P R E F A C E. ixxv 



believe, is the opinion of moft of the Newtonians, I cannot help 

 faying, though I Ihould give offence, that he is more an Atheift, if 

 poffible, than Epicurus ; for Epicurus did not believe that matter 

 could ad upon matter, except by contact ; whereas, to make bodies 

 2iCt upon bodies at fuch dillances, is to give more power to body 

 than we know is in mind, which can only a£t where it is prefent. 

 Of fuch imputations I think I have fully acquitted Sir Ifaac Newton, 

 by ihewing, that when he began to philofophife upon the principle 

 of motion, which was not till he wrote his queries, he philofophifed 

 rightly ; and as to body ading upon body at a diilance, he has de- 

 clared his opinion, that no man can believe it wbo/} principles of 

 underjia7id'mg are not wholly ftibver ted'''' ; to ufe an exprefTion of Mr. 

 David Hume's, which he has applied very differently, namely, to thofe 

 who believe in the Bible Hiflory. 



ido. Another fubjed, of which I have treated in this Work, mufl be 

 allowed to be a matter of curious enquiry for a Philofopher ; viz. 

 Whether it be the Supreme and Univerfal Mind that, moves all 

 unorganized bodies, or a particular mind that moves each of them, 

 fuch as moves animals ? 



2,tio. It is alfo a fubjed of important enquiry, what is the principle of 



virtue ? Whether felfifhnefs, benevolence, or perception of truths 



according to the notion of different Moderns; or whether, according to 

 the Philofophy of Plato, Ariftotle, and the Pythagorean School, it be not 

 the fenfe of the beautiful in fentiments and adions that conflitutes 

 virtue ; and whether that fenfe be not the governing principle of the 

 intelledual nature ? 



4/0. It is a fubjed of flill more extenfive enquiry, what is the nature 



T3f man ? Whether he be compofed of three diftind fubftances, the 



vegetable, animal, and intelledual minds, all wonderfully united in 

 one body ; or whether he be any thing more than a racer animal ? 



5/0. Whether, upon the fuppofition of man being thus com- 

 pounded, there be not a progrefs in the fpecies as well as in the 



individual, from the mere animal to the intelledual creature ? 



1 2 6to. 



* See Sir Ifaac's own words quote^J, Vol. II, p. 3;6« 



