Memoirs of Dr. Joseph Priestley : $b To the year 1795, written by himself: with a continuation, to the time of his decease, by his son, Joseph Priestley: and observations on his writings, by Thomas Cooper, President Judge of the 4th. district of Pennsylvania: and the Rev. William Christie.Priestley, Joseph
Religion
Memoirs of Dr. Joseph Priestley : $b To the year 1795, written by himself: with a continuation, to the time of his decease, by his son, Joseph Priestley: and observations on his writings, by Thomas Cooper, President Judge of the 4th. district of Pennsylvania: and the Rev. William Christie.
Priestley, Joseph
Chemists -- Great Britain -- Biography; Priestley, Joseph, 1733-1804
In discussing the former hypothesis, Dr. Priestley denies not only the
existence of spirit as having no relation to extension or space, but
also the common definition of matter, as a substance possessing only
the inert properties of extension, and solidity or impenetrability. The
latter he defines in conformity with the more accurate observations of
later physics, a substance possessing the property of extension and
the active powers of attraction and repulsion. With Boscovich and Mr.
Michell, he admits of the penetrability of matter, and replies to the
objections that may be drawn from this view of the subject.
It must be acknowledged that highly curious as this preliminary
disquisition is, it is not only unnecessary to the main argument, but
leaves the definition of matter open to the question whether there be
any substratum or subject in which the essential properties or powers
of attracting and repelling inhere. That these powers really belong to
matter, whatever else matter may be, is evident from the reflection
of light, previous to contact with the reflecting substance and its
inflection afterward from the electric spark, visible along a suspended
chain, from the phenomena of the metallic pyrometers, from the rain
drop on a cabbage leaf, &c. And that matter is permeable, at least to
light, is sufficiently evident from every case of tranparency. Still
however it cannot consist of properties alone; a property must be the
property of something. But the proper and direct train of argument in
favour of materialism is, that every phenomenon from which the notion
of a soul is deduced, is resolveable into some affection of the brain,
perceived. That all thought, reflection, choice, judgment, memory, the
passions and affections, &c. consist only of ideas or sensations,(i.
e. motions within that organ) perceived at the time. Though, judgment,
memory, being words, denoting different kinds of internal perceptions,
relating only to, and consisting of, ideas and sensations.[67] That
sensations and ideas themselves, arise only in consequence of the
impressions of external objects on our senses, which impressions are
liable to be recalled afterward by the recurrence of others with
which they were originally associated, agreeably to the necessary and
inevitable law of the animal system. That this is evident in as much as
there can be no ideas peculiar to any of the senses where there is a
want of the necessary bodily organ, as of hearing, sight, &c. inasmuch
as all these ideas commence with the body, grow with its growth,
and decrease with its decline. That they can be suspended, altered,
destroyed, by artificial means, by accident, by disease. That all these
properties of mind, viz. thought, judgment, memory, passions, and
affections, are as evident in brutes as in men; and though the degree
be different, it is always accompanied with a proportionate difference
of organization. That perception is clearly the result of organization,
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