Of the Conduct of the Understanding

Front matter

MAYNARD'S ENGLISH CLASSIC SERIES, No. 228-229

by

JOHN LOCKE

Introduction

INTRODUCTION

Probably no man in England, during the period immediately following the Revolution, contributed more toward the cause of progress and civilization than the philosopher, John Locke. The storm in which Locke said that he found himself when he came into the world was both political and religious. Parliament and King, Roundhead and Cavalier, Puritan and Churchman were the parties between whom the storm raged during the first half of the seventeenth century. The beheading of Charles I. in 1649 brought Parliament and the Puritans into power; but the failure to maintain the Commonwealth after the death of Cromwell brought about, in 1660, the restoration of the monarchy and of the Established Church. It was not alone moral corruption in church and state that led to these changes. The period was one of transition in English thought. Up to the beginning of the century, the scholasticism of the Middle Ages was still dominant. The learned doctors at the universities spent their time in splitting hairs and wrangling over useless questions. Philosophy was allied with the dogmatic theology of the day, and independent thought was stifled. But the time was ripe for a change. Bacon now came and infused new life into philosophy and science; Milton arose as the apostle of freedom of thought and speech; the divine right of kings came to be no longer accepted without question; the more rational of the clergy tried to construct a philosophic religion, while Hobbes, a follower of Bacon, brought forward a destructive philosophy that at once aroused a storm of opposition. A spirit of discontent was abroad. Men were beginning to desire a better philosophy, a more enlightened religion, a truer science, and a freer government, and it was into such an environment of national thought and life that John Locke was born August 29, 1632.

Though born at Urington in the north of Somersetshire, it is probable that most of Locke’s early life was spent in Pensford near Bristol, where his father had a small estate. A man of some local fame as an attorney, his father early joined the Parliamentary army. This fact alone was sufficient to interest the young son in the stirring events of the time. At the age of fourteen he entered Westminster School, at which time the poet Dryden was also a pupil there. In 1652 he became a student at Christ Church, Oxford, where, it has been suggested, he obtained his first ideas of religious toleration from Dr. John Owen, the Puritan Dean of Christ Church. Locke’s life at the University covered the period of the Commonwealth. Though he undoubtedly gained much while here from his opportunities for individual thought and study and for intercourse with other men, he became growingly discontented with the prescribed course of study, especially with the methods in logic and philosophy. He worked on, however, and secured his degrees of A. B. and A. M. and, in 1660, was appointed to a Greek lectureship in his own college. The same year his father died.

About this time was written the “Reflections upon the Roman Commonwealth,” though the work was not published until some time after. In this essay Locke traced all public ills to the dominance of the priesthood, and he held that the only remedy lay in the supremacy of the state. His ideal was the Roman Constitution, in which he found but two essentials of belief—the goodness of the gods and the merit of a moral life.

Locke’s interest in science led him to the study of medicine, which he hoped to make a profession. Ill health, however, prevented him from engaging in regular practice, though his skill was held in high esteem and his services were often in demand.

In 1662 he was transferred from the Greek lectureship to one in Rhetoric, and three years later he left the University for his first visit to the Continent, going as secretary of an embassy to the Elector of Brandenburg. His personal letters at this time are full of interest. Nothing escaped his observation and he did not fail to tell his friends of what he saw and heard. In less than a year, however, he returned to Oxford, where his friendship with Lord Ashley soon began. Later he took up his residence in London with his newly found friend, and here came in contact with many of the famous men of the day.

Through this intimacy he began to be drawn into public affairs. Lord Ashley was one of the eight lords proprietors to whom the Carolina grant had been made. Locke was interested in the plan for colonization and became practically the manager of the association. The famous Constitution, which has been characterized as “the most grotesque curiosity in modern political history,” has been attributed to Locke; but he was probably author of only a part. It was not long after this, in 1671, when the “five or six friends” that met for discourse on subjects of mutual interest found themselves suddenly face to face with problems touching the character of the human mind. The discussions that followed led to the beginning of Locke’s greatest work, the “Essay concerning the Human Understanding.” An account of how the Essay came to be written is given by the author in the introductory “Epistle to the Reader.”

