cannot see; and by enumerating, and thereby, as it were, setting before our imaginations all those ideas which go to the making them up, and are the constituent parts of them. For having by sensation and reflection stored our minds with simple ideas, and by use got the names that stand for them, we can, by those means, represent to another any complex idea we would have him conceive; so that it has in it no simple ideas but what he knows, and has, with us, the same name for. For all our complex ideas are ultimately resolvable into simple ideas, of which they are compounded, and originally made up, though perhaps their immediate ingredients, as I may so say, are also complex ideas. Thus the mixed mode, which the word lye stands for, is made up of these simple ideas; 1. Articulate sounds. 2. Certain ideas in the mind of the speaker. 3. Those words the signs of those ideas. 4. Those signs put together by affirmation or negation, otherwise than the ideas they stand for, are in the mind of the speaker. I think I need not go any farther in the analysis of that complex idea we call a lye ; what I have said is enough to shew, that it is made up of simple ideas; and it could not be but an offensive tediousness to my reader, to trouble him with a more minute enumeration of every particular simple idea that goes to this complex one; which, from what has been said, he cannot but be able to make out to himself. The same may be done in all our complex ideas whatsoever; which, however compounded, and decompounded, may at last be resolved into simple ideas, which are all the materials of knowledge or thought we have, or can have. Nor shall we have reason to fear, that the mind is hereby stinted to too scanty a number of ideas, if we consider what an inexhaustible stock of simple modes, number and figure alone affords us. How far then mixed modes, which admit of the various combinations of simple different ideas, and their infinite modes, are from being few and scanty, we may easily imagine. So that before we have done, we shall see, that nobody need be afraid he shall not have scope and compass enough for his thoughts to range in, though they be, as I pretend, confined only to simple ideas received from sensation or reflection, and their several combinations.

§ 10. Motion, thinking, and power have been most modified.—It is worth our observing, which of all our simple ideas have been most modified, and had most mixed ideas made out of them, with names given to them; and those have been these three: thinking, and motion (which are the two ideas which comprehend in them all action), and power, and from whence these actions are conceived to flow. The simple ideas, I say, of thinking, motion, and power, have been those which have been most modified; and out of whose modifications have been made most complex modes, with names to them. For action being the great business of mankind, and the whole matter about which all laws are conversant, it is no wonder that the several modes of thinking and motion should be taken notice of, the ideas of them observed, and laid up in the memory, and have names assigned to them; without which, laws could be but ill made, or vice and disorder repressed. Nor could any communication be well had amongst men, without such complex ideas with names to them; and therefore men have settled names, and sup

posed settled ideas in their minds, of modes of action distinguished by their causes, means, objects, ends, instruments, time, place, and other circumstances; and also of their powers fitted for those actions: v. g. boldness is the power to speak or do what we intend, before others, without fear or disorder; and the Greeks call the confidence of speaking by a peculiar name, appnoía. Which power or ability in man, of doing any thing, when it has been acquired by frequent doing the same thing, is that idea we name habit; when it is forward and ready upon every occasion to break into action, we call it disposition. Thus testiness is a disposition, or aptness to be angry.

To conclude: let us examine any modes of action, v. g. consideration and assent, which are actions of the mind; running and speaking, which are actions of the body; revenge and murder, which are actions of both together, and we shall find them but so many collections of simple ideas, which together make up the complex ones signified by those names.

§ 11. Several words seeming to signify action, signify but the effect. -Power being the source from whence all action proceeds, the substances wherein these powers are, when they exert this power into act, are called causes; and the substances which thereupon are produced, or the simple ideas which are introduced into that subject by the exerting of that power, are called effects. The efficacy whereby the new substance or idea is produced, is called, in the subject exerting that power, action; but in the subject wherein any simple idea is changed or produced, it is called passion: which efficacy, however various, and the effects almost infinite, yet we can, I think, conceive it in intellectual agents, to be nothing else but modes of thinking and willing; in corporeal agents, nothing else but modifications of motion. I say, I think we cannot conceive it to be any other but these two: for whatever sort of action, besides these, produces any effects, I confess myself to have no notion or idea of; and so it is quite remote from my thoughts, apprehensions, and knowledge, and as much in the dark to me as five other senses, or as the ideas of colours to a blind man; and therefore many words, which seem to express some action, signify nothing of the action or modus operandi at all, but barely the effect with some circumstances of the subject wrought on, or cause operating; v. g. creation, annihilation, contain in them no idea of the action or manner whereby they are produced, but barely of the cause and the thing done. And when a countryman says the cold freezes water, though the word freezing seems to import some action, yet truly it signifies nothing but the effect, viz. that water that was before fluid, is become hard and consistent, without containing any idea of the action whereby it is done.

