ARGUMENT CONTINUED. 
43 
do not find it. In the structure of the eye, (for we adhere to 
our example,) in the figure and position of its several parts, 
the most exact order is maintained. In the forms of rocks’ 
and mountains, in the lines which bound the coasts of con¬ 
tinents and islands, in the shape of bays and promontories, 
no order whatever is perceived, because it would have been 
superfluous. No useful purpose would have arisen from 
moulding rocks and mountains into regular solids, bound¬ 
ing the channel of the ocean by geometrical curves; or 
from the map of the world resembling a table of diagrams 
in Euclid’s Elements, or Simpson’s Conic Sections. 
VII. Lastly, the confidence which we place in our ob¬ 
servations upon the works of nature, in the marks which 
we discover of contrivance, choice, and design, and in our 
reasoning upon the proofs afforded us, ought not to be 
shaken, as it is sometimes attempted to be done, by bring¬ 
ing forward to our view our own ignorance, or rather the 
general imperfection of our knowledge of nature. Nor, 
in many cases, ought this consideration to affect us, even 
when it respects some parts of the subject immediately 
under our notice. True fortitude of understanding consists 
in not suffering what we know to be disturbed by what we 
do not know. If we perceive a useful end, and means 
adapted to that end, we perceive enough for our conclusion 
If these things be clear, no matter what is obscure. The 
argument is finished. For instance; if the utility of vision 
to the animal which enjoys it, and the adaptation of the eye 
to this office, be evident and certain, (and I can mention 
nothing which is more so,) ought it to prejudice the infer¬ 
ence which we draw from these premises, that we cannot 
explain the use of the spleen ? Nay, more; if there be parts 
of the eye, viz. the cornea, the crystalline, the retina, in 
their substance, figure, and position, manifestly suited to 
the formation of an image by the refraction of rays of light, 
at least, as manifestly as the glasses and tubes of a dioptric 
telescope are suited to that purpose; it concerns not the 
proof which these afford of design, and of a designer, that 
there may perhaps be other parts, certain muscles, for in¬ 
stance, or nerves in the same eye, of the agency or effect 
of which we can give no account; any more than we 
should be inclined to doubt, or ought to doubt, about the 
construction of a telescope, viz. for what purpose it was 
constructed, or whether it were constructed at all, because 
there belonged to it certain screws and pins, the use or 
action of which we did not comprehend. I take it to be a 
general way of infusing doubts and scruples into the mind, 
