
would not
not for the
fecond circumftance, viz. the conduct
ing of the world by general laws ; and

this feems nowife
neceflary to a very
perfedl
Being.
It
is
true
if
every
were condudled by particular

volitions, the courfe of nature wou?.d
be perpetually broken, and no man
thing
could employ his reafon in the condu6l

of life. Bur might not other parti
cular volitions
remedy
this
inconveni
ence?
NATURAL RELIGION.
ence? In
fliort,
exterminate
all
be found
207
might not the Deity

it were
ill, where-ever
and produce
PART
all
good,
without any preparation or long proeffects ?
grefs of caufes and
to
BESIDES,
we
rnuft
confider,
that,
of
according to the prefent ceconomy
the world, the courfe of Nature, though
us ap
fuppofed exactly regular, yet to
events are un
pears not fo, and many
ex
certain, and many difappoint our
Health and
pectations.
ficknefs,
calm
and temped, with an infinite number

of other accidents, whofe caufes are un
known and
variable,
have a great in
on the* fortunes of parti

cular perfons and on the profperity of
and indeed all human
public focieties
fuch ac
life, in a manner, depends on
cidents. A being, therefore, who knows
fluence both
the fecret fpriiigs of the univerfe,

eafily,
by
might
particular volitions, turn all
ihcfc accidents to the
good of mankind,
and
208
ART
and render the whole world

happy,
î without difcovering himfelf in any ope
ration.
A fleet, whofe purpofes were
falutary to fociety, might always meet
with a fair wind
Good princes
:
enjoy
found health and long life: Perfons

born to power and authority, be fram
ed with good tempers and virtuous difpofitions.
few fuch events
as thefe,
regularly and wifely conducted, would

change the face of the world ; and yet
would no more feem to difturb the
courfe of Nature, or confound human

condudl, than the prefent oeconomy of
things, where the caufes are fecret, and
variable,
and compounded. Some
CALIGULA
touches, given to
final!
brain in
his infancy, might have converted him

into a TRAJAN
one wave, a little
:
higher than the reft, by burying CJESAR

and his fortune in the bottom of the
ocean, might have reftored liberty to a
confiderable part of mankind*
There
may,
for
aught we know, be good reafons s
NATURAL RELIGION.
209
Providence interpofes not in

but they are unknown to
this manner
foils,
why
^L
and though the mere fuppofition,

that fuch reafons exift, may be fuffius
cient tofave the conclufion concerning
the divine attributes, yet furely it can

never be fufficient to eftablifh that conclufion.
IF every thing in the univerfe be con-
dueled by general laws, and if animals

be rendered fufceptible of pain, it fcarcefeems poffible but fome ill muft arife
ly
and the
in the various {hocks of matter,
and oppofition of
But this ill would be very
various concurrence
general laws
rare,
were
ftance,
it
not for the third circurn-
which
propofed to mention,
which all
frugality with
I
viz. the great

and faculties are diflributed to
powers
So well adjufted
every particular being.
of all ani
are the organs and capacities
to their prefermals, and fo well fitted
as far as hiftory or tradi
vation, that,
tion
210
?
xT
tion reaches there
appears not to be
>
j fingle fpecies
any
which has yet been extin-
guifhed in the univerfe. Every animal

has the requifite endowments but thefe
;
endowments
are beftowed with fo fcru-
pulous an oeconomy, that any confiderable diminution muft
entirely deftroy
the creature.
Wherever one power
increafed, there
is
ment
in the others.
Animals,
cel in
are
fwiftnefs,
which ex
commonly
tive in force.
is
a proportional abate
defec
Thofe which
poffefs both,
are either
in
of their
imperfecl
fenfes, or are oppreffed with the fhoft
%ne
craving wants.
The human
whofe chief
excellency
gacity,
tous,
is
of
all
is
fpecies,
reafon and fa-
others the moft neceffi-
and the moft
deficient in
bodily
advantages; without clothes, without

arms, without food, without
lodging,
without any convenience of
what they owe
to their
life,
own
except
fkill
and
In fhort,
Nature feems to
induftry.
have formed anexaft calculation of the
neceffities
NATURAL RELIGION.
neceffities
of her creatures
rigid majler,
has afforded
more powers
or
are
and, like a
them
little
endowments than what
flriclly fufficient
An
neceffities.
211
to
fupply thofe
indulgent parent-would
have beftowed a large
flock, in order to
the
guard againil accidents, and fecure
of
the creature
welfare
and
happinefs
in the rnoft unfortunate concurrence of
Every courfe of life

would not have been fo furrounded with
that the lead departure from
circumftaiices.
precipices,
the true path, by miftake or neceffity,

muft involve us in mifery and ruin.
Some
referve,
fome fund, would have
been provided to enfure happinefs; nor

would the powers and the neceffities
have been adjufted with fo rigid an cecoincon
nomy. The Author of Nature is
is fuppofed
ceivably powerful: his force
inexhauitible
great, if not altogether
:
nor
is
there
judge, to
any reafon,
make him
as far as
we
obferve this
can
ftridt
his crea
frugality in his dealings with
tures.
212
PART tures.
his
It
would have been
power
better,
extremely limited, to
were
have
created fewer animals, and to have en
dowed thefe with more
faculties for their
happinefs and prefervation. A builder

is never efteemed
prudent, who under
beyond what
takes a plan
enable
him
IN order
human
his flock will
to finifli.
to cure
moft of the
ills
of
require not that man

the wings of the eagle, the
fwiftnefs of the flag, the force of the ox,
life,
mould have
the arms of the lion, the fcales of the

crocodile or rhinoceros ; much lefs do I
demand
rubim.
the fagacity of an angel or che

I am contented to take an in-
creafe in one fingle
power or faculty of
his foul.
Let him be endowed with a
greater propenfity to induflry and la
bour a more vigorous fpring and ac
a more conflant bent to
tivity of mind
bufinefs and application. Let the whole
;
fpecies pofTefs naturally
an equal
dili
gence
NATURAL RELIGION.
gence with that which
213
many individuals
by habit and refleo

and the moft beneficial confe-
are able to attain
tion
quences, without any allay of
ill, is
the
immediate and necefTary refult of this

endowment. Almoft all the moral, as
well as natural evils of
from
idlenefs
human
and were our
life arife
fpecies,
by
the original conilitution of their frame,

exempt from this vice or infirmity, the
perfect cultivation of land, the
improve
ment of arts and manufactures, the exact

execution
of
office and duty,

and
men at once
immediately follow;
every
fully reach that ftate of fociety,

which is fo imperfectly attained by the
may
befl-regulated government. But as induflry is a power, and the moft valu

able of any, Nature feems determined,
fuitably to her ufual maxims, to beftow
it
on men with a very fparing hand and

