416 Additional Notes. 



but in its nature. We are elevated with rapture, or writhe m 

 agony J we revolt with horror from an object, or hasten to 

 meet it with joy; we are alternately actuated by hope and fear, 

 desire and aversion, love and hatred, joy and sorrow : in shorty 

 there is a diversity almost endless in the modes of our feelings, 

 and in the characters of our ideas. Can all these different and 

 opposite states of mind be accounted for by any supposabic 

 changes in one homogeneous fluid ? Or is it possible for that 

 fluid to retain its nature, and all its defined attributes, and yet 

 to be continually undergoing this essential change ? Assuredly 

 this cannot be the case, consistently with any physical laws 

 with which we are acquainted. 



Again ; in defining the difference between irritation, sensa- 

 tion, volition, and association. Dr. Darwin resolves it all into 

 the different •portion of the sensorium in which they originate. 

 Thus, '* irritation Is an exertion or change of some extreme 

 parts of the sensorium ; sensation is an exertion or change of 

 the ce/zfrfl/ parts;" &c. But the sensorial power resides in 

 every part of the body, and it is every where the same fluid, 

 secreted by the same gland, endued with the same attributes, 

 and susceptible of the same changes 3 and, of course, mere dif- 

 ference of ;;/ace, if other circumstances be equal, is not suffi- 

 cient to account for so great a difference as that between irrita- 

 tion and volition ; and so of the rest. This is assigning a cause 

 which is not known to exist ; and which, if it do exist, is not 

 sufficient to explain the phenomena. 



But further defects in this theory appear. — From what organ 

 of sense do we derive our abstract ideas ? Whsit^broiis motions 

 are excited when we call to mind the ideas of wisdom, benevo- 

 lence, justice, and truth ? According to Dr. Darwin these 

 general ideas are repetitions of former particular perceptions, 

 obtained through the organs of sense. But can general ideas 

 be mere repetitions of particular ones ? The simple statement 

 of the doctrine is sufficient for Its refutation. The power of ab- 

 straction, then, must be given up, or Dr. Darwin's theory must 

 be totally abandoned. Nor can this writer be considered as satis- 

 factorily replying to this objection, by asking, as he does in his 



