that the Ru

we fhall find, that they have no fuch internal Veneration for thefe Rules, nor Mens Action fo full a Perfuafion of their Certainty and Obligation. The great Principle of Mc- convince us, rality, To do as one would be done to, is more commended than practis'd; but of Vertue i. the Breach of this Rule cannot be a greater Vice than to teach others, that it is not their in no moral Rule, nor obligatory, would be thought Madness, and contrary to ternal Printhat Intereft Men facrifice to, when they break it themselves. Perhaps Con- ciple. fcience will be urg'd as checking us for fuch Breaches, and fo the internal Obligation and Eftablishment of the Rule be preferv'd.

innate moral Rule.

§. 8. To which I anfwer, That I doubt not but, without being written on Confcience no their Hearts, many Men may, by the fame way that they come to the knowledg Proof of any of other things, come to affent to feveral moral Rules, and be convinc'd of their Obligation. Others alfo may come to be of the fame mind, from their Education, Company, and Cuftoms of their Country; which Perfuafion, however got, will ferve to fet Confcience on work, which is nothing else but our own Opinion or Judgment of the moral Re&itude or Pravity of our own Actions. And if Confcience be a proof of innate Principles, Contraries may be innate Principles; fince fome Men, with the fame bent of Confcience, profecute what others avoid.

p. 13.

1

§. 9. But I cannot fee how any Men fhould ever tranfgrefs those Moral Rules Inftances of with Confidence and Serenity, were they innate, and ftamp'd upon their Minds. Enormities View but an Army at the facking of a Town, and fee what Obfervation, or without repractic'd fense of Moral Principles, or what touch of Confcience for all the Outrages morse. they do. Robberies, Murders, Rapes, are the Sports of Men fet at liberty from Punishment and Cenfure. Have there not been whole Nations, and thofe of the moft civiliz❜d People, amongst whom the expofing their Children, and leaving them in the Fields to perifh by Want or Wild Beafts, has been the practice, as little condemn'd or fcrupled as the begetting them? Do they not ftill, in fome Countries, put them into the fame Graves with their Mothers, if they die in Child-birth; or difpatch them, if a pretended Aftrologer declares them to have unhappy Stars? And are there not places where, at a certain Age, they kill or expose their Parents without any remorfe at all? In a Part of Afia the Sick, when their Cafe comes to be thought defperate, are carry'd out, and laid on the Earth before they are dead, and left there, expos'd to Wind and Weather, to perish without Affiftance or Pity. (a) It is familiar among the Men- (a) Gruber 1 grelians, a People profeffing Chriftianity, to bury their Children alive without apud Thevefcruple. (b) There are places where they eat their own Children. (c) The Ca- not, Part 4. ribbes were wont to geld their Children, on purpose to fat and eat them. (b) Lambert (d) And Garcilaffo de la Vega tells us of a People in Peru, which were wont to apud Thevefat and eat the Children they got on their Female Captives, whom they kept as not, p. 38. Concubines for that purpofe; and when they were paft breeding, the Mothers Voffius de Nili Origithemselves were kill'd too and eaten. (e) The Vertues whereby the Tououpi- ne, c. 18, 19. nambos beliey'd they merited Paradife, were Revenge, and eating abundance of (d) P. Mart. their Enemies. (f) They have not so much as a Name for God, and have no Reli- Dec. 1. (e) Hift. des gion, no Worship. The Saints, who are canoniz'd amongst the Turks, lead Lives, Incas, l. 1. which one cannot with Modefty relate. A remarkable Paffage to this purpose, c. 12. out of the Voyage of Baumgarten, which is a Book not every day to be met (f) Lery, c. with, I fhall fet down at large in the Language it is publifh'd in. Ibi (Sc. prope 16,215, 231. Belbes in Ægypto) vidimus fanétum unum Saracenicum inter arenarum cumules, ita ut ex utero matris prodiit nudum fedentem. Mos eft, ut didicimus, Mahometiftis, ut eos qui amentes & fine ratione funt, pro Janctis colant & venerentur. Infuper & eos qui cum diu vitam egerint inquinatiffimam, voluntariam demum pœnitentiam & paupertatem, Sanctitate venerandos deputant. Ejufmodi verò genus hominum libertatem quandam effranem habent, domos quas volunt intrandi, edendi, bibendi, & quod majus eft, concumbendi; ex quo concubitu, fi proles fecuta fuerit, Sanita fimiliter habetur. His ergo hominilus, dum vivunt, magnos exhibent honores; mortuis verò vel templa vel monumenta extruunt ampliffima, eofque contingere ac fepelire maxima fortuna ducunt loco. Audivimus hac dicta & dicenda per interpretem à Mucrelo noftro. Infuper fanctum illum, quem eo loci vidimus, publicitus apprimè commendari, eum effe Hominem fan&tum, divinum ac integritate præcipuum; eo quod, nec fœminarum unquam effet, nec puerorum, fed tantum modo afellarum concubitor atque mularum. Peregr. Baumgarten, 1. 2. c. I. p. 73. More of the fame kind,