The condition of Locke’s health about this time suggested a trip to the Continent. After a few months, however, Lord Ashley, recently created Earl of Shaftesbury, being appointed Lord High Chancellor of the realm, called Locke home to act as his adviser as well as to fill the offices of Secretary of Presentations and Secretary to the Council of Trade and Plantations. It was not long before Shaftesbury incurred the displeasure of the king, and with his fall Locke too stepped out of public office. The freedom from public responsibility gave him the opportunity for doing again what the state of his health demanded. This time he took up his residence at Montpellier in France, where he remained until 1679, in which year, Shaftesbury being restored, Locke returned to England. But he was now destined to share the fortunes of his patron, who, being discovered in 1682 in a plot against the king, fled to Holland, whither he was soon followed by Locke. This land of tolerance was the home of the philosopher until his return to England with the Princess Mary in 1689.

During these years in Holland he was free to think and study as he never would have been in England. Always eager to exchange his thoughts with other men, he organized here a literary club similar to the one he had formed at Lord Ashley’s. Le Clerc, with whom he had formed an intimacy, was at this time publishing a literary and scientific review, the “Bibliothèque Universelle,” and to this Locke became a contributor. The year of his return to England, the first “Letter on Toleration” was published anonymously in Holland. This letter, as well as the three that followed, expressed a broader principle than the world was yet ready to accept. Locke tolerated all beliefs but atheism, which, he held, struck at morality, and Roman Catholicism, which was in itself intolerant of others. Though he spent his life in the Church of England, it is evident from his writings that he considered her doctrines narrow.

The “Essay concerning the Human Understanding” was published in 1690, soon after Locke’s return to England. He received thirty pounds for the copyright, not a large sum for a work that had been more than eighteen years in preparation and was destined to be one of the greatest influences in the establishment of modern philosophy. Sir James Mackintosh says of the Essay: “Few books have contributed more to rectify prejudice, to undermine established errors, to diffuse a just mode of thinking, to excite a fearless spirit of inquiry, and yet to contain it within the boundaries which Nature has prescribed to the human understanding.”

Locke’s aim in the Essay is to discover how people acquire knowledge and develop thought. He rejects the theory of innate ideas and likens the mind to a blank sheet of paper. All thought, he concludes, is the result of sensation, or the operations of the external senses, and reflection, or the notice which the mind takes of its own operations. His reasoning processes were direct and simple, and the language of the Essay is an exact expression of his own clear thought. Sentences, however, are frequently loose and carelessly constructed, and his evident desire to make things perfectly plain sometimes leads him into wearisome repetition. He was the first of the philosophers to adopt the expression, the Association of Ideas, though the thought underlying it had, to a certain extent, been made use of by his predecessors. His use of the term idea is at times ambiguous, as he does not distinguish between the popular and the philosophical use of the word.

The “Essay on the Conduct of the Understanding,” which was not published until after Locke’s death, was undoubtedly designed as an additional chapter to the great Essay. This is evident from the author’s own notes on the subject. H. R. Fox Bourne, perhaps the fullest and most careful of Locke’s biographers, says of it: “It is a collection of notes for an essay or discourse, the notes often repeating one another, and sometimes not fitting very well together. But the incoherence almost enhances the value of the work to us, if not as a scientific treatise, as an index to the modest, earnest temper in which Locke prepared to give his last message to the world as an apostle of truth.” At one point in this Essay we read, “I am not inquiring the easy way to an opinion, but the right way to truth.” In this brief statement may be found the purpose of all Locke’s intellectual work and the secret of his influence on the deeper thought of his time.

Two “Treatises on Civil Government” were published in the same year as the great Essay. “Thoughts concerning Education” came from the press in 1693. This treatise was suggested by the interest the author took in the education of the children of his friend, Edward Clarke. About this time Locke was much interested in public affairs, especially those relating to finance. One of his tracts at this period was on the “Lowering of Interest.” He felt much solicitude for the future of the currency, which was in a very unstable condition owing to the practice of clipping the coins. Locke’s advice was much sought in these trying times, for, however much his philosophy might be criticised, his conclusions in practical matters were always found to be wise and prudent. In this crisis he urged strongly the minting of coins, and he became himself one of the original proprietors of the Bank of England. The last public office that he held was that of Commissioner of the Board of Trade. This he resigned in 1700 and so gave up his active connection with public affairs.