;
rather to punifh him feverely for his de

ficiency in it, than to reward him for his
attainments.
She has fo contrived his
frame,
PA * T
214
PART
DIALOGUES CONCERNIN
frame, that nothing but the moft vio
lent neceffity can oblige him to labour;
and
me
employs all his other wants to

overcome, at leaft in part, the want of
diligence, and to endow him with fome
mare of a faculty, of which {he has
thought fit naturally to bereave him.
Here our demands may be allowed
very humble, and therefore the more
If we required the en
reafonable.
dowments of
fuperior penetration and

judgment, of a more delicate tafte of
beauty, of a nicer fenfibility to bene
volence and friendfhip

told, that
we
we might be
impioufly pretend to break
the order of Nature
that
we want
exalt ourfelves into a higher
to
rank of be
which we require,
ing ;
not being fuitable to our ftate and con
that the prefents
dition,
would only be pernicious
But
it is
full
of wants and
hard
to us.
dare to repeat it, it is

hard, that being placed in a world fo
;
neceffities,
where
moil every being and element
is
al-
either
our
NATURAL RELIGION.
our foe or refufes
mould
its
we
affiftance
own temper
have our
alfo
215
to
ftruggle with, and fhould be deprived

of that faculty which can alone fence
againfl thefe multiplied evils.
THE
fourth circumftance, whence athe mifery and ill of the univerfe,

the inaccurate
workmanfliip of all the
rifes
is
fprings
and
principles of the great
chine of nature.
ma
muft be acknow
It
ledged, that there are few parts of the

univerfe, which feem not to ferve fome
purpofe, and whofe removal would not

produce a vifible defect and diforder in
The
the whole.
ther
hang
parts
all
toge
nor can one be touched without
affecting the reft, in a greater or lefs
But
fame time, it muft

be obferved, that none of thefe parts or
principles, however ufeful, are fo ac
degree.
at the
curately adjufted, as to keep precifely

within thofe bounds in which their uti
lity confifts
but they
are, all
of them,
apt,
PART
XI
216
PART a
p^
run into the

one extreme or the other. One would
imagine, that this grand production had
on every
occafion, to
hand of the maker

fo little nniihed is every part, and fo
coarfe are the ftrokes with which it is
not received the
laft
Thus, the winds are requi-
executed.
convey the vapours along the

furface of the globe, and to affift men
but how oft, rifing up
in navigation
to tempefts and hurricanes, do they be
fite
to
pernicious ? Rains are necefTary

to nouriih all the plants and animals of
come
the earth
fective
but
how
how
often are they de
often exceflive
Heat
is
and vegetation but

is not always found in the due propor
On the mixture and fecretion of
tion.
requifite to all life
the
humours and juices of the body de
pend the health and profperity of the

animal
but the parts perform not re
What
gularly their proper function.
more ufeful than all the paffions of the
mind, ambition, vanity,
love,
anger
But
NATURAL RELIGION.
217
But how oft do they break their bounds, PART

and caufe the greateil convulfions in
There
nothing fo advan
tageous in the univerfe, but what fre
fociety
is
quently becomes pernicious, by its excefs or defecl:

nor has Nature guarded,
with the requifite accuracy,
all
;
againft
diforder or confufion.
The
irregula
never, perhaps, fo great as to
deftroy any fpecies ; but is often fufEcient to involve the individuals in ruin
rity
is
and mifery.
ON
four
the concurrence, then, of thefe

circumftances, does all or the
part of natural evil depend.
all living creatures
incapable of
greateft
Were
pain, or were the world adrniniftered
by
particular volitions, evil never could
have found accefs into the univerfe
and were animals endowed with a large

and faculties, beyond
ftock of powers
what
ftricT:
neceffity requires
the feveral fprings
and
3
or were
principles of the
univerfe
2i8
PART univerfe fo
accurately framed as to preferve always the juft temperament and
v^~>l
medium
little ill
muft have been very

companion of what we feel at
there
in
prefent.
What
on
occafion
this
then
?
ihall
Shall
we pronounce
we fay, that
thefe circumftances are not neceflary,
and that they might eauly have been

altered in the contrivance of the uni
This decifion feems too prefumptuous for creatures fo blind and

verfe
Let us be more modeft in

ignorant.
our conclusions. Let us allow, that,
goodnefs of the Deity (I mean a

goodnefs like the human) could be efta-
if the
blifhed on any tolerable reafons a priorv,

thefe phenomena, however untoward,
would not be
fufficient to fubvert that
but might eafily, in fome

unknown manner, be reconcilable to it.
principle
But
let
us
ftill affert,
that as this
good
not antecedently eftablifhed, but

mufh be inferred from the phenomena,
nefs
is
there can be
no grounds
for fuch an
inference.
NATURAL RELIGION.
inference, while there are fo
219
many
the univerfe, and while thefe
in
might
far
as
fo eafily
human
Sceptic
PA * T
ills
^^j
have been remedied, as

underftanding can be
allowed to judge on fuch a
am
ills
enough
fubjecT:.
to allow, that the
bad appearances, notwithftanding
my reafonings, may be
all
compatible with
fuch attributes as you fuppofe

furely they can never prove thefe
But
attri
Such
butes.
from Scepticifm but muft arife from
the phenomena, and from our confi
dence in the reafonings which we de
a concluiion cannot refult

;
duce from thefe phenomena.
LOOK round
this
uiiiverfe.
What
an immenfe profufion of beings, ani
mated and organized,

tive
You admire
fenfible
and
ac
this prodigious vari
and fecundity. But infpecT: a little

more narrowly thefe living exiftences,
the only beings worth regarding. How
ety
hoftile
and deilructive
O 4
to each other
How
226
How
infufficient all of
them
for their
-A.1.
happinefs How contemptible or

The whole
odious to the fpe&ator
prefents nothing but the idea of a blind
own
Nature, impregnated by a great vivify
ing principle, and pouring forth from

her lap, without difcernment or pa
rental care, her
maimed and
abortive
children.
HERE
the
MANICHJEAN
fyftem oc
curs as a proper hypothecs to folve the

and no doubt, in fome redifficulty
:
very fpecious, and has more

probability than the common hypothefis, by giving a plaufible account of the
fpe<5ts,
it is
ftrange mixture of good and ill which

