Buffon's Natural History, Volume 03 (of 10): Containing a Theory of the Earth, a General History of Man, of the Brute Creation, and of Vegetables, Minerals, &c. &c.Buffon, Georges Louis Leclerc, comte de
History
Buffon's Natural History, Volume 03 (of 10): Containing a Theory of the Earth, a General History of Man, of the Brute Creation, and of Vegetables, Minerals, &c. &c.
Buffon, Georges Louis Leclerc, comte de
Natural history
The general idea then is formed from the whole taken together, which
whole being composed of different parts, there is consequently between
these parts degrees and links. An insect, in this sense, is something
less of an animal than a dog; an oyster still less than an insect; a
sea-nettle, or a fresh-water polypus, still less than an oyster; and
as nature acts by insensible links, we may find beings which are still
less animated than a sea-nettle, or a polypus. Our general ideas are
only artificial methods to collect a quantity of objects in the same
point of view; and they have, like the artificial methods we shall
speak of, the defect of never being able to comprehend the whole.
They are likewise opposite to the walk of nature, which is uniform,
insensible, and always particular, insomuch that by our endeavouring to
comprehend too great a number of particular ideas in one single word,
we have no longer a clear idea of what that word conveys; because, the
word being received, we imagine that it is a line drawn between the
productions of nature; that all above this line is _animal_, and all
below it _vegetable_; another word, as general as the first, and which
is used as a line of separation between organized bodies and inanimate
matter. But as we have already said, these lines of separation do
not exist in nature; there are beings which are neither animals,
vegetables, nor minerals, and which we in vain might attempt to arrange
with either. For example, when Mr. Trembly first observed the polypus,
he employed a considerable time before he could determine whether it
was an animal or a plant; and possibly from this reason that it is
perhaps neither one nor the other, and all that can be said is, that it
approaches nearest to an animal; and as we suppose every living thing
must be either an animal or a plant, we do not credit the existence of
an organized being, that cannot be referred to one of those general
names; whereas there must, and in fact are, a great number of organized
beings which are neither the one nor the other. The moving substances
perceived in seminal liquors, in infusions of the flesh of animals, in
seed, and other parts of plants, are all of this kind. We cannot call
these animals, nor can we say they are vegetables, and certainly we can
still less assert they are minerals.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account