It may well be supposed that Gall, who in the word understanding sees nothing but an abstract word, expressive of the sum of our intellectual faculties, would also, in the word _will_, perceive nothing more than an abstract word, expressing the sum of our moral faculties. He had given a definition of _reason_: “The result of the simultaneous action of all the intellectual faculties.”[37] In the same way he defined _will_ to be “the result of the simultaneous action of the superior intellectual faculties.”[38] But Gall always deceives himself; for reason and will are not _results_—they are _powers_, and primary powers of thought. Gall, in a manner equally singular, defines _moral liberty_ or _free will_. “Moral liberty,” says he, “is nothing more than the faculty of _being determined_, and of determining under motive.”[39] Not so: liberty is precisely the power to determine against all motive. Locke well defined liberty as _power_: to be determined, is to allow one’s self to be determined—that is, to _obey_. Gall says again, “Unlimited liberty supposes not only that man governs himself independently of all law, but that he is the creator of his own nature.”[40] Not at all; it supposes that he may have choice—and in fact he does choose. Lastly, Gall says, “A phenomenon such as that of absolute liberty, would be a phenomenon occurring without any cause whatever.”[41] Why without cause? The cause is in the power of choosing—and this power is a fact. Gall’s whole doctrine is one series of errors, which press upon each other cumulatively. He resolves that the part of the brain in which the understanding resides shall be divided into many small organs, distinct from each other; a physiological error. He decries the unity of the understanding, and looks upon the will and the reason as mere results—psycological errors. In the free will he perceives merely a compulsory determination,[42] and consequently a mere result—this is a moral error. Man’s liberty is a positive faculty, and not the simple passive result of the preponderance of one _motive_ over another _motive_, of one _organ_ over another _organ_.[43] Reason, will, liberty, are therefore, not as in Gall’s doctrine, _positive faculties_, _active powers_; or rather, they are the understanding itself. Reason, will, liberty, are in fact the understanding, as _conceiving_, _willing_, _choosing_, or _deliberating_.[44] The consciousness which feels itself to be one, feels itself free. And you will remark, that these two great facts given out by the inward sense, the consciousness, to wit, the unity of the understanding and the positive power of the free will, are precisely the two first facts denied by the philosophy of Gall. And take good care to observe further, that if there be in us any thing that belongs to the _consciousness_, it is evidently and par excellence the sense of our personal unity; or what is more, the consciousness of our moral liberty.