The principal writings of Locke’s later years were controversial in character. The spirit of the age was one of controversy, and it was but natural that Locke should feel its influence. In 1695 he published an “Essay on the Reasonableness of Christianity.” This was attacked by John Edwards of Cambridge. Locke wrote a “Vindication” of his Essay, which called forth an answer from Edwards. This was followed by a seeond “Vindication” by Locke.

More famous than this, however, was his controversy with Stillingfleet, Bishop of Worcester. This began in 1696 and did not close until the death of Stillingfleet in 1699. The dispute turned on the Bishop's interpretation of the Essay as opposed to the doctrine of the Trinity. Thomas Fowler, Locke's most recent biographer, says of this episode in his life: "There can be no doubt that the antagonists were unequally matched. Stillingfleet was clumsy both in handling and argument, and constantly misrepresented or exaggerated the statements of his adversary. On the other hand, Locke, notwithstanding an unnecessary prolixity which wearies the modern reader, shows admirable skill and temper. He deals tenderly with his victim, as if he loved him, but none the less, never fails to dispatch him with a mortal stab."

In 1691 Locke took up his residence at Oates, in the parish of High Laver. Here, in the home of Sir Francis Masham, he was destined to spend the remainder of his days. For several years he kept his rooms in London, where he spent much of his time, but Oates was his home.

His personal characteristics were such as to make him always a welcome member of this household. His never-failing cheerfulness, his amiable disposition, and his fascinating powers in conversation were in themselves sufficient to win the regard of all who came in contact with him. After several years of gradually declining health, he died at Oates October 28, 1704, and was buried in the parish church at High Laver.

The estimate of two of Locke's personal friends will perhaps furnish the best tribute to his character. Thomas Sydenham, the eminent physician, said: "A man whom, in the acuteness of his intellect, in the steadiness of his judgment, and in the simplicity, that is, in the excellence of his manners, I confidently de- clare to have amongst the men of our own time few equals and no superior.” Jean Le Clerc wrote of him: “He was a profound philosopher, and a man fit for the most important affairs. He had much knowledge of belles lettres, and his manners were very polite and particularly engaging. He knew something of almost everything which can be useful to mankind, and was thoroughly master of all that he had studied, but he showed his superiority by not appearing to value himself in any way on account of his great attainments.”

No better summary can be given of the character and value of Locke’s work than is contained in the following extract from Dr. Thomas Fowler: “Great as is the debt which philosophy owes to Locke’s ‘Essay,’ constitutional theory to his ‘Treatises on Government,’ the freedom of religious speculation to his ‘Letters on Toleration,’ and the ways of ‘sweet reasonableness’ to all these, and indeed to all his works, it would form a nice subject of discussion whether mankind at large has not been more benefited by the share which he took in practical reforms than by his literary productions. It would undoubtedly be too much to affirm that, without his initiative or assistance, the state of the coinage would never have been reformed, the monopoly of the Stationers’ Company abolished, or the shackles of the Licensing Act struck off. But had it not been for his clearness of vision, and the persistence of his philanthropic efforts, these measures might have been indefinitely retarded or clogged with provisos and compromises which might have robbed them of more than half their effects.”

Critical Opinions

CRITICAL OPINIONS

No quality more remarkably distinguishes Locke than his love of truth. He is of no sect or party, has no oblique design, such as we so frequently perceive, of sustaining some tenet which he suppresses, no submissiveness to the opinions of others, nor—what very few lay aside—to his own.

Henry Hallam

The plain directness of his manner, his earnestness without fanaticism, his hearty, honest love of truth, and the depth and pertinence of his thoughts, are qualities which, though they do not dazzle the reader, yet win his love and respect.

George Henry Lewes

Locke's authority as a philosopher was unrivaled during the first half of the eighteenth century, and retained great weight until the spread of Kantian doctrines. His masculine common-sense, his modesty and love of truth have been universally acknowledged; and even his want of thoroughness and of logical consistency enabled him to reflect more fully the spirit of a period of compromise.