But if we confider, on
appears in life.
the other hand, the perfect uniformity

and agreement of the parts of the uni-
we
fhall
not difcover in
it
any
marks of the combat of a malevolent
with a benevolent being. There is in
verfe,
deed an oppofition of pains and pleafures
NATURAL RELIGION.
221
fares in the feelings of fenfibic creatures : but are not all the operations of v_^
Nature carried on by an oppofitiort of

moifb and
principles, of hot and cold,
dry, light and heavy ? The true conclufion is, that the original Source of all
all thefe
entirely indifferent to
has no more regard to
principles ; and
good above ill, than to heat above cold,
things
is
or to drought
light
above moifture, or to
above heavy.
THERE may four hypotheles be fra

med concerning the firft cauies of the
univerfe: that they are endowed with
that they have per
perfect goodnefs ;
fect malice; that they are oppofite, and
have both goodnefs and malice; that

nor malice.
they have neither goodnefs
Mixt phenomena can never prove the
two former unmixt principles. And the

of general
uniformity and fleadinefs
laws feem to oppofe the third.
The
fourth,
222
PART
fourth, therefore, feems
by
far the
moft
probable.
WHAT
ral evil
Or
have faid
concerning natu
will apply to
moral, with little
I
no variation
and we have no more
reafon to infer, that the reditude of the
Supreme Being refembles human reditude than that his benevolence refembles
the human.
Nay, it will be thought,
that we have ftill
greater caufe to ex
clude from
as
we
him moraj
fentiments, fuch
them; fmce moral evil, in the

of
opinion
many, is much more predo
minant above moral, good than natural
evil above natural
good.
feel
BUT
even though this fhould not be
allowed; and though the virtue, which

in mankind, fhould be
is
acknowledged
much
fuperior to the vice ; yet fo long

as there is
any vice at all in the univerfe,
it
will very
thropomorphites,
much puzzle you Anhow to account for it.

You
NATURAL RELIGION.
You muft
for
ailign a caufe
it,
223
without
But
having recourfe to the firft caufe.
as every effedl mull have a caufe, and
that caufe another
you muft
carry on the progreffion

reft
on that
in infmitum,
original principle,
the ultimate caufe of
all
either
who
is
things
Whi
Hold! cried DEMEA:
HOLD
or
ther does your imagination hurry you?

I joined in alliance with you, in order
to prove the incomprehenfible nature of
the Divine Being, and refute the prin
ciples
of CLEANTHES,
fure every thing
ftandard. Bxit
by
now
who would meahuman rule and
find
you running
the topics of the greateft liber

that
tines and infidels ; and betraying
into
all
holy caufe, which you feemingly efpoufed.
Are you
dangerous
fecretly,
enemy than
then, a
more
CLEANTHES
himfelf?
AND
are
you
fo late in perceiving it?
replied
224
PART
replied
CLEANTHES.
Believe me,
DE-
ME A
;
your friend PHILO, from the be
ginning, has been amufing himfelf at
both our expence
and
it
muft be con-
feffed, that the injudicious
reafoning of
our vulgar theology has given him but

too juft a handle of ridicule. The total
infirmity of
human
reafon, the abfolute
incomprehenfibility of the Divine Na

ture, the great and univerfal mifery and
ftill
greater wickednefs of
men
thefe
are ftrange topics, furely, to be fo fondly

cherifhed by orthodox divines and doc
tors.
In ages of ftupidity and igno
rance, indeed, thefe principles
may fafe-
ly be efpoufed ; and, perhaps, no views

of things are more proper to promote
fuperftition, than fuch as encourage the
blind amazement, the diffidence, and

melancholy of mankind. But at prefent
BLAME
not fo much, interpofed PHI

LO, the ignorance of thefe reverend gen
tlemen.
NATURAL RELIGION.
tlemen.
225
They know how to change
their
was a
mainmoft
was vanity and
rain, that human life
all the ills and
mifery, and to exaggerate
which are incident to men. But
it
with the times. Formerly
ftyle
to
popular theological topic
pains
of
late years, divines,
retract
this
we
pofition;
find,
and
begin to
maintain,
with fome hefitation, that

there are more goods than evils, more
even in this life.
pleafures than pains,
though
ftill
When religion
flood entirely
per and education,
it
upon tem
was thought pro
as indeed,
per to encourage melancholy;
mankind never have recourfe to fupefo readily as in that difporior
powers
But
fition.
to
form
men
principles,
quences,
batteries,
guments
as
it
is
and
now
have
and
to
learned
draw confe-
the
neceffary to change
ar
fuch
of
to make ufe
as will
endure
at lead
fome
This varia
fcrutiny and examination.
the fame
from
tion is the fame (and
caufes)
226
T
DIALOG UES CONCERNING

caufes) with that which I formerly
marked with regard to Scepticifm.
THUS PHILO
continued to the
re-
laft his
of oppofition, and his cenfure of

eftablifhed opinions.
But I could obferve, that DEMEA did not at all relift
fpirit
the latter part of the difcourfe; and he

took occafion foon after, on fome
pretence or other, to leave the
company.
PART
PART
A FTERDEMEA
XII.
CLEAN-
PART
THES and PHILO contimied the

converfation in the following manner.
^vO
Our
friend, I
am
THES, will have
departure,
afraid, faid
little
CLEAN-
inclination to re
vive this topic of difcourfe, while

are in company; and to tell
you
truth,
PHILO, I fhould rather wifh to reafon

with either of you apart on a fubjecl
fo fublime and interefling. Your
fpirit
of controverfy, joined to your abhor
rence of vulgar fuperitition, carries
you
ftrange lengths,
when engaged
in
an ar
gument; and there is nothing fo facred

and venerable, even in your own eyes,
which you fpare on that occafion.
I
228
MUST
am
lefs
confefs, replied
PHILO, that
cautious on the fubjecl: of
Na
on any other; both

know that I can never, on that
tural Religion than
becaufe
head, corrupt the principles of any man

of common fenfe ; and becaufe no one,
I
am confident, in whole eyes I appear

man of common fenfe, will ever inif-
my intentions. You in particular,

CLEANTHES, with whom I live in untake
referved
intimacy
you
are fenfible,
notwithftanding the freedom of

converfation, and my love of fingu-
that,
my
lar
arguments, no one has a deeper fenfe
of religion imprefled on his mind, or

pays more profound adoration to the
Divine Being, as he difcovers himfelf to
reafon, in the inexplicable contrivance
and
of Nature.
purpofe, an
a
intention,
defign, {hikes every where
the
moft carelefs, the moft ftupid
thinker ; and no man can be fo harden
artifice
ed in abfurd fyftems, as at all times to

That Nature docs nothing in
rejed it.
vain.
NATURAL RELIGION.
maxim
is
in^
eftabliflied in all the
merely from the contemplation

of the works of Nature, without any re
fchools,
from a firm conan anatomift, who
ligious purpofe; and,
vidion of
its
truth,
had obferved a new organ or

canal,
would never be fatisfied till he had alfo
difcovered
its
ufe and intention.
One
GOPERNICAN
great foundation of the
fyftem
is
the
maxim, That Nature
afls
by tbcfimpkft methods, and choofes the moft

proper means to any end ; and aftrono-
mers
often, without thinking of
this flrong
ligion.
The fame thing
acknowledge a
firft
their authority
greater, as they
that intention.
IT
is
lay
obfervable in
is
other parts of
philofophy
the fciences almoft lead us
and
it>
foundation of piety and re
And
all
infenfibly to
intelligent
is
thus
often fo
Author;
much the
do not directly profefs
with pleafure
hear
GALEN
reafon concerning the ftrudlure of the
human
230
PART
human
^vO
fays he *, difcovers above
body.
mufcles-;
The anatomy of a man,

