To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
GOOD morrow, Sir, You look somewhat pale; methinks, and heavy about the eyes this morn∣ing.
And so, Philalethes, would I always con∣tentedly, for such a surfeit of pleasures as I en∣joy'd last night.
Dry, Sober, and Philosophical ones, I suppose; for a little of any other serves your turn.
Philosophical if you please, but not dry. O thou prodigious, incomparable, divine Bur∣net! thou foiler of all Philosophers, High-Priest of Nature!
Nay, if you're there-abouts, I ask no more Questions, but should be glad if you could govern your self so far as but to learn my Pre∣scriptions against your Night-mare.
Prescriptions! I hope you will not un∣dertake to do more than so many eminent Ma∣thematicians and Vertuoso's have done yet. The sortress you would beleaguer is altogether im∣pregnable; and let the fate of others teach you, that whosoever attempts the Theory, had as good strike at a Spirit.
However, with your permission, I will venture the consequences, but shall premise this in your favour, that I think all Characterizings and personal Representations ought to be care∣fully avoided in the dispute. I'm sure that will never confute a mistake, how much soever it may lessen the Lapser. Nor will I remind you of any thing hitherto urg'd by the Learned and Ingenious against your Theory; only give me leave to communicate a thought or two of my own, and be free to find what flaws you can.
Very fairly proposed, and you shall be as fairly heard.
I thank you. Then know in the first place, it has been my opinion all along, that the work might be cut much shorter. I was never a Friend to multiplying Problems and
Propositions. The Theory is from first to last a plausible pretty Chain of Physical Effects, wherein you need ruin but one link to ruin the whole. Make but one breach, and your impre∣gnable Fortress is lost. Compasses and Slate may as well hang in their places, for a little good Logick and natural Philosophy are suffici∣ent to make head against the Mischief. Yet because the surest way is to strike at the root, I shall examine your Theorist's foundation, and presume if he be catch'd tripping there, you will easily give up his After-conclusions.
You may depend upon't.
Very good. Then if I make it appear that the form of the Ante diluvian Earth was not different from the form of the present Earth, you will no longer maintain that the Deluge was brought to pass by the Dissolution of any form of the Earth different from the present.
No longer I promise you; but yet I shall be at a loss for any better Hypothesis to clear those difficulties, which otherwise the No∣tion of an Universal Flood must necessarily carry with it.
As for that, further Speculations may in time bring forth a satisfactory Hypothesis: but if they should not, thus much we know, That the Flood was either the ordinary Effect of second Causes, though the measures of their Operati∣on be hidden from us, or if it could not be such an Effect, that it was the direct and immediate Atchievment of Omnipotence it self, and let that hush all your Scruples.
That were self-resignation with a Ven∣geance: What? Shall I be oblig'd to acquiesce
in a Miracle, because I cannot fathom Nature's measures?
Mistake me not. I say fathom 'em if you can: if that's deny'd, enquire whether the Supposal implies any Contradiction or Absur∣dity in respect of Nature's usual proceedings. If it does not, take it for granted 'twas no more than the result of ordinary Combinations: if it does, you may be confident 'twas Miracle all, and then trouble your head no further.
I submit, be pleas'd to proceed to your Argument.
The Theorist you know presumes it in∣fallibly certain, that the Earth rose out of a Chaos at first, and that such a Chaos as him∣self describes (Theor. Book 1. Chap. 4.) a fluid Mass, or a Mass of all sorts of little Parts and Particles of Matter mix'd together and floating in confusion one with another. And this Sup∣position he lays down as a Postulate, whereas I must tell you, it ought to have been offer'd with such restrictions as render it wholly unservicea∣ble to his main design. For why must this Cha∣os be a fluid Mass? Why might it not be as well a drift or shower of Atoms yet unamass'd, disorderly dancing one amongst another, and at various distances?
But this is no better, Man, than out of the Frying-pan into the Fire. You dread the pernicious Doctrines of the Theory, and there∣fore take Sanctuary in those of Epicurus. In good time I beseech you consider the Poet's Ma∣xim, Dum vitant (you know who) vitium in contraria currunt.
God forbid using of Epicurus's terms should make me his. All that I would have a∣mounts to thus much. That the Chaos or mate∣rial Elements of our Earth which were origi∣nally created by a Divine Power, and after∣wards by the same Divine Power so dispos'd and compounded as to form this Sublunary World, might as well be a Company or Chorus of A∣toms of divers kinds dispers'd and dancing in the great Inane, without any just order or distribu∣tion, as a fluid Mass of mixt Particles.