concerning

Men have con

concerning these precious Saints amongst the Turks, may be feen in Pietro della Valle, in his Letter of the 25th of January, 1616. Where then are thofe innate Principles of Juftice, Piety, Gratitude, Equity, Chastity? Or where is that univerfal Confent, that affures us there are fuch inbred Rules? Murders in Duels, when Fashion has made them honourable, are committed without remorfe of Confcience; nay, in many places, Innocence in this cafe is the greatest Ignominy. And if we look abroad, to take a View of Men, as they are, we fhall find that they have remorfe in one place for doing or omitting that, which others, in another place, think they merit by.

§. 10. He that will carefully perufe the Hiftory of Mankind, and look abroad trary practical into the feveral Tribes of Men, and with Indifferency furvey their A&ions, Principles. will be able to fatisfy himself, that there is fcarce that Principle of Morality to be nam'd, or Rule of Vertue to be thought on (those only excepted, that are abfolutely neceffary to hold Society together, which commonly too are neglected betwixt diftinct Societies) which is not, fomewhere or other flighted and condemn'd by the general Fafhion of whole Societies of Men, govern'd by practical Opinions, and Rules of Living quite oppofite to others.

Whole Nati

veral moral

Rules

S. 11. Here perhaps 'twill be objected, that it is no Argument that the Rule ons reject fe is not known, because it is broken. I grant the Objection good, where Men, tho' they tranfgrefs, yet difown not the Law; where fear of Shame, Censure or Punishment carries the Mark of fome Awe it has upon them. But it is impoffible to conceive, that a whole Nation of Men fhould all publickly reject and renounce what every one of them, certainly and infallibly, knew to be a Law; for fo they muft, who have it naturally imprinted on their Minds. 'Tis poffible Men may fometimes own Rules of Morality, which in their private Thoughts they do not believe to be true, only to keep themselves in Reputation and Efteem amongst thofe who are perfuaded of their Obligation. But 'tis not to be imagin'd that a whole Society of Men fhould publickly and profeffedly difown, and caft off a Rule, which 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 fuch: And therefore muft every one of them apprehend from others, all the Contempt and Abhorrence due to one, who profeffes himfelf void of Humanity; and one, who confounding the known and natural Meafures of Right and Wrong, cannot but be look'd on as the profefs'd Enemy of their Peace and Happiness. Whatever practical Principle is innate, cannot but be known to every one to be juft and good. It is therefore little less than a Contradiction to fuppofe, that whole Nations of Men fhould, both in their Profeffions and Practice, unanimously and univerfally give the Lye to what, by the most invincible Evidence, every one of them knew to be true, right and good. This is enough to fatisfy us, that no practical Rule, which is any where univerfally, and with publick Approbation or Allowance tranfgrefs'd, can be fuppos'd innate. But I have fomething farther to add in anfwer to this Objection.

§. 12. The breaking of a Rule, say you, is no Argument that it is unknown, I grant it: But the generally allow'd Breach of it any where, I fay, is a Proof that it is not innate. For example; let us take any of thefe Rules, which being the most obvious Deductions of human Reafon, and conformable to the natural Inclination of the greatest part of Men, feweft People have had the impudence to deny, or inconfideration to doubt of. If any can be thought to be naturally imprinted, none, I think, can have a fairer Pretence to be innate than this; Parents, preferve and cherish your Children. When therefore you fay, that this is an innate Rule, what do you mean? Either that it is an innate Principle, which, upon all occafions, excites and directs the Actions of all Men; or elfe, that it is a Truth, which all Men have imprinted on their Minds, and which therefore they know and affent to: but in neither of thefe Senfes is it innate. First, That it is not a Principle, which influences all Mens Actions, is what I have prov'd by the Examples before-cited; nor need we feek fo far as Mingrelia or Peru, to find Inftances of fuch as neglect, abuse, nay and destroy their Chil.dren; or look on it only as the more than Brutality of fome favage and barbarous Nations, when we remember that it was a familiar and uncondemn'd Practice amongst the Greeks and Romans, to expofe, without pity or remorse,