600
and whoever duly
different
confiders,
thefe, will find, that in each of
Nature muft have adjufted
them
at leaft ten
different circumftances, in order to at
end which
tain the
me
propofed
pro
per figure, juft magnitude, right difpofition of the feveral ends, upper and
lower pofition of the whole, the due infertion of the feveral nerves, veins, and
So that, in the mufcles alone,
arteries
:
above 6000 feveral views and intentions
muft have been formed and executed.
The bones he
calculates to
be 284: The
aimed at in the ftructure of each, above forty. What a pro

diftindl purpofes,
digious difplay of
artifice,
even in thefe
fimple and homogeneous parts ? But if

we confider the fkin, ligaments, veffels,
glandules, humours, the feveral limbs
and members of the body ; how muft
our
* De formatione
foetus*
NATURAL RELIGION.
our aftoniihment
rife
upon
the number and
portion to
the parts fo
231
PART
us, in pro-
intricacy of
artificially adjufted ? The

we advance in thefe refearches,
we difcover new fcenes of art and wifdom: But defcry flill, at a diftance, far
farther
ther fcenes beyond our

reach; in the
fine internal ftrudlure of the
parts, in
the
ceconomy of the
of the feminal
brain, in the fabric
veffels.
All thefe artifices
are repeated in
every different fpecies of
animal, with wonderful variety, and

with exact propriety, fuited to the dif
ferent intentions of Nature in
framing
each fpecies. And if the
infidelity of
GALEN, even when
thefe natural fci-
ences were flill imperfed, could not

withitand fach flriking appearances ;
to what pitch of
pertinacious obflinacy
mufl
a philofopher in this
age have at
tained,
who can now doubt of a Supreme
Intelligence ?
COULD
meet with one of
this fpecies
thank God, are very rare)

would afk him: Suppofing there were
cies
I
(who,
a God,
who
did not difcover himfelf
immediately to our fenfes

fible for
him
were
it
pof-
to give ftronger proofs of
his exiflence, than
what appear on the
whole face of Nature
What
indeed
could fuch a Divine Being do, but copy

the prefent oeconomy of things ; render
many
of his
artifices fo plain,
that
no
ftupidity could miftake
them; afford
greater artifices, which
glimpfes of ftill
demonftrate his prodigious fuperiority
and
from
many
above our narrow apprehenfions

conceal altogether a great
fuch imperfect creatures ? Now, accord

ing to all rules of juft reafoning, every
fadl
muft
pafs for undifputed,
when
it
fupported by all the arguments which

its nature admits of; even though thefe
is
arguments be not, in themfelves, very

numerous or forcible How much more,
in the prefent cafe, where no human
:
imagination, can
compute
their
number,
and
NATURAL RELIGION.
and no underftanding eflimate
233
their PART
^îf
cogency ?
SHALL farther add,

THES, to what you have
I
faid
CLEAN-
fo well urged,
that one great advantage of the prinpie of Theifm, is, that it is the only fy-
ilem cf cofniogony which can be ren

dered intelligible and complete, and yet
can throughout preferve a flrong ana
we
every day fee and ex

perience in the world. The comparifon
of the univerfe to a machine of human
logy to what
obvious and natural,

juftified by fo many inflances of
contrivance
and
is
is
fo
order and defign in Nature, that it mufl
immediately
ftrike all
unprejudiced ap-
prehenfions, and procure univerfal ap

probation. Whoever attempts to weaken
this theory,
by
cannot pretend to fucceed
eflablifhing in
that
is
precife
fufficient for
difficulties;
its
place
any other
and determinate:
him,
if
It
is
he dart doubts and
and by remote and

P
abftracl
views
234
PART views of
things, reach that fulpenfe of
judgment, which is here the utmoft
boundary of
But befides
his wifhes.
that this ftate of
mind
is
in itfelf unfa-
can never be fleadily main

tisfadory,
tained againft fuch ftriking appearances
it
engage us into the reli

A falfe, abfurd fygious hypothelis.
ftem, human nature, from the force of
as continually
prejudice,
capable of adhering to with
is
obftinacy and perfeverance
But no fy-
in opposition to a theory
fupported by ftrong and obvious reafon, by natural propenfity, and by early
ftem at
all,
education,
fible to
So
think
it
abfolutely impof-
maintain or defend.
little,
replied
PHILO, do
efteem
of judgment in the prefent cafe to be poilible, that I am apt to

this fufpenfe
fufpsdl there enters fomewhat of a dipute of words into this controverfy,
That
ufually imagined.
the works of Nature bear a great ana
inore than
is
logy
NATURAL RELIGION.
logy to the productions of art,
and according
is
235
evident; PART
of good
to all the rules
^^
reafonmg, we ought to infer, if we argue

at all concerning them, that their caufes
have a proportional analogy. But as
there are alfo confiderable differences,
we have reafon
to fuppofe a proportional
difference in the caufes
cular ought to attribute a
and in
parti
much
higher
futo
the
and
of
energy
power
degree
preme caufe than any we have ever ob-
Here then the ex-
ferved in mankind.
iftence of a
DEITY is
plainly afcertainif we make it a que-
ed ,by reafon and

ana
ilion, whether, on account of thefe
call him a mind
logies, we can properly
:
or intelligence, notwithflanding the vafl

difference which may reafonably be
fuppofed
minds
between
what
controverfy
is
this
him and human

but a mere verbal
No man
can deny the
To reanalogies between the

ftrain. ourfelves from inquiring con
effects
cerning the caufes,
P 4
is
fcarcely poffible:
From
236
From
this inquiry, the legitimate
clufion
is,
con-
that the caufes have alfo an
analogy And if we are not contented

with calling the firft and fupreme canfe
a
or DEITY, but defire to
vary
:
GOD
the exprefllon; what can

but MIND or
we
THOUGHT,
he
is
call
to
him
which
juftly fuppofed to bear a confi-
derable refemblance?
ALL men
of found reafon are dif-
gufted with verbal difputes, w^hich a-
bound
fo
much
in philofophical
and
theological inquiries ; and it is found,

that the only remedy for this abufe
muft
arife
from
clear definitions,
from
the precifion of thofe ideas which en

ter into any argument, and from the
and uniform ufe of thofe terms

which are employed. But there is a
ftridt
fpecies of controverfy, which,
from the
very nature of language and of human

ideas, is involved in perpetual am
biguity,
and can never, by any pre

caution
NATURAL RELIGION.
237
caution or any definitions, be able to

reach a reafonable certainty or precifion.
Thefe are the controverfies con
cerning the degrees of any quality or

Men may argue to all
circumftance.
eternity, whether HANNIBAL be a
great, or a very great, or a fuperlatively
man, what degree of beauty CLE

