Ability to perform, juft when the great Occafion called for all his Efforts to engage.

The fame Ambition that prompted him to be a Politician, actuated him as a Philofopher. His Aims were equally great and extensive in both Capacities: unwilling to fubmit to any Power in the one, or any Authority in the other, he entered the Fields of Science, with a thorough Contempt of all that had been established before him, and seemed to think every Thing wrong, that he might fhew his Faculty in the Reformation. It might have been better for his Quiet, as a Man, if he had been content to act a fubordinate Character in the State'; and it had certainly been better for his Memory as a Writer, if he had aimed at doing less than he attempted. Wisdom in Morals, like every other Art or Science, is an Accumulation that Numbers have contributed to increase; and it is not for one fingle Man to pretend, that he can add more to the Heap, than the thousands that have gone before him. Such Innovators more frequently retard, than promote Knowledge; their Maxims are more agreeable to the Reader, by having the Glofs of Novelty to recommend them, than those which are trite, only because they are true. Such Men are therefore followed at first with Avidity, nor is it till fome Time that their Disciples begin to find their Error. They pften, though too late, perceive, that they have been following a fpeculative Enquiry, while they have been leaving a practical good; and while they have been practifing the Arts of Doubting, they have been lofing all Firmness of Principle, which might tend to establish the Rectitude of their private Conduct. As a Moralift, therefore, Lord Boingbroke, by having endeavoured at too much, feems to have done nothing: but as a political Writer, few can equal, and none can exceed him. As he was a practical Politician, his Writings are

K 3

lefs

lefs filled with thofe fpeculative Illufions, which are the Result of Solitude and Seclufion. He wrote them with a Certainty of their being oppofed, fifted, examined, and reviled; he therefore took Care to build them up of fuch Materials, as could not be eafily overthrown: they prevailed at the Times in which they were written, they ftill continue to the Admiration of the prefent Age, and will probably last for ever.

AN

IN

THE

PREFACE.

N the Conteft carried on for fome Years past between the Defenders of Chriftianity and Deifts, the latter always appealed to Philofophy, and under that Shelter fpecioufly defended themselves: their Procedure obliged the Champions of Chriftianity to follow and attack them within the Verge of Philofophy; but by the occafional fhifting of Principles and Syftems, and a dexterous Ufe of equivocal Language, the Dispute became a Kind of Chafe through a Labyrinth, in which the Retreats were endless, and the Victory always incompleat: this Obfervation made me with the Principles of Philofophy that enter into the Dispute were more clear, limited, and decifive. It feemed reasonable to me to conclude, that true Religion cannot be inconfiftent with true Philofophy;

K 4

A

Philofophy; that if Men be obliged to any Duties in a State of Nature, fuch Duties are the indubitable Laws of God, and they cannot differ effentially from the Duties the Deity is pleased to require of us by Revelation. Hence I imagined that the Plan of the Mind of Man, if attentively obferved, and faithfully delineated, muft give Light into the Intention and End of his Creation; at least the eager Defire of each Party to reconcile Philofophy to their own religious Opinions, demonftrates the fecret Senfe Mankind have of the Neceffity that true Philofophy fhould witness for Religion. Full of these Reflections, I fet out in an Enquiry into the Nature of the human Mind, with a View, if poffible, to discover fome Traces of Duty and natural Religion; and to try if any Principles may be folidly established in public View, which may prove decifive in the Dispute between Chriftians and Deifts.

Chriftians may object to the Trial of Religion by Philofophy, on Account of the Weakness and Incertainty of human Reafon; but Deists can have no Objections to it, without bidding Defiance to all equitable Principles of Decifion; for Philosophy is their only Luminary to direct them, and their only Refource for the Defence of their Opinions: in fact, this is bringing the Difpute to that Tribunal they themselves fet up against Revelation.

Having given fome Account of my general Defign, my present Business with my Reader is to inform him, that when I made fome little Progrefs in my Obfervations on the human Mind, I found myfelf involved in Objections and Difficulties that arofe from Ambiguities, and from a fraudulent Use of Language, peculiar to modern Philofophy: I found general Expreffions paffed current for Names of fimple Ideas that come to the Imagination from Senfation; and this Cheat made ufe of to favour

falfe

falfe Principles, of the most pernicious Influence to Virtue and Reason; and I found metaphorical Expreffions adopted in Philofophy, for the Sake of making a deceitful Tranfition from the metaphorical to a proper Sense. The Confufion and perverse Train of Reasoning occafioned by thefe Abuses of Language, obliged me, before I could proceed in the Theory of Man, to clear away the Rubbish of Equivoque, by Way of Introduction; which I have attempted in the two firft Sections of the following Sheets. I afterwards added a few Thoughts on human Instincts, which make the third Section; but having obferved upon a Review that I unhinged many fettled Opinions, and broke up fo much of the Foundations of modern Philofophy, I thought proper to stop there, and publish the Introduction apart, in order to take the Senfe of my Cotemporaries upon these my Reflections, before I proceed any further.

The

There is one Poftulatum I expect to be acknowledged by my candid Reader, at our fetting out; it is, That there is a Poffibility that the Body of the Learned may be impofed upon by the prefent Mode of Philofophy; and that falfe Principles in this Age we live in, may have their Currency 'from the Stamp and Fashion of the Times.' various Revolutions in the Syftems of the Learned, have abundantly proved the Poffibility I fpoke of; in Confequence of which, I hope my impartial Reader will grant me without Difficulty, that no Names, or Systems, however refpectable, thould be allowed any Weight against Evidence or Demonftration. I cannot indeed help owning, that the Obfcurity of the Writer, and the great Names I have to contend with, make a Contrast, that with a little Irony may be wrought into a smart and humourous Critique : but this is the very Thing I proteft againft, fince that Mode of Argument can never be fatisfactory,

that