*94 THE PHILOSOPHY 



When we have no idea of the diflance of obje<fls by a pre- 

 vious knowledge of the fpace between them and the eye, we 

 try to judge of their magnitudes by recognifmg their figures. 

 But, when their figures are not diftinguifhable, we perceive 

 thofe which are mofl: brilliant in colour to be neareft, and 

 thofe that are moft obfcure to be at the greateft diftance. 

 From this mode of. judging many deceptions originate. 

 When a number of obje(fl:s are placed in a right line, as 

 lamps in a long ftreet, we cannot judge of their proximity 

 or remotenefs but by the different quantities of light they 

 tranfmit to the eye. Of courfe, if the lamps neareft the eye 

 happen to be more obfcure than thofe which are more re- 

 mote, the firft will appear to be laft, and the laft firft. 



Before I difmifs this fubje^t, I feel an irrefiftible defire of 

 giving a Ihort view of the Abbe de Condillac's Traite des Sen^ 

 faiions* \ a moft ingenious performance, which, I believe, is 

 not very generally known in this country. 



In an advertifement prefixed to this Treatife, the fagacious 

 and learned Abbe defires his readers to abftra£l: themfelves 

 from all their preconceived opinions, and to imagine the 

 fituation and feelings of a ftatue, limited, at firft, to a fingle 

 fenfe, and afterwards acquiring gradually the whole five. 



1. ^enje of fmelling alone. 

 A man, or a ftatue, who had no fenfe but that of fmel- 

 ling, could have no other ideas than thofe of odours. He 

 would be the fmell of a rofe, a violet, or a jeflamine, accord- 

 ing as the effluvia of thefe objects acled upon his fingle or- 

 gan of fenfation. From agreeable or difagreeable fmells he 

 "^ould acquire ideas of pleafure and pain. By means of 

 agreeable and difagreeable fmells frequently repeated, thefe 

 • Frctn the edition I754» in two Tolumcs 12m. 



