486 GENERAL REFLECTIONS ON 



an animal, for instance, be put out, it is evident from his, 

 actions that he has lost a power. Yet we cannot be ab- 

 surd enough to suppose that the Deity should have lost 

 any power by this process ; and if we say, on the other 

 hand, that the loss has only been experienced by the body, 

 we fall into the exploded notion of a material sentient 

 principle. 



To me, such an argument appears insurmountable; but 

 I confess its force is very much weakened by the reflec- 

 tion, that the basis of the opposed doctrine is, that every 

 thing we see is intended for our instruction, either with 

 respect to the divine nature or the human. Now it is 

 manifestly possible to place to this account, not only the 

 apparent consequences of injuries in animals, but all the 

 phenomena they may present. Nevertheless, assumption, 

 I repeat, crowds so fast here on assumption, that, although 

 not any one by itself may be improbable, all together ren- 

 der it very difficult, if not impossible, to credit the maxim, 

 " Deus est anima brutorum" In consequence of a re- 

 markable but not very explicit paper in the second volume 

 of the Spectator, Addison is generally supposed to have 

 been of this sentiment. When talking of the energy 

 which acts in animals he says, " To me it seems the im- 

 mediate direction of Providence, and such an operation 

 of the Supreme Being as that which determines all the 

 portions of matter to their proper centres." The latter 

 part of this sentence, however, seems to correspond rather 

 with the Cartesian hypothesis, which supposes animals 

 to be acted upon by some mechanical force ; and the whole 

 makes me suspect that Addison had not exactly made up 

 his mind as to the distinction between the two theories, 



1, I now come to the last hypothesis which I have to 