What becomes then of the Authority of the Ancients? who (not to cite'em particu∣larly) understood by their Chaos nothing but a mere Hotch-potch of matter, a rude, undigest∣ed Mixture or Collection of the several Seeds of things animate and inanimate.
'Tis e'en as good as ever 'twas, that is, in my opinion none at all (sacred Authority al∣ways excepted whereto my Hypothesis is not that I know of any way repugnant) for if the Tradition of the Ancients avails any thing in the present case, it therefore avails because they liv'd at a less distance of time from the Chaos: but alas! neither their earliness, nor the credit of their Tradition qualifie 'em to be better Judges than we of what neither they nor their Fore-fathers could know more than the latest of their Posterity: and 'tis impossible they should be better acquainted with the Chaos than their Offspring, unless they and the Chaos had been Cotemporary. Not to mention how much they are indebted to Moses for their Notions, as also that most of your Authorities are either properly Poetical, or else pure Hypothesis, and Theory like your own.
Do you not believe then that the Pri∣mitive Inhabitants of the Earth might at least give a better guess from the Contemplation of it in its Infancy, and most simple condition (supposing even its first form the same as its present) than we who behold it at so great a disadvantage, and almost in its ruins, what might be the Constitution of the Chaos?
By no means, 'till you can prove Har∣mony a good Comment upon Disorder: for whether your Chaos or mine were the true, the first People of our world could, I suppose, see no farther into a Mill-stone than their Suc∣cessors. No doubt they were equally Strangers to all beyond the Superficial parts of our Globe as our selves; consequently as much in the dark a∣bout the distribution of the Chaos, much more about the state of it before that distribution. Nei∣ther did the righteous Man and his Family, that we know of, make any remarks at the time of the Deluge which might give us some light into the matter, or granting they left a Tradition behind them relating thereto, and lost many Ages ago, which however there appears no manner of reason why we should grant, still I say those remarks must be very imperfect, and contribute little enough to our knowledge of the Distribution of the Chaos, nothing at all to our knowledge of its Constitution before that Distri∣bution —But I entreat you oblige me not to any longer Digression upon this Topick, which else will lead us very much out of our way.
I shall not, but pardon me if I observe to you that unless your dancing Atoms will an∣swer all the ends of our fluid mass, I shall hold
it reasonable to pay some deference to the Au∣thority of the Ancients which at least confirms the original state of Nature to be such as is fair∣ly solvable according to our Hypothesis of the Chaos.
With all my heart, when you can al∣ledge a just cause why my dancing Atoms as soon as they are gather'd into a body will not serve the true genuine purposes of a Chaos as well as the Theorist's fluid Mass.
Admitting therefore your Conjecture, I cannot conceive of what use it will be to you in the present Disquisition.
Of singular use, believe me; for the Atoms or Particles of my Chaos being free and separate, and not sorted into distinct Orders and Species, nor allotted their proper distances from each other, 'tis very probable many less Detach∣ments of them would unite distinctly from any greater Combination, and being united into such smaller Masses, would in time encounter the larger Combination (such an one as we may understand to consist of the grossest matter of all being the likeliest to reach the Center soonest) and by their accession render the Superficies of it however Spherical and regular in it self (which according to our Supposition it could scarce be to a Nicety) very uneven and mountainous. All this would be but a natural result, and yet re∣quires a more immediate Interposition of Pro∣vidence to frame the great ball of our Earth so regular as it now appears to be; as indeed all Events in the natural World do, and ever did, and the Deluge no less than the rest, notwith∣standing the large Province you would assign to
second Causes. Thus we see what a doughty Postulate your Theory leans upon.
Still we stand both upon the same bot∣tom, and if I should assent to your Hypothesis you cannot, I think, deny but you have as much reason to assent to mine. Only this advantage I retain above you, that those Conclusions which the Theory infers afterwards from my Hypo∣thesis, are so just and apposite, and otherwise so perfectly inexplicable as to turn the Scale on my side, and strengthen not a little the probability of our Proposition.
As for the inexplicableness of those Conclusions, I have spoke to it already, and need only admonish you to beware of such circu∣lar Argumentations. The Conclusion is good because the Premises are so, and the Premises are good because the Conclusion is so.
To whom do you apply that?
To no worse a Friend than your self. The Flood came to pass by the disruption of that Crust of Earth which inclos'd the Abyss. How could that be, unless there was such a Crust? But there was such a Crust form'd when the Chaos was digested into Order. Why do you believe so? because the Floud which en∣sued upon the dis-ruption of this Crust is best accounted for upon such a supposal. And yet bating this Argument, I do not see but my Scheme deserves to be as fairly receiv'd as that of the Theorist, consideratis considerandis. But I am ready to quit my own Notion of the Chaos, offer'd only to shew the precariousness of the Theorist's, and supposing the state of the Tohu bohu to have been such as he describes it, I hope
in the next place to convince you that the di∣tribution of its parts could not be such as he would have it, not that Incrustation, upon which he builds so confidently, be effected after such a manner as he imagines.
