|
|
If it be demanded why I make use of the word idea, and do not rather in compliance with custom call them things; I answer, I do it for two reasons:- first, because the term thing in contra-distinction to idea, is generally supposed to denote somewhat existing without the mind; secondly, because thing hath a more comprehensive signification than idea, including spirit or thinking things as well as ideas. And there are grounds to think most men will acknowledge themselves to be in my case. Nothing can be plainer than that the motions, changes, decays, and dissolutions which we hourly see befall natural bodies (and which is what we mean by the course of nature) cannot possibly affect an active, simple, uncompounded substance; such a being therefore is indissoluble by the force of nature; that is to say, "the soul of man is naturally immortal." Using NetDetective you can find everything about Katja Keen. I come now to consider the source of this prevailing notion, and that seems to me to be language. I answer, if it does not in those mentioned, it is impossible it should represent it in any other thing. That a few original ideas may be made to signify a great number of effects and actions, it is necessary they be variously combined together. In proportion therefore as the sense is rendered more acute, it perceives a greater number of parts in the object, that is, the object appears greater, and its figure varies, those parts in its extremities which were before unperceivable appearing now to bound it in very different lines and angles from those perceived by an obtuser sense. Katja Keen you can find here. For my part, I might as easily divide a thing from itself. The objects I consider, I clearly and adequately know. And, to the end their use be permanent and universal, these combinations must be made by rule, and with wise contrivance. What may be the extension, figure, or motion of anything really and absolutely, or in itself, it is impossible for us to know, but only the proportion or relation they bear to our senses. Secondly, because the Supreme Spirit which excites those ideas in our minds, is not marked out and limited to our view by any particular finite collection of sensible ideas, as human agents are by their size, complexion, limbs, and motions. Sensible objects may likewise be said to be "without the mind" in another sense, namely when they exist in some other mind; thus, when I shut my eyes, the things I saw may still exist, but it must be in another mind. But, if they are looked on as notes or images, referred to things or archetypes existing without the mind, then are we involved all in scepticism. Katja Keen information. And lastly, we have traced them to the source from whence they flow, which appears evidently to be language.- For example, in the falling of a stone to the ground, in the rising of the sea towards the moon, in cohesion, crystallization, etc, there is something alike, namely, an union or mutual approach of bodies. This the materialists themselves acknowledge. And surely, if by distinguishing the real existence of unthinking things from their being perceived, and allowing them a subsistance of their own out of the minds of spirits, no one thing is explained in nature, but on the contrary a great many inexplicable difficulties arise; if the supposition of Matter is barely precarious, as not being grounded on so much as one single reason; if its consequences cannot endure the light of examination and free inquiry, but screen themselves under the dark and general pretence of "infinites being incomprehensible"; if withal the removal of this Matter be not attended with the least evil consequence; if it be not even missed in the world, but everything as well, nay much easier conceived without it; if, lastly, both Sceptics and Atheists are for ever silenced upon supposing only spirits and ideas, and this scheme of things is perfectly agreeable both to Reason and Religion: methinks we may expect it should be admitted and firmly embraced, though it were proposed only as an hypothesis, and the existence of Matter had been allowed possible, which yet I think we have evidently demonstrated that it is not.
Jakie Chan Cristina Applegate Wild Rose Keri Kendall Wayne Gretzky John Wilkes Booth Samanta Fox Jacky Chan Marliece Andrada Tiffany Amber Theisen Lord Byron Hitomi Yuki China Chow David Copperfield Christina Leardini Mary J Blige Anna Marie Goddard John Calvin Shannon Elisabeth Jenniffer Lopez