OPATRA poffeffed, what epithet of
praife LIVY or THUCIDYDES is intitled
great
to,
to
without bringing the controverfy
any determination.
The
difputants
may here agree in their fenfe, and differ

in the terms, or vice verfa ; yet never be
able to define their terms, fo as to enter
into each others meaning Becaufe the
:
degrees of thefe qualities are not, like

of any
quantity or number, fufceptible
exacl: menfuration, which may be the
ftandard in the controverfy.

difpute concerning
nature,
Theifm
That the
is
of this
and confequently is merely ver
bal, or perhaps, if poflible,
ftill
more
incurably ambiguous, will appear upon

the
DIALOGUES CONCERNING-
238
PARF
j
h e flighteft inquiry. I afk the Thrift,

if he does not allow, that there is a
great
t
and immeafurable, becaufe ineomprehenfible, difference between the human

and the divine mind The more pious
he is, the more readily will he affent to
the affirmative, and the more will he
be difpofed to magnify the difference
:
He
is
will even affert, that the difference
of a nature which cannot be too
much
magnified,
next turn to the
who, I affert, is only nomi

nally fo, and can never poffibly be in
carneft
and I afk him, whether, from
Atheift,
the coherence and apparent

fympathy
all the
parts of this world, there be
in
not a certain degree of analogy among

all the
operations of Nature, in every
lituation
and in every age
whether
the rotting of a turnip, the generation

of an animal, and the ftru<5lure of hu
man
thought, be not energies that pro

bably bear fome remote analogy to each
other
It is
impofGble he can deny
it
He
NATURAL
He
will readily
R.ELIGION.
farther in his retreat
Itiil
aik him,
if it
Ha-
it.
acknowledge
ving obtained this conceilion,
him
239
I
;
puih
and
be not probable, that the
arranged, and ftill

bears
maintains, order in this univerfe,
not alfo fome remote inconceivable a-
principle
which
firft
of
nalogy to the other operations
ture,
and among the
nomy
reft to the ceco-
human mind and
of
Na
thought.
However reludtant, he muft give his

Where then, cry I to both
aflent.
the fubjed of your
Theift allows, that the
thefe antagonifts,
The
difpute?
original
is
is
intelligence
from human reafon
very different
The
Atheift al
of or
lows, that the original principle
der bears fome remote analogy to it.
Will you quarrel,
Gentlemen, about
the degrees; and enter into a controwhich admits not of any precife
verfy,
de
meaning, nor confequently of any
obtermination ? If you mould be fo
ilinate,
ihould not be furprifed to

find
PA
240
find you infenfibly change fides ; while
the Theift, on the one hand, exaggerates
the diflimilarity between the
Supreme
and
frail, imperfedt, variable,
Being,
and
mortal creatures and the
fleeting,
Atheift, on the other, magnifies the a;
nalogy
among
all
the operations of
Na
ture, in every period, every fituation,
and every pofition.

Confider then,
where the real point of controverfy lies
and if you cannot lay afide your dif;
putes, endeavour, at leaft, to cure yourfelves
of your animofity.
AND
here
mufl
alfo
acknowledge,
CLEANTHES, that, as the works of Na
ture have a much greater analogy to
the efFedls of our art
than to thofe of our

juftice;
we have
and contrivance,
benevolence and
reafon to infer, that
the natural attributes of the Deity have

a greater refemblance to thofe of men,
than his moral have to
But what
is
human
the confequence
virtues.
Nothing
but
NATURAL RELIGION.
but
this, that
man
are
more
241
the moral
qualities of
defective in their kind
For as the
.than his natural abilities.

is
PART
allowed to be abfb-
Supreme Being
lutely and entirely perfedl; whatever
differs mofl from him, departs the fartheft
from the fupreme flandard of rec

and perfection *.
titude
THESE,
* It feems evident, that the
difpute between the
or at leaft
Sceptics and Dogrnatifts is entirely verbal ;
of doubt and aflurance, which
regards only the degrees
And
with
to
we ought indulge
regard to all reafoning :
fuch difputes are commonly, at the bottom, verbal, and
admit not of any precife determination.

al
Dogmatift
denies, that there arc
with regard to the fenfes and to
all
No
philofophi-
difficulties
fcience
both
and that
thefe difficulties are in a regular, logical method, abfo-
No Sceptic denies, that we lie under

an abfolute neceffity, notwithftanding thefe difficulties,
ef thinking, and believing, and reafoning, with regard to
lutely infolveable.
all
kinds of fubje&s, and even of frequently affenting
with confidence and fecurity.
The
only difference, then,
between thefe fe&s, if they merit that name, is, that

the Sceptic, from habit, caprice, or inclination, infills
moft on the
difficulties
a the necelHty.
the Dograatift, for like reafon^
242
PART
THESE, CLEANTHES,
feigned fentiments on this
thefe
are
fubjedl
you know,
fentiments,
ever cherifhed and maintained.
un~
and
my
I
have
But in
my veneration for true

my abhorrence of vulgar
proportion to
religion,
is
fuperftitions
pleafure,
principles,
and
indulge a peculiar
confefs, in pulhing fuch
fometimes into abfurdity,
fometimes into impiety.

fenfible, that
all
And you
are
bigots, notwithftand-
ing their great averfion to the latter a-
bove the former, are commonly equally

guilty of both.
MY
lies,
inclination, replied CLEANTHES,

own, a contrary way. Religion,
however corrupted, is ftill better than

no religion at all. The doctrine of a
future ftate is fo ftrong and neceflary a
fecurity to morals, that we never ought
to abandon or neglect it.
For if finite
and temporary rewards and punifhments have fo great an effect, as we

daily
NATURAL RELIGION.
daily find
how much
greater muft be
fuch as are infinite and
expected from
eternal
243
PART
How
happens
then, faid PHILO,
it
be fo falutary to
hiflory abounds fo
if vulgar fuperflition
that
fociety,
all
mvich with accounts of
its
corifequences on public
affairs
pernicious
?
Fac
tions, civil wars, perfecutions, fubver-
fions
of government, oppreffion, flave-
ry; thefe are the difmal confequences

which always attend its prevalency over
the minds
of men.
If the
religious
fpirit be ever mentioned in any hiftorical narration, we are fure to meet after
wards with a
which attend
detail
it.
of the miferies
And no
period of
time can be happier or more profperous,

than thofe in which it is never regarded
or heard
THE
plied
of.
reafon of this obfervation, re
CLEANTHES,
is
obvious.
The
proper
244
PART
proper
^v^
the heart of
of religion
office
is
to regulate
men, humanize
their
con
duit, infufe the fpirit of temperance^

order,
ration
and obedience and as its ope

is filent, and
only enforces the
;
motives of morality andjuftice, it is in

danger of being overlooked, and con
founded
When it
with
diftinguifhes
motives.
other
thefe
itfelf,
and
a feparate principle over men,
has de
proper fphere, and has

