« AnteriorContinuar »
selves: which could not be if práctical principles were innate, and imprinted in our minds immediately by the hand of God. I grant the existence of God is so inany ways manifest; and the obedience we owe him so congruous to the light of reason, that a great part of mankind give testimony to the law of nature; but yet I think it must be allowed, that several moral rules may receive from mankind a very general approbation, without either knowing or admitting the true ground of morality; which can only be the will and law of a God, who sees men in the dark, has in his hand rewards and punishments, and power enough to call to account the proudest offender. For God having, by an inseparable connexion, joined virtue and public happi. ness together, and made the practice thereof necessary to the preservation of society, and visibly beneficial to all with whom the virtuous man has to do; it is no
wonder, that every one should not only allow, but theran recommend and magnify those rules to others, from
whose observance of them he is sure to reap advantage to himself. He may, out of interest, as well as conviction, cry up that for sacred, which if once trampled on and prophaned, he himself cannot be safe nor secure. This, though it takes nothing from the moral and eternal obligation which these rules evidently have; yet it
shows that the outward acknowledgement men pay to her them in their words, proves not that they are innate
principles; nay, it proves not so much, as that men Butta assent to them inwardly in their own minds, as the in
violable rules of their own practice : since we find that self-interest, and the conveniencies of this life, make
many men on an outward profession and approbation it of thein, whose actions sufficiently prove, that they very man little consider the law-giver that prescribed these rules, the nor the hell that he has ordained for the punishment of
those that transgress them.
5. 7. For, if we will not in civility allow Men's actions wo much sincerity to the professions of most convince us,
that the rule of men, but think their actions to be the in
terpreters of their thoughts, we shall find their internal to 154 that they have no such internal venc:ation principle. D 3
for these rules, npr so full a persuasion of their certainty and obligation. The great principle of morality, “to. do as one would be done to," is more commended than practised. But the breach of this, rule cannot be a greater vice, than to teach others, that it is no moral rule, nor obligatory, would be thought madness, and contrary to that interest inen sacrifice to, when they break it themselves. Perhaps conscience will be urged as checking us for such breaches, and so the internal obligation and establishinent of the rule be preserved. Conscience
$. 8. To which I answer, that I doubt no proof of not but, without being written on their any innate hearts, many men may, by the same way 1.bral rule. that they come to the knowledge of other 'things, come to assent to several moral rules, and be convinced of their obligation. Others also may come to be of the same mind, from their education, company, and customs of their country; which persuasion, however got, will serve to set conscience on work, which is nothing else, but our own opinion or judg. ment of the moral rectitude or pravity of our own actions. And if conscience be a. proof of innate principles, contraries may be innąte principles; since some. men, with the same bent of conscience, prosecute what others avoid. : Instances of
$.9. But I cannot see bow any men should
ever transgress those moral rules, with conpractised fidence and serenity, were they innate, and without re. stamped upon their minds. View but an morse.
army at the sacking of a town, and see what observation, or sense of moral principles, or what touch of conscience for all the outrages they do. Robberies, murders, rapes, are the sports of men set at liberty from punishment and censure. Have there not been whole. nations, and those of the most civilized people, amongst whom the exposing their children, and leaving them in the fields to perish by want or wild beasts, has been the practice, as little condemned or scrupled as the be. getting them? Do they not still, in some countries, put them into the same graves with their mothers, if they die in child-birth : or dispatch them, if a pretended
astrologer declares them to have unhappy stars? And lly," are there not places where, at a certain age, they kill
or expose their parents without any remorse at all ? In not bh a part of Asia, the sick, when their case comes to be 10 m thought desperate, are carried out and laid on the earth, R$ before they are dead; and left there, exposed to wind hen land weather, to perish without assistance or pity (a). be ung It is familiar among the Mingrelians, a people profesintera sing christianity, to bury their children alive without erred, scruple (6). There are places where they eat their own I down children (c). The Caribbees were wont to geld their on luce children, on purpose to fat and eat them (á). And ame " Garcilasso de la Vega tells us of a people in Peru, which of oly were wont to fat and eat the children they got on their
and a female captives, whom they kept as concubines for that Tay con purpose; and when they were past breeding, the mo. 12), (thers themselves were killed too and eaten (e). The
pers* virtues, whereby the Tououpinambos believed they meun Wo* rited paradise, were revenge, and eating abundance of or just their enemies. They have not so much as a name for
own & God (f), and have no religion, no worship. The e pris saints, who are canonized amongst the Turks, lead lives,
ce $03 which one cannot with modesty relate. A remarkable cute num passage to this purpose, out of the voyage of Baumgar
ten, which is a book not every day to be met with, I n show shall set down at large in the language it is published in. with even Ibi (sc. prope Belbes in Egypto) vidimus sanctum unum ate, a$ Saracenicum inter arenarum cumulos, ita ut ex utero ma. v butetris prodiit, nudum sedentem. Mos est, ut didicimus, Ma. see wa hometiştis, ut eos, qui amentes & sine ratione sunt, pro at toad sanctis colant & renerentur. Insuper & eos, qui cum diu abbert vitam egerint inquinatissimam, voluntariam demum pæni. rty first tentiam & paupertatem, sanctitate venerandos deputant. 2 WIP Ljusmodi verò genus hominum libertatem quandam effræamorsk nem habent, domos quas volunt intrandi, edendi, bibendi, ne then I quod majus est, concumbendi ; ex quo concubitu si proles mas bei secuta fuerit, sancta similiter habetur. His ergo homini. ille" la) Gruber apud Thevenot, part 4. p. 13. (6) Lambert apud jes Thevenot, p. 38.