Heroically threatned! make but your words good at last, Et eris mihi magnus Apollo.
You may remember the Theorist ha∣ving delineated his Chaos, presently after, takes notice that from such a Chaos 'tis impossible should arise a mountainous, uneven Earth, for that no Concretion or consistent State which this Mass could flow into immediately, or first settle in, could be of such a form or figure as our present Earth, neither without nor within; not within, because there the Earth is full of Cavi∣ties and empty Places, of Dens and broken Holes, whereof some are open to the Air, and others cover'd and enclos'd wholly within the ground.
And pray are not both of these unimi∣table in any liquid Substance, whose parts will necessarily flow together into one continued Mass, and cannot be divided into Apartments and se∣parate Rooms, nor have Vaults or Caverns made within it?
Not at all unimitable, if I may be a Judge, for let us but conceive the agitation of the Parts of this liquid Chaos to be pretty quick and violent, which why it should not I know of no better reasons you can give than I can why it should; I say, suppose their agitation somewhat of the quickest, and your Theorist's Axiom will appear a plain mistake, unless he will please to exempt some of the main constituent Principles of this sublunary World out of his Chaos.
I cannot apprehend what you would drive at no more than why you should doubt of the comprehensiveness of our Chaos. I know no reason why we ought to exclude either Fire, or Air, or Earth, or Water, I mean the consti∣tuent parts of them, and if you will consult the Theorist's own description of his Chaos (Book 1. Chap. 5.) you will see he is much of the same mind.
I am glad to hear it; I was almost a∣fraid the two former Elements would get no House-room, at least that commodious Utensil, Fire; and the more, because in that same De∣scription of his which you cite, he has forgot to reckon it amongst his principles of all Terrestrial (I suppose by that word he means sublunary) Bodies.
But do not you know the Theorist is so liberal of that Element, as to furnish out of the Centre with it even to profuseness?
With just as good a pretence as Mr. Hobbs himself has sometimes acknowledged such a thing as a Law of Nature, but yet by the constant Tenour of his Argumentations would abolish the very meaning of it▪ Thus the The∣orist tolerates a Central Fire, and at the same time forgets how upon the secretion of his Cha∣os he tumbles down all the course miry rubbish directly thither. But this only by the by: so long as he is reconcil'd to any mixture of Igne∣ous and Aethereal Particles I am content, see∣ing the consequence runs thus, That these Igne∣ous and Aethereal Particles being driven, and put into motion in common with the rest may not unlikely occasion rarefactions, at least in
concurrence with the sulphureous Particles. This I presume may pass with you for a Result natural enough.
Not so very natural neither, 'till you can make out the necessity of your quick and vi∣olent motion. Did you never see Water and Ashes mixt in a Kettle before 'twas hung over the Fire? if you ever did, I much question whether you could find a motion so brisk among the parts of that Liquid, as to cause rarefacti∣ons.
Pardon me, Sir, if I think the case quite different in the Chaos, not only because its parts are suppos'd to be ten Thousand de∣grees more minute and mobile with respect to each other than the gross ones of common Wa∣ter and Ashes, but also because in such a com∣position before 'tis hung over the Fire, there are no such ingredients as igneous Particles, nor yet any sulphureous, at least at liberty. But up∣on the insinuations of the igneous Particles you may behold how the more subtle parts of the mixture are easily rarefy'd, and the gross ones crowded one upon another. In like manner I cannot but believe the grosser and earthy parts of the Chaos by the rarefaction of the Igneous and Aethereal would gather into Cakes and Masses around the Spheres of rarefaction, which if pra∣cticable, then might the interior parts of the Chaos be divided into Apartments and separate Rooms, and have Vaults and Caverns made within it, for the Masses so form'd being une∣qual, irregular and disjointed, either of them∣selves or by Explosions, when the rarefaction is violent and restrain'd, encounter and tumble up∣on
one another, by that means falling into greater Masses, and those greater Masses being craggy and cliffy, and settling among one ano∣ther no less irregularly, must necessarily leave within them those Vaults and Caverns, so little expected by the Theorist.
Very good. Then it seems you fancy the Chaos boyling up like a Mess of Frumen∣ty?