a
cover to faction and am
only
parted from
become
it
adls as
its
bition.
AND
fo will all religion, faid
PHILO,
and
rational
except
philofophical
kind.
Your reafonings are more eafily
the
eluded than
my
facts.
The
inference
not juft, becaufe finite and tempo

rary rewards and punimments have fo
is
great influence, that therefore fuch as

are infinite and eternal mufl have fo
much
greater.
the attachment
Confider,
befeech you,
which we have
to pre-
fent
NATURAL RELIGION.
fent things,
and the
little
245
concern which
we
difcover for objects fo remote and

uncertain. When divines are declaim
ing againfl the common behaviour and

conduct of the world, they always reprefent this principle as the flrongefb
imaginable, (which indeed it is) ; and

defcribe almoft all human kind as lying
under the influence of
and funk into

the deepefl lethargy and unconcern about their religious interefts. Yet thefe
fame divines, when they refute their
it,
fpeculative antagonists, fuppofe the

tives
mo
of religion to be fo powerful, that,
without them,
were impoffible for
it
civil fociety to fubfifl
nor are they a-
fliamed of fo palpable a contradiction.

It is certain, from experience, that the
fmalleft grain of natural honefly
benevolence has more

conduct, than the
on mens
mod pompous
views
theological theories
fuggefted
by
fyflems.
A man
works
effect
inceflantly
and
and
natural inclination
upon him ;
it is
for
ever
246
ever P rc ênt to tne
n<
an d mingles
with every view and confiderawhereas religious motives, where
itfelf
tion
they adl at
all,
operate only
by
ftarts
and
bounds and it is fcarcely poffible for

them to become altogether habitual to
the mind.
The force of the greateft
;
gravity, fay the philofophers, is infinite

ly fmall, in comparifon of that of the
leafl
impulfe: yet
it is
certain, that the
fmall eft gravity will, in the end, pre

vail above a great impulfe ; becaufe no
ftrokes or blows can be repeated
fuch conftancy
as attraction
with
and gravi
tation,
ANOTHER
advantage of inclination;
engages on its fide all the wit and in

genuity of the mind ; and when fet in
It
oppofition to religious principles, feeks
every method and art of eluding them:

In which it is almoft always fuccefsful.
Who
can explain the heart of man^ or

account for thofe ftraiige falvos and ex-
NATURAL RELIGION.
with which people
cufes,
when they
felves,
tious
fatisfy
247
them- PART
follow their inclina-
in oppofition
to
their religious
duty? This is well underftood in the

world and none but fools ever
repofe
;
lefs truft
in a
man, becaufe they hear,

from
that,
fludy and philofophy, he has
entertained fome fpeculative doubts
with
regard
And when we
who makes a
to
theological
have
fubjedls.
do with a man,
great profefTibn of reli
gion and devotion
to
has this any other
feveral, who pafs for pru

than
to
dent,
put them on their guard,
left
they be cheated and deceived
efFedl
upon
by
him ?
WE
muft farther
lofophers,
who
flection, ftand
confider, that phicultivate reafon and re
lefs
in need of fuch
mo
keep them under the reftraint

of morals and that the vulgar, xvho
tives to
alone
may
pable of fo
need them, are utterly inca

pure a religion as reprefents
the
248
the Deity to be pleafed with nothing but

virtue in human behaviour.
The re
commendations
to the Divinity are ge

nerally fdppofed to be either frivolous
obfervances, or rapturous
We
bigottecl credulity.
ecftafi.es,
or a
need not run
back into antiquity, or wander into re

mote regions, to find inftances of this
degeneracy.
Amongft
ourfelves,
fome
have been guilty of that atrocioufnefs,
unknown
CIAN
to the
EGYPTIAN and GRE
fuperftitions,
of declaiming, in
exprefs terms, againft morality ; and reprefenting it as a fure forfeiture of the
divine favour, if the leafl truft or
ance be laid upon
reli
it.
BUT
even though fuperftition or enthufiafm mould not put itfelf in diredl

di
oppolition to morality ; the very
verting of the attention, the raifing up
new and
frivolous fpecies of merit,
the prepofterous diflribution which
makes of
praife
and blame,
it
nruft have
the
NATURAL RELIGION.
249
the mofl pernicious confequences, and

weaken extremely rnens attachment to
the natural motives of juftice and
hu
manity.
SUCH
a principle of aclion likewife,
not being any of the familiar motives

of human conduct, acts only by inter
vals on the temper; and muft be rouzed
by continual
efforts, in
order to render
the pious zealot fatisfied with his
conduct, and
make him
fulfil his
own
devo
Many religious exercifes

into
with feeming fervour,
are entered
where the heart, at the time, feels cold
tional tafk.
and languid:
habit of diflimulation
by degrees contracted and fraud

and falfehood become the predominant
Hence the reafon of that
principle.
is
vulgar obfervation, that the higheft zeal

in religion and the deepeft hypocrify,
fo far
or
from being
inconfiftent, are often
commonly united
vidual character.
0.3
in the fame indi
250
in
THE bad effedts of fuch habits, even

common life, are eafxly imagined
:
but where the
interefts
of religion are
concerned, no morality can be forcible

enough to bind the enthufiaftic zealot,
The
facrednefs of the caufe faaclifies
every meafure which can be

of to promote it.
made
fteady attention alone to fo
ufe
im
portant an intereft as that of eternal

apt to extinguifli the bene
volent affedions, and
beget a narrow,
contrafted felfifhnefs. And when
is
falvation,
fuel*
a temper
is
encouraged, it eafily eludes

the general
precepts of charity and
benevolence.
*11
THUS
the motives of
vulgar fuperftino great influence on
general
tion have
condiuft; nor
is their
operation very fa
vourable to
morality, in the initances
where they predominate.

Is
NATURAL RELIGION.
251
more
any maxim in politics

certain and infallible, than that both
the number and authority of priefls
mould be confined within very narrow
Is there
and that the
limits;
civil
magiftrate
to keep his fafces and

ought, for ever,
axes from fuch dangerous hands ? But
of popular religion were fo

a contrary maxim
falutary to fociety,
if the fpirit
number
ought to prevail. The greater

of priefts, and their greater authority
and
riches, will
the re
always augment
And
the
priefls
though
ligious fpirit.
have the guidance of this fpirit, why
may we
of
life,
not expect a fuperior fandlity

and greater benevolence and
moderation, from perfons

apart for religion,
who
who
are fet
are continually
and who
inculcating it upon others,

muft themfelves imbibe a greater {hare
in
it ? Whence comes it then, that,
of
fact, the
utmofl a wife magiftrate can
to popular
propofe with regard
gions,
is,
as far as poffible, to
reli
make
faving
252
P* RT
X.1 1.
faving
game of it, and
to prevent their
pernicious confequences with regard to

fociety ? Every expedient
for fo humble a purpofe
which*he
tries
furrounded
is
with inconveiiiencies. If he admits only

one religion among his fubjedts, he muft
facrifice,
to
an uncertain profpe6t of
tranquillity, every corifideration of pub
reafon, induftry, and

independency. If he gives
lic liberty, fcience,
own
even his
indulgence to feveral feels, which is the

wifer maxim, he muft preferve a very
philofophical indifference to all of them,
and carefully reftrain the pretenfions of
the prevailing fedl ; otherwife he can
but endlefs difputes,

quarrels, factions, perfecutions, and ci
vil commotions.
expec5l
nothing
TRUE
religion, I allow, has
pernicious confequences
treat of religion,
no fuch
but we muft
as it has
commonly
been found in the world; nor have I

any tiling to do with that fpeculative
tenet
NATURAL RELIGION.
253
tenet of
cies
Theifm, which, as it is a fpe- PART

