THINGS DENOTED BY NAMES. 61 



whole universe except himself were destroyed. But destroy 

 all white substances, and where would be the attribute white 

 ness ? Whiteness, without any white thing, is a contradiction 

 in terms. 



This is the nearest approach to a solution of the difficulty, 

 that will be found in the common treatises on logic. It will 

 scarcely be thought to be a satisfactory one. If an attribute 

 is distinguished from a substance by being the attribute of 

 something, it seems highly necessary to understand what is 

 meant by of; a particle which needs explanation too much 

 itself, to be placed in front of the explanation of anything 

 else. And as for the self-existence of substance, it is very 

 true that a substance may be conceived to exist without any 

 other substance, but so also may an attribute without any 

 other attribute : and we can no more imagine a substance 

 without attributes than we can imagine attributes without a 

 substance. 



Metaphysicians, however, have probed the question deeper, 

 and given an account of Substance considerably more satis 

 factory than this. Substances are usually distinguished as 

 Bodies or Minds. Of each of these, philosophers have at 

 length provided us with a definition which seems unexcep 

 tionable. 



7. A Body, according to the received doctrine of 

 modern metaphysicians, may be defined, the external cause to 

 which we ascribe our sensations. When I see and touch a 

 piece of gold, I am conscious of a sensation of yellow colour, 

 and sensations of hardness and weight ; and by varying the 

 mode of handling, I may add to these sensations many others 

 completely distinct from them. The sensations are all of 

 which I am directly conscious ; but I consider them as pro 

 duced by something not only existing independently of my 

 will, but external to my bodily organs and to my mind. This 

 external something I call a body. 



It may be asked, how come we to ascribe our sensations to 

 any external cause ? And is theiv sufficient ground for so 

 ascribing them ? It is known, that there are metaphysicians 