their

their innocent Infants. Secondly, That it is an innate Truth, known to all Men, is alfo falfe For Parents, preferve your Children, is fo far from an innate Truth, that it is no Truth at all; it being a Command, and not a Proposition, and so not capable of Truth or Falfhood. To make it capable of being aflented to as true, it must be reduc'd to fome fuch Propofition as this; It is the Duty of Parents to preferve their Children. But what Duty is, cannot be understood withcut a Law; nor a Law be known or fuppos'd withour a Law-maker, or without Reward and Punishment: So that it is impoffible that this, or any other practical Principle fhould be innate, i. e. be imprinted on the Mind as a Duty, without fuppofing the Ideas of God, of Law, of Obligation, of Punishment, of a Life after this, innate: For that Punishment follows not, in this Life, the Breach of this Rule, and confequently that it has not the force of a Law in Countries, where the generally allow'd Practice runs counter to it, is in it felf evident. But thefe Ideas (which must be all of them innate, if any thing as a Duty be fo) are fo far from being innate, that 'tis not every fludious or thinking Man, much lefs every one that is born, in whom they are to be found clear and diftina: And that one of them, which of all others feems most likely to be innate, is not fo, (I mean the Idea of God) I think, in the next Chapter, will appear very evident to any confidering Man.

§. 13. From what has been faid, I think we may fately conclude, That what ever practical Rule is, in any place, generally, and with Allowance broken, cannot be Juppos'd innate; it being impoffible that Men fhould, without fhame or fear, confidently and ferenely break a Rule, which they could not but evidently know that God had fet up, and would certainly punish the breach of (which they muft, if it were innate) to a degree to make it a very ill Bargain to the 'Tranfgreffor. Without fuch a Knowledg as this, a Man can never be certain that any thing is his Duty. Ignorance or Doubt of the Law, Hopes to escape the Knowledg or Power of the Law-maker, or the like, may make Men give way to a prefent Appetite: But let any one fee the Fault, and the Rod by it, and with the Tranfgreffion a Fire ready to punish it; a Pleasure tempting, and the Hand of the Almighty visibly held up, and prepar'd to take Vengeance (for this must be the Cafe where any Duty is imprinted on the Mind) and then tell me, whether it be poffible for People with fuch a Profpect, fuch a certain Knowledg as this, wantonly, and without fcruple, to offend against a Law which they carry about them in indelible Characters, and that ftares them in the face whilft they are breaking it? Whether Men, at the fame time that they feel in themselves the imprinted Edicts of an Omnipotent Law-maker, can, with Affurance and Gaity, flight and trample under foot his moft facred Injunctions? And lastly, whether it be poffible, that whilft a Man thus openly bids defiance to this innate Law and fupreme Law-giver, all the By-ftanders, yea even the Governors and Rulers of the People, full of the fame fenfe both of the Law and Law-maker, fhould filently connive, without teftifying their diflike, or laying the least blame on it? Principles of Actions indeed there are lodg'd in Mens Appetites, but these are so far from being innate moral Principles, that if they were left to their full Swing, they would carry Men to the over-turning of all Morality. Moral Laws are fet as a Curb and Restraint to thefe exorbitant Defires, which they cannot be but by Rewards and Punishments, that will over-ballance the fatisfaction any one fhall propofe to himself in the breach of the Law. If therefore any thing be imprinted on the Minds of all Men as a Law, all Men must have a certain and unavoidable Knowledg, that certain and unavoidable Punishment will attend the breach of it: For if Men can be ignorant or doubtful of what is innate, innate Principles are infifted on and urg'd to no purpose. Truth and Certainty (the things pretended) are not at all fecur'd by them; but Men are in the fame uncertain floating Eftate with, as without them. An evident indubitable Knowledg of unavoidable Punishment, great enough to make the Tranfgreffion very uneligible, muft accompany an innate Law; unlefs with an innate Law, they can fuppofe an innate Gospel too. I would not here be miftaken, as if, becaufe I deny an innate Law, I thought there were none but pofitive Laws. There is a great deal of difference between an innate Law, and a Law of Nature: between fomething imprinted on our Minds in their very Original, and something that we being ignorant of may attain to the knowledg of, Vol. I. by

D

by the use and due application of our natural Faculties. And I think they equally forfake the Truth, who running into the contrary Extremes, either affirm an innate Law, or deny that there is a Law knowable by the Light of Nature, i. e. without the help of pofitive Revelation.