c) Vossius de Nili Origine, c. 18, 19. if (4) P. Mart. Dec, 1. (e) Hist. des Incas, 1. 1. C, 12, 1) Lery, istenta 6. 16, 216, 231. D4 .
bus dum vivunt, magnos exhibent honores ; mortuis vero vel templa cel monumenta extruunt amplissima, eosque CONtingere ac sepelire maxime fortuna ducunt loco. Audivimus hæc dicta f dicenda per interpretem à Mucrelo nostro. Insuper sanctum illum, quem eo loco vidimus, pube licitus apprimè commendari, cum esse hominem sanctum, divinum ac integritate præcipuum ; eo quod, nec fæminarum unguam esset, nec puerorum, sed tantummodo asellag'um concubitor atque mularum, Peregr. Baumgarten, 1. 2. c. 1. p. 73. More of the same kind, concerning these precious saints amongst the Turks, inay be seen in Pictro della Valle, in his letter of the 25th of January, 1616. Where then are those innate principles of justice, piety, gratitude, equity, chastity ? Or, where is that universal consent, that assures us there are such inbred rules? Murders in duels, when fashion has made them honourable, are committed without remorse of conscience, nay, in many places, innocence in this case is the greatest ignominy.' And if we look abroad, to take a view of men, as they are, we shall find, that they have remorse in one place, for doing or omitting that, which others, in another place, think they merit by. Men have $. 10. He that will carefully peruse the contrary history of mankind, and look abroad into practical the several tribes of men, and with inditprinciples. ferency survey their actions, will be able to satisfy himself, that there is scarce that principle of morality to be named, or rule of virtue to be thought on (those only excepted that are absolutely necessary to hold society together, which commonly, too, are neg. lected betwixt distinct societies) which is not, somewhere or other, slighted and condemned by the general fashion ofwhole societies of men, governed by practical opinions and rules of living, quite opposite to others. Whole na 5. 11. Here, perhaps, it will be objected, that tions reject it is no argument that the rule is not knowil, several moral because it is broken. I grant the objection
good, where mcn, though they transgress, félj disown not the law; where fear of shame, censure, orpus nishinent, carries the mark of some awe it has upon them.
con of alle But it is iinpossible to conceive, that a whole nation of
men should all publickly reject and renounce what every one of them, certainly and infallibly, knew to be a law : for so they must, who have it naturally imprinted on their minds. It is possible men may sometimes own rules of morality, which, in their private thoughts, they do not believe to be true, only to keep themselves in reputation and eşteem amongst those, who are persuaded of their obligation. But it is not to be imagined, that a whole society of men should publickly and professedly disown, and cast off a rule, wbich they could not, in their own minds, but be infallibly certain was a law; nor be ignorant, that all men they should have to do with, knew it to be such: and therefore must every one of them apprehend from others, all the contempt and abhorrence due to one, who .professes himself void of humanity; and one, who, confounding the known and natural measures of right and wrong, cannot but be looked on as the professed enemy of their peace and happiness. Whatever practical principle is innate, cannot but be known to every one to be just and good. It is therefore little less than a contradiction to suppose, that whole nations of men should, both in their professions and practice, unanimously and universally give the lie to what, by the most invincible evidence, every one of them knew to be true, right, and good. This is enough to satisfy us, that no practical rule, which is any where universally, and with publick approbation or allowance, transgressed, can be supposed innate. But I have something farther to add, in answer to this objection.
§. 12. The breaking of a rule, say you, is no argument that it is unknown. I grant it: but the generally allowed breach of it any where, I say, is a proof that it is not innate. For example : let us take any of these rules, which being the most obvious deductions of human reason, and conformable to the natural inclination of the greatest part of men, fewest people have had the impudence to deny, or inconsideration to doubt of. If any can be thought to be naturally imprinted, none, I think, can have a fairer pre-tence to be innate than this; “ parents, preserve and cherish your children." When therefore you say, that