50 GENERAL PREFACE TO 



into man only. 1 To the latter he gave the name of spiraculum, 

 which was of course suggested by the text, s( Spiravit in faciem 

 ejus spiraculum vita3." M. Bouillet, in his edition of Bacon's 

 philosophical works 2 , condemns this doctrine of man's having 

 two souls, and goes on to remark that Bacon was led to adopt 

 it in deference to the opinions of the schoolmen, and that it 

 is also sanctioned by S. Augustine. In these remarks he is 

 much less accurate than usual ; the truth being that the doc- 

 trine of the duality of the soul is condemned very strongly by 

 S. Augustine and by the schoolmen, and that there is no doubt 

 as to the source from which Bacon derived it, namely from the 

 writings of Telesius. The notion of a lower soul, distinct in 

 essence from the higher principle of man's nature, is in reality 

 much older than Telesius. We find it for instance among the 

 Manichees a circumstance which makes it singular that S. 

 Augustine should have been supposed to countenance it. Both 

 in his work De Ecclesicz Dogmatibus, and nearly in the same 

 words in that De Anima 9 he rejects in the most precise and 

 accurate manner the doctrine of two distinct souls, affirming 

 that there is but one, which is at once the principle of nutri- 

 tion, of sensation, and of reason. In opposing the tenets of the 

 Manichaeans, he has more than once condemned the same doc- 

 trine, though less at length than in the works just mentioned. 

 The schoolmen also peremptorily rejected the doctrine which 

 M. Bouillet has affirmed that Bacon derived from them. Thus 

 S. Thomas Aquinas says, " Impossibile est in uno homine esse 

 plures animas per essentiam differentes, sed una tantum est 

 anima intellectiva quae vegetativae et sensitivaB et intellective 

 officiis fungitur." 3 And this follows at once from the received 

 opinion, that the soul is joined to the body as its form (ut 

 forma unitur corpori). It would be easy to multiply citations 

 to the same effect ; but as no schoolman could venture to con- 

 tradict an emphatically expressed opinion of S. Augustine, it 

 appears unnecessary to do so. 4 



1 De Augmentis iv. 3. 



2 (Euvres Philosophiques de Bacon. Paris, 1834. J. S. 

 8 S. Thorn. Prim. Q. 76. a. 3. Concl. 



4 With what bold ignorance the schoolmen are sometimes spoken of is well seen in 

 Dr. Gutwauer's preface to his edition of Leibnitz De Principio Individui. The 

 sixth proposition in the Corolfarium attached to this disputation is as follows : 

 " Hominis solum una est anima quae vegetativam et sensitivam virtualiter includat." 

 The learned Doctor declares that in this statement Leibnitz set himself in direct op- 

 position to the schoolmen, and that it contains the germ of Leibnitz's own psychology ; 

 the statement being almost a literal transcript of that of St. Thomas Aquinas. Sum. i. 