Leslie Stephen

With respect to the style of the Essay, it has been observed by a most competent judge that it resembles that of a well-educated man of the world, rather than of a recluse student, who had made an object of the art of composition. It everywhere abounds with colloquial expressions, which he had probably caught by the ear from those whom he considered as models of good conversation; and hence, though it now seems somewhat antiquated and not altogether suited to the dignity of the subject, it may be presumed to have contributed its share towards the great object of turning the thoughts of his contemporaries to logical and metaphysical inquiries.

Lord King

Although John Locke is so very imposing a figure in the history of intelligence, he holds but little place in that of pure literature. He has been called “perhaps the greatest, but certainly the most characteristic of English philosophers”; it might be added, the most innocent of style… His style is prolix, dull, and without elevation; he expresses himself with perfect clearness indeed, but without variety or charm of any kind. He seems to have a contempt for all the arts of literature, and passes on from sentence to sentence, like a man talking aloud in his study, and intent only on making the matter in hand perfectly clear to himself. It is only proper to say that this is not the universal view, and that it is usual to speak of the homespun style of Locke as “forcible,” “incisive,” and even “ingenious.”

Henry Morley

Bibliography

BIBLOGRAPHY

"John Locke." By Thomas Fowler, D. D. In English Men of Letters series; edited by John Morley. Harper, 1879.

"Life of John Locke, The." By H. R. Fox Bourne. 2 vols. Harper, 1876.

"Life of John Locke; with Extracts from his Correspondence, Journals and Commonplace Books." By Lord King. 2 vols, Bohn, 1858.

"." By Leslie Stephen. In Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. XXXIV. Macmillan, 1885.

"" By A. Campbell Fraser. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. XIV. 9th edition.

"John Locke." In A Library of the World's Best Literature. Vol. XVI. Peale & Hill, 1897.

"First Sketch of English Literature" By Henry Morley. Cassell, 1873.

"Portraits of Illustrious Personages of Great Britain." By Edmund Lodge. Vol. VI. Bohn, 1850,

"Biographical History of Philosophy." By George Henry Lewes. Vol. II. Parker & Son, 1857.

"History of Philosophy." By F. Ueberweg. Trans. by G. S. Morris. Vol. II. Scribner, 1876.

"English Thought in the Eighteenth Century." By Leslie Stephen. 2 vols, Smith & Elder, 1876. In Vol. I., John Locke and Toland. In Vol. II., The Principles of 1688.

"History of English Literature in the Eighteenth Century." By Edmund Gosse. Macmillan, 1888. Locke as a prose writer.

"History of England." By Lord Macaulay. Chaps. v., vi., xv., xxi.

"British Thought and Thinkers." By G. S. Morris. Griggs, 1880. Contains objections to Locke's philosophy.

"Essays on Educational Reformers." By Robert H. Quick. Appleton, 1890.

"Literature of Europe." By Henry Hallam. Murray, 1854.

"John Locke and Sydenham." By John Brown, M. D. In Spare Hours, III. Tichnor & Fields, 1866. Locke as a physician.

"History of Civilization." By Amos Dean. Vol. VI. Munsell, 1868. The philosophy of Locke.

"Philosophical Genius of John Locke and Francis Bacon." By Sir James Mackintosh. In Miscellaneous Works, 17. Longmans, 1854.

"John Locke and his Critics." By R. Vaughan. In Essays, Vol. II. Jackson & Walford, 1849.

"System of Logic, A." By John Stuart Mill. Book I. chap. vi. Parker & Son, 1862.

"Critical Dictionary of English Literature." By S. A. Allibone. Vol. II. Lippincott, 1870. Critical estimates and bibliography.

"Intellectualism of Locke, The." By Thomas E. Webb. Longmans, 1857.

"Locke's Theory of Knowledge." By James McCosh, D.D. In Philosophic Series, No. 5. Scribner, 1884. Contains a brief biographical sketch and a clear outline of Locke's philosophy.