XIT
of philofophy, muft partake of the
^0
beneficial influence of that

principle,
and
at the
fame time muft
like inconvenience,
lie
under a
of being always con
few perfons.
fined to very
OATHS
are requifite in all courts of

judicature; but it is a queftion whether
from any popular

the folemnity and im
their authority arifes

religion.
It is
portance of the occafion, the regard to
and the
on the
general interefts of fociety, which are
the chief reftraints upon mankind.
Cuftom-houfe oaths and political oaths
are but little regarded even by fome
reputation,
who
reflecting
pretend to principles of honefty
and
religion
tion
is
and a Quaker s afTeverawith us juftly put upon the fame

;
footing with the oath of any other perfon. I know, that POLYBIUS * afcribes
the infamy of
GREEK
faith to the pre-
valency
* Lib.
vi.
cap. 54.
254
PART
EPICUREAN philofophy:
alfo, that PUNIC faith had
valency of the
^v^ but
as
know
bad a reputation
in ancient times, as
IRISH evidence has in modern; though

we cannot account for thefe vulgar obfervations
by
GREEK
mention, that
mous
Not to
was infa
the fame reafon.
before the
rife
faith
of the
EPICUREAN
in apafphilofophy; and EURIPIDES f,

out to you, has
fage which I mall point
of fatire
glanced a remarkable ftroke
with regard to this
agtiinft his nation,
circumftance.
TAKE
care,
PHILO, replied CLEAN-
THES, take care: puih not matters too

allow not your zeal againft falfe
veneration
religion to undermine your
far;
for the true.
Forfeit not this principle,
the chief, the only great comfort in life;

and our principal fupport amidft all the
The mofl
attacks of adverfe fortune.
agreeable reflection,
f Iphigenia
which
in
it is
Tauride.
poffible
for
NATURAL RELIGION.
for
human
255
imagination to fuggeft,
is
that of genuine
Theifm,
fents us as the
which repreworkmanfhip of a Being

perfedly good, wife, and powerful;
who created us for happinefs and
who,
;
having implanted in us immeafurable

defires of good, will
prolong our exiflence to all eternity, and will transfer
us
into an infinite
of
in or
variety
fcenes,
der to fatisfy thofe

defires, and render
our
complete and durable. Next

to fuch a
Being himfelf (if the comparifori be
lot which
allowed), the
felicity
we can
his
imagine,
is
happiest
that of being under
guardianihip and protection.
THESE
mod
appearances, faid PHILO, are
engaging and alluring
and with
regard to the true philofopher, they are

more than appearances. But it
happens
here, as in the former cafe, that, with
regard to the greater part of mankind,

the appearances are
deceitful, and that
the
PART
256
PART tne terrors of

religion
vail
above
IT
its
allowed, that
is
commonly
pre
comforts.
men
never have
recourfe to devotion fo readily as when

dejected with grief or deprefTed with
not this a proof, that the

religious fpirit is not fo nearly allied to
joy as to forrow ?
ficknefs.
Is
BUT men, when
afflicted, find
folation in religion, replied
con-
CLEANTHES.
Sometimes *faid PHILO: but
it is
natu
imagine, that they will form a

notion of thofe unknown beings, fuit-
ral to
ably to the prefent gloom and melan

choly of their temper, when they betake
themfel ves to the contemplation of them.
Accordingly,
we
find the tremendous
predominate in
images
to
and we
ourfelves, after
all
religions;
having employ
ed the moft exalted expreffion in our
fall into the
defcriptions of the Deity,
flatteft
contradiction, in affirming, that

the
NATURAL RELIGION.
damned are infinitely
number to the elecfL
the
SHALL venture
257
PART
fuperior in
to affirm, that there
never was a popular religion, which reprefented the ftate of departed fouls in
fuch a
for
light, as
human
fuch a
it
eligible
kind, that there fhould be
Thefe
ftate.
gion are the

phy.
would render
For as
fine
models of
reli
mere product of philofodeath lies between the eye
and the profpecl of futurity, that event

is fo fhocking to Nature, that it muft
throw a gloom on all the regions which
lie beyond it
and fuggefl to the gene
rality of mankind the idea of CERBERUS
and Furies devils, and torrents of fire
and brimftone.
;
both fear and hope enter

into religion; becaufe both thefe paIT
is
true,
fions, at different times, agitate the
man mind, and

fpecies
hu
each of them forms a
of divinity fuitable to
itfelf.
But
whea
258
man
he
is
fie
n a cheerful
difpofition,
for bufmefs, or
company, or
entertainment of any kind and he na
turally applies himfelf to thefe, and
;
When
thinks not of religion.
melan
choly and dejeded, he has nothing to

do but brood upon the terrors of the
invifible world,
ftill
and
to
plunge himfelf
deeper in affli&ion. It
may, indeed,
that
after
he
happen,
has, in this man^
the
ner, engraved
religious opinions
deep into his thought and imagination,
there may arrive a change of health or
circumftances, which
may
reftore his
good-humour, and
raifing cheerful pro-
fpedls of futurity,
make him run
into
the other extreme of joy and

triumph.
But
muft be acknowedged, that,

as terror is the primary
principle of re
ligion, it is the paffion which always
predominates in it, and admits but of
ftill it
fhort intervals of pleafure.
NOT
to mention,
that thefe
fits
of
NATURAL RELIGION.
cxceffive, enthufiaftic joy,
ing the
fits
ftate
where a
it
is
there any ftate of mind

calm and equable. But
is
as the
happy
impomble
man thinks,
that he
to fupport,
lies,
in fuch
profound darknefs and uncertainty, be

tween an eternity of happinefs and an
No wonder, that
eternity of mifery.
fuch an opinion disjoints the
ordinary
frame of the mind, and throws it into
the utmoft confufion. And
though that
feldom fo fteady in its ope
ration as to influence all the actions
;
opinion
is
apt to make a confiderable

breach in the temper, and to
yet
is
that
gloom and melancholy
it
able in
IT
is
all
PART
always prepare the way ^-ô

of fuperftitious terror and
dejection ; nor
this
by exhaufl-
fpirits,
for equal
fo
259
fo
produce
remark
common
fenfe to
devout people.
contrary to
entertain apprehenfions or terrors
upon
account of any opinion whatfoever, or

to imagine that we run
any rifk here
after
^6o
-f>ART
after,
by
the freed ufe of our reafon,
^0 Such a fentiment implies both an abfurdity
and an
inconfiftency.
an abfur-
It is
dity to believe that the Deity has hu

man paflions, and one of the loweft of
human
paflions, a refllefs appetite for

It is an inconiiftency to be
applaufe.
Deity has this hu

paflion, he has not others alfo and
lieve, that, fince the
man
in particular, a difregard to the opi

nions of creatures fo much inferior.
To knoiv
GW,
fays
SENECA,
All other worfliip
Jhip him.
is to
is
ivor-
indeed
abfurd, fuperftitious, and even impious.