§ 12. Mixed modes made also of other ideas.-I think I shall not need to remark here, that though power and action make the greatest part of mixed modes, marked by names, and familiar in the minds and mouths of men; yet other simple ideas, and their several combinations, are not excluded; much less, I think, will it be necessary for me to enumerate all the mixed modes which have been settled with names to them. That would be to make a dictionary of the great part of the words made use of in divinity, ethics, law, and politics, and several other

sciences. All that is requisite to my present design, is to shew what sort of ideas those are, which I call mixed modes; how the mind comes by them; and that they are compositions made up of simple ideas got from sensation and reflection; which, I suppose, I have done.

CHAP. XXIII.

OF OUR COMPLEX IDEAS OF SUBSTANCES.

§ 1. Ideas of substances, how made. The mind being, as I have declared, furnished with a great number of the simple ideas conveyed in by the senses, as they are found in exterior things, or by reflection on its own operations, takes notice also that as certain numbers of these simple ideas go constantly together; which being presumed to belong to one thing, and words being suited to common apprehensions, and made use of for quick dispatch, are called, so united in one subject, by one name; which, by inadvertency, we are apt afterwards to talk of, and consider, as one simple idea, which indeed is a complication of many ideas together: because, as I have said, not imagining how these simple ideas can subsist by themselves, we accustom ourselves to suppose some substratum, wherein they do subsist, and from which they do result; which, therefore, we call substance.*

• This section, which was intended only to shew how the individuals of distinct species of substances came to be looked upon as simple ideas, and so to have simple names, viz. from the supposed substratum of substance, which was looked upon as the thing itself in which inhered, and from which resulted, that complication of ideas, by which it was represented to us, hath been mistaken for an account of the idea of substance in general; and as such, hath been represented in these words: But how comes the general idea of substance to be framed in our minds? Is this by abstracting and enlarging simple ideas? No: "But it is by a complication of many simple ideas together: because, not imagining how these simple ideas can subsist by themselves, we accustom ourselves to suppose some substratum, wherein they do subsist, and from whence they do result; which, therefore, we call substance." And is this all, indeed, that is to be said for the being of substance, That we accustom ourselves to suppose a substratum? Is that custom grounded upon true reason, or not? If not, then accidents or modes must subsist of themselves; and these simple ideas need no tortoise to support them; for figures and colours, &c., would do well enough of themselves, but for some fancies men have accustomed themselves to.

To which objection of the Bishop of Worcester, our author a answers thus: "Herein your lordship seems to charge me with two faults: one, That I make the general idea of substances to be framed, not by abstracting and enlarging simple ideas, but by a complication of many simple ideas together; the other, as if I had said, the being or substance had no other foundation than the fancies of men.

"As to the first of these I beg leave to remind your lordship, that I say in more places than one, and particularly Book S., Chap. 3., § 6., and Book 1., Chap. 11., § 9., where, ex professo, I treat of abstraction and general ideas, that they are all made by abstracting, and, therefore, could not be understood to mean, that that of substance was made any other way; however my pen might have slipt, or the negligence of expression, where I might have something else than the general idea of substance in view might make me seem to say so.