"Philosophy of Locke, The." Introductory notes and biographical sketch by John E. Russell, A. M. Holt, 1900. His philosophy as shown in the Essay concerning the Human Understanding.

"Works of Dugald Stewart." Edited by Sir William Hamilton. Vol. I. Part I. Hamilton, 1858. Essay I. Locke's account of the sources of Human Knowledge and its influence on the Doctrines of some of his successors. Essay II. On the Influence of Locke's Authority upon the Philosophical systems which prevailed in France during the latter part of the Eighteenth Century.

"Physical Realism." By Thomas Case. Chap. vi. Longmans, 1888. An analysis of Locke's theory of ideas, with observations as to its limitations and inconsistencies.

"Religious Though in England." By John Hunt. Vol. II. Strahan, 1873. Locke's religious beliefs and principles of toleration.

Of the Conduct of the Understanding

“Quid tam temerarium tamque indignum sapientis gravitate atque constantiâ, quam aut falsum sentire, aut quod non satis exploratè perceptum sit, et cognitum, sine ullâ dubitatione defendere?”

Cic. de Natura Deorum, lib. i.

1. Introduction.—The last resort a man has recourse to, in the conduct of himself, is his understanding; for though we distinguish the faculties of the mind, and give the supreme command to the will, as to an agent, yet the truth is, the man, who is the agent, determines himself to this or that voluntary action, upon some precedent knowledge, or appearance of knowledge, in the understanding. No man ever sets himself about anything but upon some view or other, which serves him for a reason for what he does: and whatsoever faculties he employs, the understanding, with such light as it has, well or ill informed, constantly leads; and by that light, true or false, all his operative powers are directed. The will itself, how absolute and uncontrollable soever it may be thought, never fails in its obedience to the dictates of the understanding. Temples have their sacred images, and we see what influence they have always had over a great part of mankind. But in truth, the ideas and images in men’s minds are the invisible powers that constantly govern them, and to these they all universally pay a ready submission. It is therefore of the highest concernment that great care should be taken of the understanding, to conduct it right in the search of knowledge, and in the judgments it makes.

The logic now in use has so long possessed the chair, as the only art taught in the schools, for the direction of the mind in the study of the arts and sciences, that it would perhaps be thought an affectation of novelty to suspect that rules that have served the learned world these two or three thousand years, and which, without any complaint of defects, the learned have rested in, are not sufficient to guide the understanding. And I should not doubt but this attempt would be censured as vanity or presumption, did not the great Lord Verulam’s au justify it; who, not servilely thinking learning could not be advanced beyond what it was, because for many ages it had not been, did not rest in the lazy approbation and applause of what was, because it was, but enlarged his mind to what it might be. In his preface to his Novum Organum, concerning logic, he pronounces thus: “Qui summas dialecticæ partes tribuerunt, atque inde fidissima scientiis præsidia comparari putârunt, verissimè et optimè viderunt intellectum humanum, sibi permissum, meritò suspectum esse debere. Verum infimior omninò est malo medicina; nec ipsa mali expers. Siquidem dialectica, quæ recepta est, licet ad civilia et artes, que in sermone et opinione positœ sunt, rectissimè adhibeatur; naturœ tamen subtilitatem longo intervallo mon attingit, et prensando quod non capit, ad errores potius stabiliendos et quasi figendos, quam ad viam veritati aperiendam valuit.”

“They,” says he, “who attribute so much to logic, perceived very well and truly that it was not safe to trust the understanding to itself without the guard of any rules. But the remedy reached not the evil, but became a part of it, for the logic which took place, though it might do well enough in civil affairs and the arts, which consisted in talk and opinion, yet comes very far short of subtlety in the real performances of nature; and, catching at what it cannot reach, has served to confirm and establish errors, rather than to open a way to truth.” And therefore a little after he says, “That it is absolutely necessary that a better and perfecter use and employment of the mind and understanding should be introduced.” “Necessariò requiritur ut melior et perfectior mentis et intellectûs humaniusus et adoperatio introducatur.”

