2 THEPHILOSOPHY 



them, neither the affairs of human life, nor the fun£tions of the 

 brute creation, could be carried on. Charadters of this kind are 

 accommodated to the apprehenfion of brutes and of vulgar men. 



But, when the produdions of nature are more clofely examined ; 

 when they are fcrutinized by the eye of philofophy, the number of 

 their relations and differences is difcovered to be almoft infinite ; 

 and their fhades of difcrimination are often fo delicate, that no fenfe 

 can perceive them. Nothing, apparently, is more eafy than to di- 

 ftlnguifli an animal from a plant ; and yet the proper diftindlion 

 has puzzled the mod acute inquirers, and perhaps exceeds the li- 

 mits of human capacity. 



* A plant,' fays Jungius, * is a livings but not a fentient body, 

 ' which is fixed in a determined place, and grows, increafes 



• in fize, and propagates its fpecies *.' In this definition living 

 powers are afcribed to vegetables ; but they are denied the faculty 

 of fenfation. Life, without fome degree of fenfation, is an incom- 

 prehenfible idea. An animal limited to the fenfe of feeling alone, 

 is the lowed conception we can form of life. Deprive this being 

 of the only fenfe it pofTeiTes, and, though its figure fliould remain, 

 we would inftantly conclude it to be as inanimate as a ftone. 

 The life attributed to plants feems to be nothing more than an ana- 

 logical deduaion from their growth, nutrition, continuation of 

 their fpecies, and fimilar circuraftances. 



Ludwig defines vegetables to be ' Natural bodies, always en- 



• dowed with the fame form, but deprived of the power of local 



• motion t-' Every branch of this definition is, with equal pro- 

 priety, applicable to precious ftones, falts, and fome anirhals ; and» 

 therefore, requires no farther attention. 



Sir 



* Rail Hift. Plant, p. I. f L«dwig, Phil. Bot. p. u 