"That I was not speaking of the general idea of substance, in the passage your lordship quotes, is manifest from the title of that chapter, which is, 'Of the complex ideas of substances:' and the first section of it, which your lordship cites for those words you have set down. "In which words I do not observe any that deny the general idea of substance to bę made by abstracting, nor any that say it is made by a complication of many simple ideas together. But speaking in that place of the ideas of distinct substances, such as man, horse, goid, &c., I say they are made up of certain combinations of simple ideas, which combinations are looked upon, each of them, as one simple idea, though they are many; and we call it by one name of substance, though made up of modes, from the custom of supposing

a In his first letter to the Bishop of Worcester.

§ 2. Our idea of substance in general. So that if any one will examine himself concerning his notion of pure substance in general, he will find he has no other idea of it at all, but only a supposition of he knows not what support of such qualities, which are capable of producing simple ideas in us; which qualities are commonly called accidents. If any one should be asked, what is the subject wherein colour or weight inheres, he would have nothing to say, but the solid extended parts and if he were demanded what is it that solidity and extension adhere in, he would not be in a much better case than the Indian before-mentioned, who saying that the world was supported by a great elephant, was asked, what the elephant rested on? To which his answer was, a great tortoise: but being again pressed to know what gave support to the broad-backed tortoise, replied, something, he knew not what. And thus here, as in all other cases, where we use words without having clear and distinct ideas, we talk like children; who being questioned what such a thing is, which they know not, readily give this

a substratum, wherein that combination does subsist. So that in this paragraph I only give an account of the idea of distinct substances, such as oak, elephant, iron, &c., how they are made up of distinct complications of modes, yet they are looked on as one idea, called by one name, as making distinct sorts of substance.

2

"But that my notion of substance is general, is quite different from these, and has no such combination of simple ideas in it, is evident from the immediate following words, where I say, a The idea of pure substance in general, is only a supposition of we know not what support of such qualities as are capable of producing simple ideas in us.' And these two I plainly distinguish all along, particularly where I say, 'whatever, therefore, be the secret and abstract nature of substance in general, all the ideas we have of particular distinct substances, are nothing but several combinations of simple ideas, coexisting in such, though unknown cause of their union, as makes the whole subsist of itself.'

“The other thing laid to my charge, is as if I took the being of substance to be doubtful, or rendered it so by the imperfect and ill-grounded idea I have given of it. To which I beg leave to say, that I ground not the being, but the idea of substance, on our accustoming ourselves to support some substratum; for it is of the idea alone I speak there, and not of the being of substance. And having every where affirmed, and built upon it, that a man is a substance, I cannot be supposed to question or doubt of the being of substance, till I can question or doubt of my own being. Farther, I say,bSensation convinces us that there are solid extended substances; and reflection, that there are thinking ones.' So that, I think, the being of substance is not shaken by what I have said; and if the idea of it should be, yet (the being of things depending not on our ideas) the being of substance would not be at all shaken by my saying, we had but an obscure imperfect idea of it, and that that idea came from our accustoming ourselves to suppose substratum; or indeed, if I should say, we had no idea of substance at all. For a great many things may be, and are granted to have a being, and be in nature, of which we have no ideas. For example: it cannot be doubted but there are distinct species of separate spirits, of which, yet we have no distinct ideas at all; it cannot be questioned but spirits have ways of communicating their thoughts, and yet we have no idea of it at all.

"The being then of substance being safe and secure, notwithstanding any thing I have said, let us see whether the idea of it be not so too. Your lordship asks, with concern, And is this all, indeed, that is to be said, for the being (if your lordship please, let it be the idea) of substance, that we accustom ourselves to suppose a substratum? Is that custom grounded upon true reason or no? I have said that it is grounded upon this, That we cannot conceive how simple ideas of sensible qualities should subsist alone; and, therefore, we suppose them to exist in, and to be supported by, some common subject; which we denote by the name substance.' Which, I think, is a true reason, because it is the same your lordship grounds the supposition of a substratum on, in this very page; even on the repugnancy to our conceptions, that modes and actions should subsist by themselves. So that I have the good luck to agree here with your lordship and consequently conclude, I have your approbation in this, that the substratum to modes or accidents, which is our idea of substance in general, is founded in this, that we cannot conceive how modes or accidents can subsist by themselves.""

a B. 2. c. 23. § 2.

b Ib. § 29.

