'22 DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN 



Emily. Then of course you will riot admit that veg- 

 etables have a consciousness of their existence, and yet 

 how can we reconcile it with the goodness of the Crea- 

 tor, to 'suppose that he has cieated such a profusion of 

 life as the vegetable world possesses, without bestowing 

 upon it capacities for a greater or less degree of happi- 

 ness. At any rate, it is a beautiful theory, this that 

 the woods and the fields are filled with sentient beings 

 that are animated, not merely by the life that supports 

 their existence, but by a nobler spirit, capable of con- 

 sciousness and delight. 



Dr. B. So long as you admire the picture for its 

 poetry, not for its truth, your admiration is not mispla- 

 ced. The presumption of an acquaintance with the 

 designs of the Deity, which this theory assumes, is a 

 sufficient objection, if there were no other to its cor- 

 rectness. When we take a survey of the scale of be- 

 ing, we see the capacities of enjoyment continually di- 

 minishing, until they are entirely lost in the mineral 

 world. Now, it is no more inconsistent with the good- 

 ness of the Deity to have denied capacities of happi- 

 ness to vegetables, than to have varied them in animals, 

 and entirely annihilated them in the mineral kingdom. 

 Besides, the power of perceiving pleasure and pain, con- 

 sequently requires that of voluntary motion, in order that 

 its possessor may obtain the one and avoid the other. 

 Since voluntary motion has been denied to vegetables, 

 we must believe that sensation has been withheld like- 

 wise unless we would impeach that very benevolence 

 which is adduced in favor of the theory. The power 

 of perceiving the good and the evil, with an inability of 

 pursuing the one and avoiding the other, has been im- 

 parted by nature to none of her objects. 'Fanciful po- 

 ets indeed, in order to excite our sympathy for helpless 

 suffering, have represented the trees of the forest as an- 

 imated by sentient beings whose tears issue through the 

 wounds they receive. 



A distinction that has been strongly insisted on is 



