Essays, or discourses, vol. 4 (of 4) : $b Selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the SpanishFeijoo, Benito Jerónimo
Philosophy
Essays, or discourses, vol. 4 (of 4) : $b Selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the Spanish
Feijoo, Benito Jerónimo
Spanish essays -- Translations into English
XLVIII. Besides this, some express a doubt, whether plants are
vegetable or not; and some are also doubtful, whether the property
of vegetation does not likewise belong to stones and metals. If we
consult the Cartesians upon this point, they will tell us, that all we
call vegetation or nutrition of plants, is pure mechanism, and that
the attraction of the nutritious juice which we attribute to them,
is a solemn chimera. If we forsake the Cartesians, and apply to the
experimental philosophers, we shall find many of them, who will tell us,
that metals and stones grow by means of vegetation; which is an opinion,
that not long ago, was illustrated by Joseph Pitton de Tournfort, a
celebrated naturalist of the Academy Royal of Sciences at Paris, and
more especially, by the celebrated observations he made upon marble in
the wonderful cave of Antiparos; and with respect to metals, we, to the
authority of others, shall add that of Aristotle, who in his book _de
Mirabilibus Auscultationibus_, says, that in a territory of the island
of Cyprus, they were used to sow iron, and that it grew and vegetated
like other plants.
XLIX. And now we are speaking of Aristotle, we will not omit mentioning
an authority of his, which is very applicable to our present subject,
because it is totally opposite to a received opinion in the schools,
to wit, that plants and animals are of two different genuses, and that
the distinction between them is, that the animal is a living sensible
entity, and the plant a living insensible one. Aristotle in his book _de
Plantis_ says, that oysters and other shell-fish, are both plants and
animals: _scimus autem, quod conchyla animalia sunt cognitione carentia:
quapropter plantæ sunt, & animalia_. I ask now, how one species can be
classed under two diametrically opposite genuses? and how an oyster
can be both sensible and insensible? for as an animal, it ought to be
a living sensible entity, and as a plant, a living insensible one. Nor
can it be said, that Aristotle, when he called an oyster a plant, spoke
in a metaphorical sense, for this mode of speaking is not allowed to
philosophers, but is only permitted to poets and orators. Besides, the
cause he assigns, shews, that he spoke in a rigorous philosophical sense;
although, to speak the truth, I do not comprehend who could reveal to
Aristotle, that oysters and other shell-fish are destitute of that sort
of knowledge, which is proper and natural to the most stupid brutes.
SECT. XII.
L. From the lowest species, we proceed to the next above, and enquire,
what is the nature of a living entity; what we are to understand by the
term living, and what is life? To this, we shall be answered from the
schools, that life is motion _ab intrinsico_, and that living, means that
which moves _ab intrinsico_; that is, its motion is produced by some
intrinsic faculty, or virtue, which it has within itself.
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