2. Parts.—There is, it is visible, great variety in men’s understandings, and their natural constitutions put so wide a difference between some men in this respect, that art and industry would never be able to master, and their very natures seem to want a foundation to raise on it that which other men easily attain unto. Amongst men of equal education there is great inequality of parts. And the woods of America, as well as the schools of Athens, produce men of several abilities in the same kind. Though this be so, yet I imagine most men come very short of what they might attain unto, in their several degrees, by a neglect of their understandings. A few rules of logic are thought sufficient in this case for those who pretend to the highest improvement, whereas I think there are a great many natural defects in the understanding capable of amendment, which are overlooked and wholly neglected. And it is easy to perceive that men are guilty of a great many faults in the exercise and improvement of this faculty of the mind, which hinder them in their progress, and keep them in ignorance and error all their lives. Some of them I shall take notice of, and endeavor to point out proper remedies for, in the following discourse.

3. Reasoning.—Besides the want of determined ideas, and of sagacity and exercise in finding out and laying in order intermediate ideas, there are three miscarriages that men are guilty of, in reference to their reason, whereby this faculty is hindered in them from that service it might do and was designed for. And he that reflects upon the actions and discourses of mankind will find their defects in this kind very frequent and very observable.

1. The first is of those who seldom reason at all, but do and think according to the example of others, whether parents, neighbors, ministers, or who else they are pleased to make choice of to have an implicit faith in, for the saving of themselves the pains and trouble of thinking and examining for themselves.

2. The second is of those who put passion in the place of reason, and being resolved that shall govern their actions and arguments, neither use their own, nor hearken to other people’s reason, any further than it suits their humor, interest, or party; and these one may observe commonly content themselves with words which have no distinct ideas to them, though in other matters, that they come with an unbiased indifferency to, they want not abilities to talk and hear reason, where they have no secret inclination that hinders them from being tractable to it.

3. The third sort is of those who readily and sincerely follow reason, but for want of having that which one may call large, sound, roundabout sense, have not a full view of all that relates to the question, and may be of moment to decide it. We are all shortsighted, and very often see but one side of a matter; our views are not extended to all that has a connection with it. From this defect I think no man is free. We see but in part, and we know but in part, and therefore it is no wonder we conclude not right from our partial views. This might instruct the proudest esteemer of his own parts, how useful it is to talk and consult with others, even such as come short of him in capacity, quickness, and penetration; for since no one sees all, and we generally have different prospects of the same thing according to our different, as I may say, positions to it, it is not incongruous to think, nor beneath any man to try, whether another may not have notions of things which have escaped him, and which his reason would make use of if they came into his mind. The faculty of reasoning seldom or never deceives those who trust to it; its consequences, from what it builds on, are evident and certain; but that which it often , if not only, misleads us in is, that the principles from which we conclude the grounds upon which we bottom our reasoning, are but a part; something is left out, which should go into the reckoning, to make it just and exact. Here we may imagine a vast and almost infinite advantage that angels and separate spirits may have over us, who in their several degrees of elevation above us may be endowed with more comprehensive faculties; and some of them perhaps, having perfect and exact views of all finite beings that come under their consideration, can, as it were, in the twinkling of an eye, collect together all their scattered and almost boundless relations. A mind so furnished, what reason has it to acquiesce in the certainty of its conclusions!