It degrades him to the low condition of
mankind, who are delighted with intreaty, folicitation, prefents, and flat
Yet
tery.
is
this
impiety the fmalleft
of which fuperftition
monly,
it
him
guilty.
deprefles the Deity far
the condition of
fents
is
mankind
below
and repre-
dsemon, who
power without reafon and
without
as a capricious
exercifes his
Com
NATURAL RELIGION.
.261
without humanity! And were that Di- PART

vine Being difpofed to be offended at
the vices and follies of
who
are his
would
of
it
filly
mortals,
own workmanfhip
ill
furely fare with the votaries
moft
popular
fuperftitions.
would any of human race merit
Nor
his fa
vour, but a very few, the philofophical

Theiftsj who entertain, or rather indeed
endeavour to entertain, fuitable notions

of his divine perfections: As the only
perfons,
intitled to his compaffton
and
would be the philofophical

a
feel
almofl equally rare, who,
Sceptics,
from a natural diffidence of their own
indulgence^
capacity, fufpend, or endeavour to fufpend, all judgment with regard to fuch
fublime and fuch extraordinary fubjefts.
IF the whole of Natural Theology, as

fome people feem to maintain, refolves
itfelf into
one fimple,
what ambiguous,
at leaft
though fomeundefined propofition,
262
PART
^vO
pofitioii,
That the caufe or
in the univerfe
analogy to
caufes of order
probably bear fome remote
human
If this
intelligence:
proposition be not capable of extenfion,

variation, or more particular explica
tion
If
affords
it
human
affects
life,
no inference that
or can be the fource
of any action or forbearance
And
if
the analogy, imperfedl as it is, can be

carried no farther than to the human
intelligence
and cannot be
transferred,
with any appearance of probability, to

the other qualities of the mind
If this
:
what can the moft

inquiiitive, contemplative, and religious
man do more than give a plain, philoreally
be the
cafe,
fophical affent
to the
propofition,
as
and believe that the

occurs
arguments on which it is eftablifhed,
exceed the objections which lie againft
it ?
Some aftonifhment indeed will na
turally arife from the greatnefs o the
fome melancholy from its obobjedt
often as
it
fcurity
fome contempt of human
rea-*
fon ?
NATURAL RELIGION.
fon, that
it
fatisfacftory
263
can give no folution more PART

with regard to fo extraor-
dinary and magnificent a qneftion. But

believe
me, CLEANTHES, the mofl na

which a well-difpofed
tural fentiment,
mind
will feel
ing defire
on
this occafion, is a
long
and expectation, that heaven
would be pleafed
to diffipate, at leaft
this
profound ignorance, by
fome
more particular revela
affording
tion to mankind, and making difcovealleviate,
of the nature, attributes, and ope

rations, of the divine object of our faith.
ries
perfon, feafoned with a juft fenfe of

the imperfections of natural reafon,
will fly to revealed truth with the
greateft
avidity
While the haughty
Dogmatifl, perfuaded that he can erect

a complete fyflem of Theology by the
mere help of philofophy, difdains any

farther aid, and rejects this a^ventitious inftrudlor.
cal Sceptic
firft
is,
and moft
in
To be
a man
a philofophiof letters, the
eflTential flep
towards be
ing
264
PART
n g a found, believing Chriftian; a

w^vl proposition, which I would willingly
j
to the attention of PAMI

And
PHILUS
hope CLEANTHES will
forgive me for interpofing fo far in
recommend
:
the education and
inftrudlion of his
pupil.
CLEANTHES and PHILO purfued not

and
this converfation much farther
as nothing ever made greater impref:
fion
the reafonings of
confefs, that, upon a
on me, than
all
that day ; fo, I

ferious review of the whole,
cannot
but think, that PHILO S principles are

more probable than DEMEA S ; but that
thofe of
CLEANTHES
approach
nearer to the truth.
FINIS.
ftill
AUG4
PLEASE
CARDS OR
1979
DO NOT REMOVE
SLIPS
UNIVERSITY OF
FROM
THIS POCKET
TORONTO
LIBRARY
BL
Hume, David
108
H8
1779
Dialogues concerning
natural religion 2d ed.

David Hume - Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

David Hume - Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

David Hume - Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

:CO

THE SECOND EDITION.

has been remarked, my HERMIPpus, that though the ancient phi-

lofophers conveyed moft of their

method of compofition has been

practifed in later ages, and has feldonl

Accurate and regu

deduce the proofs on which

converfation, fcarcely appears natural ;

by departing from the

compoiition, to give a freer air to his

of Author and Reader^ he is apt to run

preparations and tranfitions, that the

the graces of dialogue,

for the order, brevity, and preeifion$

are fbine fubjects, however,

which dialogue-writing is peculiarly

point of doctrine, which is fo

feems to require fome fuch method of

manner may compenfate

where the variety of

us naturally into the ftyle of dialogue

where no one can

Oppofite fentiments, even without any decifion, af

the fubje6t be curious and inter efting^

and unites the two great-

and pureft pleafures* of human

thefe circumftances are

be found in the fubje6l of

RAL RELIGION. What truth

vious, fo certain, as the BEING of

the moft ignorant ages have

fined genuifes have ambitioudy driven

produce new proofs and arguments ?

ground of all our hopes, the fured

quedions occur, concerning the NA

cerning thefe, human reafon has not

cannot redrain our redlefs inquiry with

4oubt, uncertainty, and contradiction,

lately occafion to obferve,

paffed 5 as ufual, part of the

was prefent at thofe converfations of

you then told

more exadl detail of

ceffity enter into a

regard to fo delicate a fubjecl: as that of

to the carelefs fcepticifm

of PHILO, or compared either of their

thodoxy of DEMEA. My youth ren*me a mere auditor of their difputes

curiofity natural to the

found any confiderable part of them in

FTER I joined thecompany, whom

compliments, on the great care which

PAMPHILUS, faid he, was your intimate

your adopted fon,

judge by the pains which

you beftow in conveying to him every

prudence than in induilry,