Not so fast, my Friend. But this I i∣magine that what an overproportion'd degree of heat (to use again your own Similitude) pre∣vents in a Mess of Frumenty, viz. The clotting or coalition of the grosser parts, that would a degree of heat proportionably less very natural∣ly effect in the Chaos. Nor do I think it can be doubted but a Concourse of principles, so contrary, will beget Fermentations, and by those Fermentations the more feculent parts must needs be separated from the finer and lighter in∣to Masses of various Bulk and Figure, which if granted upon your Theorist's own terms his Hy∣pothesis unavoidably perishes.
As how, I beseech you?
Why if the grosser parts must be colle∣cted into Masses before the Descent of any of them towards the Centre, as the case will stand if they were collected by and during the Fermen∣tation, then will they upon their Descent lodge themselves so immethodically one upon another, and ruinously, as both to form Hills and Emi∣nencies on their Surface, and leave hollownesses within their Substance, and so the Primaeval Earth will be e'ery whit as ill shap'd as that we poor Mortals inhabit, even in spight of the The∣orist's
lucky invention. Nay further, I see no reason why, if we should excuse all Fermentati∣ons whatsoever, the grosser Particles should not either in their common state of Fluidity, or in descending, gather into such Masses of different Form and Size, according as larger or less num∣bers of 'em encounter'd, and according as their postures and modifications differ'd which circum∣stances, as they must be very various and uncer∣tain in a Mass so compounded as the Chaos, and withall so disorderly in the motions of its parts, so they cannot but be the cause of horrible irre∣gularities and deformities both upon and within the great collection of the pond'rous solid parts. within we shall have Chasms, Gulphs and La∣byrinths: a'top vast rugged Cliffs and wide ca∣pacious Chanels.
Do not, dear Friend, celebrate your Triumph before you have conquer'd. How much soever you may flatter your self, I have yet a Quere in reserve that perhaps may dispose you to lay down your Arms at last.
What may that be?
Which way these Masses are bound up and fasten'd together, so as not to be wash'd asun∣der again by the motion of the free parts of the Fluid?
Either by Hitching, and Articulations, no matter how accurate, as it may frequently happen, or else by the Astriction of that Oily matter which the Theorist assigns after the Di∣stribution of the Chaos for the foundation of his great vaulted Crust.
But is Oil of so glutinous a Nature?
For the uniting of earthy Particles, your Theorist has thought it so upon another occasion as well as my self.
But he first took care to gather it into a body, and fetch it to such a Consistency as might handsomely sustain the impression, and support the weight of that shower of Particles which was to light upon it.
How unwarrantably he compass'd all that we shall presently evince. In the mean while I would gladly be inform'd why oleagi∣nous Particles meeting with earthy and gross in a common Fluid may not couple and hold them together very tightly and effectually, espe∣cially if it be consider'd that it is the property of Oily Particles to concorporate when they en∣counter, and consequently that by their Com∣binations they become so much the better capa∣ble to collect and retain such dispers'd Particles of Earth as come in their way. But this is certain, that during its state of Fluidity the Oily Parts of the Chaos when earthy occurr to them, must adhere pertinaciously to the earthy, so that in the distribution of the Chaos they cannot disengage themselves, but are oblig'd to subside along with them, and what will you do now for a Sphere of Oil a' top of your Water, when the parts of your Chaos are to be digested into order? Yet without it you must utterly de∣spair of a Crust, and without a Crust, of an u∣niversal Deluge occasion'd by the disruption and dissolution of it.
I confess, Philalethes, you have shock'd me a little, yet perhaps if you will give me lei∣sure to weigh your Objection more accurately,
I may come to find out where the Fallacy lies.
As much leisure as you please, only before you set about the matter, let me desire you to take another Animadversion of mine a∣long with you; That however plausible or ex∣act any Physical System or Hypothesis which va∣ries at all from express accounts of the Divine Oracles may appear at first glance, when you have look'd a little deeper into it, you will find the Philosophy of it very empty and incongru∣ous. Nor do I design this to the disparagement of the Theorist, for whose excellent Parts and Learning I profess my self to have as profound a Veneration as even his coràm Vindicator. And now I ask your Pardon for detaining you so long with a Dispute which indeed the Theorist him∣self has according to the Rules of equitable In∣terpretation determin'd before-hand in favour of me, for if for confirmation he so willingly appeals (as he often does most willingly) to the testimony of the Sacred Writings, 'tis to be pre∣sum'd his pleasure that his cause should stand or fall thereby, and then I think 'tis impossible for any body to read in Genesis, but he must perceive that ingenious Gentleman has fairly cast him∣self in his own Court.
Your Servant.