An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, Volume 1: MDCXC, Based on the 2nd Edition, Books 1 and 2Locke, John
Philosophy
An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, Volume 1: MDCXC, Based on the 2nd Edition, Books 1 and 2
Locke, John
Knowledge, Theory of -- Early works to 1800
What true or tolerable notion of a Deity could they have, who
acknowledged and worshipped hundreds? Every deity that they owned above
one was an infallible evidence of their ignorance of Him, and a proof
that they had no true notion of God, where unity, infinity, and
eternity were excluded. To which, if we add their gross conceptions of
corporeity, expressed in their images and representations of their
deities; the amours, marriages, copulations, lusts, quarrels, and other
mean qualities attributed by them to their gods; we shall have little
reason to think that the heathen world, i.e. the greatest part of
mankind, had such ideas of God in their minds as he himself, out of
care that they should not be mistaken about him, was author of. And
this universality of consent, so much argued, if it prove any native
impressions, it will be only this:—that God imprinted on the minds of
all men speaking the same language, a NAME for himself, but not any
IDEA; since those people who agreed in the name, had, at the same time,
far different apprehensions about the thing signified. If they say that
the variety of deities worshipped by the heathen world were but
figurative ways of expressing the several attributes of that
incomprehensible Being, or several parts of his providence, I answer:
what they might be in the original I will not here inquire; but that
they were so in the thoughts of the vulgar I think nobody will affirm.
And he that will consult the voyage of the Bishop of Beryte, c. 13,
(not to mention other testimonies,) will find that the theology of the
Siamites professedly owns a plurality of gods: or, as the Abbe de
Choisy more judiciously remarks in his Journal du Voyage de Siam,
107/177, it consists properly in acknowledging no God at all.
16. Idea of God not innate although wise men of all nations come to
have it.
If it be said, that wise men of all nations came to have true
conceptions of the unity and infinity of the Deity, I grant it. But
then this,
First, excludes universality of consent in anything but the name; for
those wise men being very few, perhaps one of a thousand, this
universality is very narrow.
Secondly, it seems to me plainly to prove, that the truest and best
notions men have of God were not imprinted, but acquired by thought and
meditation, and a right use of their faculties: since the wise and
considerate men of the world, by a right and careful employment of
their thoughts and reason, attained true notions in this as well as
other things; whilst the lazy and inconsiderate part of men, making far
the greater number, took up their notions by chance, from common
tradition and vulgar conceptions, without much beating their heads
about them. And if it be a reason to think the notion of God innate,
because all wise men had it, virtue too must be thought innate; for
that also wise men have always had.
17. Odd, low, and pitiful ideas of God common among men.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account