B. 2. c. 23. Ib. § 4.

satisfactory answer, that it is something; which, in truth, signifies no more, when so used, either by children or men, but that they know not what; and that the thing they pretend to know, and talk of, is what they have no distinct idea of at all, and so are perfectly ignorant of it, and in the dark. The idea then we have, to which we give the general name substance, being nothing but the supposed, but unknown, support of those qualities we find existing, which, we imagine, cannot subsist sine resubstante, without something to support them, we call that support substantial; which, according to the true import of the word, is, in plain English, standing under, or upholding.*

From this paragraph, there hath been raised an objection by the Bishop of Worcester, if our author's doctrine here, concerning ideas, had almost discarded substance out of the world: his words in this paragraph being brought to prove, that he is one of the gentlemen of this new way of reasoning, that have almost discarded substance out of the reasonable part of the world. To which our author replies: "This, my lord, is an accusation which your lordship will pardon me, if I do not readily know what to plead to, because I do not understand what it is almost to discard substance out of the reasonable part of the world. If your lordship means by it, that I deny, or doubt, that there is in the world any such thing as substance, that your lordship will acquit me of, when your lordship looks again into this 23d chapter of the second book, which you have cited more than once; where you will find these words, § 4., Whence, we talk or think of any particular sort of corporeal substances, as horse, stone, &c., though the idea we have of either of them, be but the complication or collection of those several simple ideas of sensible qualities which we use to find united in the thing called horse, or stone; yet, because we cannot conceive how they should subsist alone, nor one in another, we suppose them existing in, and supported by, some common subject, which support we denote by the name substance; though it is certain, we have no clear or distinct idea of that thing we suppose a support.' And again, §5: The same happens concerning the operations of the mind, viz. thinking, reasoning, fearing, &c., which we considering not to subsist of themselves, nor apprehending how they can belong to body, or be produced by it, we are apt to think these the actions of some other substance, which we call spirit; whereby yet it is evident, that having no other idea or notion of matter, but something wherein those many sensible qualities, which affect our senses, do subsist, by supposing a substance, wherein thinking, knowing, doubting, and a power of moving, &c. do subsist, we have as clear a notion of the nature or substance of spirit, as we have of body; the one being supposed to be (without knowing what it is) the substratum to those simple ideas we have from without: and the other supposed (with a like ignorance of what it is) to be the substratum to those operations, which we experiment in ourselves within.' And again, § 6. Whatever, therefore, be the secret nature of substance in general, all the ideas we have of particular distinct substances, are nothing but several combinations of simple ideas co-existing in such, though unknown cause of their union, as makes the whole subject of itself.' And I farther say, in the same section, that we suppose these combinations to rest in, and to be adherent to, that unknown common subject, which inheres not in any thing else.' And § 3: 'That our complex ideas of substances, besides all those simple ideas they are made up of, have always the confused idea of something to which they belong, and in which they subsist; and, therefore, when we speak of any sort of substance, we say it is a thing having such and such qualities; as body is a thing that is extended, figured, and capable of motion: spirit, a thing capable of thinking.

"These and the like fashions of speaking, intimate, that the subtance is supposed always something besides the extension, figure, solidity, motion, thinking, or other observable idea, though we know not what it is.'

"Our idea of body,b I say, is an extended solid substance; and our idea of soul, is of a substance that thinks.' So that as long as there is any such thing as body or spirit in the world, I have done nothing towards the discarding substance out of the reasonable part of the world. Nay, as long as there is any simple idea or sensible quality left according to my way of arguing, substance cannot be discarded; because all simple ideas, all sensible qualities, carry with them a supposition of a substratum to exist in, and of a substance wherein they inhere and of this, that whole chapter is so full, that I challenge any one who reads it, to think I have almost, or one jot, discarded substance out of the reasonable part of the world. And of this man, horse, sun, water, iron, diamond, &c., which I have mentioned of distinct sorts of substances, will be my witnesses, as long as any such thing remain in being, of which I say, That the idea of substances are such combinations of simple ideas, as are a In his first letter to that bishop. b B. 2. c. 23. § 22. c B. 2. c. 12. § 6.

с