In this we may see the reason why some men of study and thought, that reason right and are lovers of truth, do make no great advances in their discoveries of it. Error and truth are uncertainly blended in their minds; their decisions are lame and defective, and they are very often mistaken in their judgments: the reason whereof is, they converse but with one sort of men, they read but one sort of books, they will not come in the hearing but of one sort of notions; the truth is, they canton out to themselves a little Goshen in the intellectual world, where light shines, and as they conclude, day blesses them; but the rest of that vast expanse they give up to night and darkness, and so avoid coming near it. They have a pretty traffic with known correspondents, in some little creek; within that they confine themselves, and are dexterous managers enough of the wares and products of that corner with which they content themselves, but will not venture out into the great ocean of knowledge, to survey the riches that nature hath stored other parts with, no less genuine, no less solid, no less useful than what has fallen to their lot, in the admired plenty and sufficiency of their own little spot, which to them contains whatsoever is good in the universe. Those who live thus mewed up within their own contracted territories, and will not look abroad beyond the boundaries that chance, conceit, or laziness has set to their inquiries, but live separate from the notions, discourses, and attainments of the rest of mankind, may not amiss be represented by the inhabitants of the Marian islands, who, being separated by a large tract of sea from all communion with the habitable parts of the earth, thought themselves the only people of the world. And though the straitness of the conveniences of life amongst them had never reached so far as to the use of fire, till the Spaniards, not many years since, in their voyages from Acapulco, to Manila, brought it amongst them; yet, in the want and ignorance of almost all things, they looked upon themselves, even after that the Spaniards had brought amongst them the notice of variety of nations, abounding in science, arts, and conveniences of life, of which they knew nothing; they looked upon themselves, I say, as the happiest and wisest people of the universe. But for all that, nobody, I think, will imagine them deep naturalists or solid metaphysicians; nobody will deem the quickest-sighted amongst them to have very enlarged views in ethics or politics; nor can anyone allow the most capable amongst them to be advanced so far in his understanding as to have any other knowledge but of the few little things of his and the neighboring islands within his commerce; but far enough from that comprehensive enlargement of mind which adorns a soul devoted to truth, assisted with letters, and a free generation of the several views and sentiments of thinking men of all sides. Let not men, therefore, that would have a sight of what everyone pretends to be desirous to have a sight of, truth in its full extent, narrow and blind their own prospect. Let not men think there is no truth but in the sciences that they study, or books that they read. To prejudge other men’s notions, before we have looked into them, is not to show their darkness, but to put out our own eyes. “Try all things, hold fast that which is good,” is a divine rule, coming from the Father of light and truth, and it is hard to know what other way men can come at truth, to lay hold of it, if they do not dig and search for it as for gold and hid treasure; but he that does so must have much earth and rubbish before he gets the pure metal; sand and pebbles and dross usually lie blended with it, but the gold is nevertheless gold, and will enrich the man that employs his pains to seek and separate it. Neither is there any danger he should be deceived by the mixture. Every man carries about him a touchstone, if he will make use of it, to distinguish substantial gold from superficial glitterings, truth from appearances. And, indeed, the use and benefit of this touchstone, which is natural reason, is spoiled and lost only by assuming prejudices, overweening presumption, and narrowing our minds. The want of exercising it in the full extent of things intelligible, is that which weakens and extinguishes this noble faculty in us. Trace it and see whether it be not so. The day-laborer in a country village has commonly but a small pittance of knowledge, because his ideas and notions have been confined to the narrow bounds of a poor conversation and employment: the low mechanic of a country town does somewhat outdo him: porters and cobblers of great cities surpass them. A country gen who, leaving Latin and learning in the university, removes thence to his mansion house, and associates with neighbors of the same strain, who relish nothing but hunting and a bottle: with those alone he spends his time, with those alone he converses, and can away with no company whose discourse goes beyond what claret and dissoluteness inspire. Such a patriot, formed in this happy way of improvement, cannot fail, as we see, to give notable decisions upon the bench at quarter-sessions, and eminent proofs of his skill in polities, when the strength of his purse and party have advanced him to a more conspicuous station. To such a one, truly, an ordinary coffee-house gleaner of the city is an arrant statesman, and as much superior to as a man conversant about Whitehall and the court is to an ordinary shopkeeper. To carry this a little further: here is one muffled up in the zeal and infallibility of his own sect, and will not touch a book or enter into debate with a person that will question any of those things which to him are sacred. Another sur our differences in religion with an equitable and fair indifference, and so finds, probably, that none of them are in everything unexceptionable. These divisions and systems were made by men, and carry the mark of fallible on them; and in those whom he differs from, and till he opened his eyes had a general prejudice against, he meets with more to be said for a great many things than before he was aware of, or could have imagined. Which of these two now is most likely to judge right in our religious controversies, and to be most stored with truth, the mark all pretend to aim at? All these men that I have instanced in, thus unequally furnished with truth and advanced in knowledge, I suppose of equal natural parts; all the odds between them has been the different scope that has been given to their understandings to range in, for the gathering up of information and furnishing their heads with ideas and notions and observations, whereon to employ their mind and form their understandings.