The Sceptical Chymist: or Chymico-Physical Doubts & Paradoxes, Touching the Spagyrist's Principles Commonly call'd Hypostatical; As they are wont to be Propos'd and Defended by the Generality of Alchymists. Whereunto is præmis'd Part of another Discourse relating to the same Subject.Boyle, Robert
Philosophy
The Sceptical Chymist: or Chymico-Physical Doubts & Paradoxes, Touching the Spagyrist's Principles Commonly call'd Hypostatical; As they are wont to be Propos'd and Defended by the Generality of Alchymists. Whereunto is præmis'd Part of another Discourse relating to the same Subject.
Boyle, Robert
Chemistry -- Early works to 1800
What you alledge (replies _Carneades_) of the Vastness of the Earth
and Water, has long since made me willing to allow them to be the
greatest and chief Masses of Matter to be met with here below: But I
think I could shew You, if You would give me leave, that this will
prove only that the Elements, as You call them, are the chief Bodies
that make up the neighbouring part of the World, but not that they are
such Ingredients as every mixt Body must consist of. But since You
challenge me of something of a Promise, though it be not an entire
one, Yet I shall willingly perform it. And indeed I intended not when
I first mention'd this Objection, to insist on it at present against
_Themistius_, (as I plainly intimated in my way of proposing it:)
being only desirous to let you see, that though I discern'd my
Advantages, yet I was willing to forego some of them, rather then
appear a rigid Adversary of a Cause so weak, that it may with safety
be favourably dealt with. But I must here profess, and desire You to
take Notice of it, that though I pass on to another Argument, it is
not because I think this first invalid. For You will find in the
Progress of our Dispute, that I had some reason to question the very
way of Probation imploy'd both by Peripateticks and Chymists, to
evince the being and number of the Elements. For that there are such,
and that they are wont to be separated by the Analysis made by Fire,
is indeed taken for granted by both Parties, but has not (for ought I
know) been so much as plausibly attempted to be proved by either.
Hoping then that when we come to that part of our Debate, wherein
Considerations relating to this Matter are to be treated of, you will
remember what I have now said, and that I do rather for a while
suppose, then absolutely grant the truth of what I have question'd, I
will proceed to another Objection.
And hereupon _Eleutherius_ having promis'd him not to be unmindfull,
when time should serve, of what he had declar'd.
I consider then (sayes _Carneades_) in the next place, that there are
divers Bodies out of which _Themistius_ will not prove in haste, that
there can be so many Elements as four extracted by the Fire. And I
should perchance trouble him if I should ask him what Peripatetick can
shew us, (I say not, all the four Elements, for that would be too
rigid a Question, but) any one of them extracted out of Gold by any
degree of Fire whatsoever. Nor is Gold the only Bodie in Nature that
would puzzle an _Aristotelian_, that is no more [Errata: (that is no
more)] to analyze by the Fire into Elementary Bodies, since, for ought
I have yet observ'd, both Silver and calcin'd _Venetian_ Talck, and
some other Concretes, not necessary here to be nam'd, are so fixt,
that to reduce any of them into four Heterogeneous Substances has
hitherto prov'd a Task much too hard, not only for the Disciples of
_Aristotle_, but those of _Vulcan_, at least, whilst the latter have
employ'd only Fire to make the _Analysis_.
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