The who §. 14. The difference there is amongit Men in their practical Principles, is fo maintain innate practical evident, that, I think, I need fay no more to evince, that it will be impoffiPrinciples, tell ble to find any innate moral Rules by this mark of general Affent: And 'tis eas not what nough to make one fufpect, that the Suppofition of fuch innate Principles, is they are. but an Opinion taken up at pleafure; fince thofe who talk fo confidently of them, are so sparing to tell us which they are. This might with justice be expected from thofe Men who lay ftrefs upon this Opinion: And it gives occafion to diftruft either their Knowledg or Charity, who declaring, that God has imprinted on the Minds of Men the Foundations of Knowledg, and the Rules of Living, are yet fo little favourable to the Information of their Neighbours, or the Quiet of Mankind, as not to point out to them which they are, in the variety Men are diftracted with. But, in truth, were there any fuch innate Principles, there would be no need to teach them. Did Men find fuch innate Propofitions ftamp'd on their Minds, they would eafily be able to diftinguish them from other Truths, that they afterwards learn'd and deduc'd from them; and there would be nothing more eafy than to know what, and how many they There could be no more doubt about their Number, than there is about the Number of our Fingers; and 'tis like then every Syftem would be ready to give them us by Tale. But fince no body that I know has ventur'd yet to give a Catalogue of them, they cannot blame those who doubt of these innate Principles; fince even they, who require Men to believe that there are fuch innate Propofitions, do not tell us what they are. 'Tis cafy to forefce, that if different Men of different Sects fhould go about to give us a Lift of those innate practical Principles, they would fet down only fuch as fuited their diftin&t Hypothefes, and were fit to fupport the Doctrines of their particular Schools or Churches; a plain Evidence that there are no fuch innate Truths. Nay, a great part of Men are fo far from finding any fuch innate moral Principles in themselves, that by denying freedom to Mankind, and thereby making Men no other than bare Machines, they take away not only innate, but all moral Rules whatsoever, and leave not a poffibility to believe any fuch, to those who cannot conceive how any thing can be capable of a Law, that is not a free Agent: And upon that Ground they muft neceffarily reject all Principles of Vertue, who cannot put Morality and Mechanism together, which are not very easy to be reconcil'd, or made confiftent.

Lord Her

I. Prio

§. 15. When I had writ this, being inform'd that my Lord Herbert had, in bert's innate his Books de Veritate, affign'd thefe innate Principles, I prefently confulted him, Principles examin'd. hoping to find, in a Man of so great Parts, fomething that might fatisfy me in this Point, and put an end to my Inquiry. In his Chapter de inftinetu Naturali, p. 76. Edit. 1656. I met with these fix Marks of his Notitia Communes. ritas. 2. Independentia. 3. Univerfalitas. 4. Certitudo. 5. Neceffitas; i. e. as he explains it, faciunt ad hominis confervationem. 6. Modus conformationis, i. e. Affenfus nullâ interpofitâ morâ. And at the latter End of his little Treatife De Religione Laici, he fays this of these innate Principles, Adeo ut non uniuscujusvis Religionis confinio arctentur qua ubique vigent veritates. Sunt enim in ipfa mente cœlitùs defcripta nullifque traditionibus, five fcriptis, five non fcriptis, obnoxia, p. 3. And Veritates noftra Catholica, que tanquam indubia Dei effata in foro interiori defcripta. Thus having given the Marks of the innate Principles or common Notions, and afferted their being imprinted on the Minds of Men by the hand of God, he proceeds to fet them down, and they are these: 1. Esse aliquod fupremum Numen. 2. Numen illud coli debere. 3. Virtutem cum pietate conjunctam optimam effe rationem cultûs divini. 4. Refipifcendum effe à peccatis. 5. Dari præmium vel pænam poft hanc vitam tranfa&tam. Tho' I allow thefe to be clear Truths, and fuch as, if rightly explain'd, a rational Creature can hardly avoid giving his Affent to; yet I think he is far from proving them innate Impreffions, in Foro interiori defcripta. For I must take leave to observe,

§. 16. First, That thefe five Propofitions are either not all, or more than all, thofe common Notions writ on our Minds by the finger of God, if it were reafonable

fonable to believe any at all to be fo written: Since there are other Propofftions, which even by his own Rules have as juft a pretence to fuch an Original, and may be as well admitted for Innate Principles, as at least some of these five he enumerates, viz. Do as thou wouldst be done unto; and perhaps fome hundreds of others, when well confider'd.

§. 17. Secondly, That all his Marks are not to be found in each of his five Propofitions, viz. his firft, fecond, and third Marks agree perfectly to neither of them; and the firft, fecond, third, fourth, and fixth Marks agree but ill to his third, fourth and fifth Propofitions. For, befides that we are affur'd from Hiftory, of many Men, nay whole Nations, who doubt or disbelieve fome or all of them; I cannot fee how the third, viz. That Vertue join'd with Piety is the best Worship of God, can be an Innate Principle, when the name or found, Vertue, is fo hard to be understood; liable to fo much uncertainty in its fignification; and the thing it ftands for, fo much contended about, and difficult to be known. And therefore this can be but a very uncertain Rule of human PraEtice, and ferve but very little to the conduct of our Lives, and is therefore very unfit to be affign'd as an Innate practical Principle.

§. 18. For let us confider this Propofition as to its meaning (for it is the Senfe, and not Sound, that is, and muft be the Principle or common Notion) viz. Vertue is the best Worship of God, i. e. is moft acceptable to him; which if Vertue be taken, as moft commonly it is, for thofe Actions, which, according to the different Opinions of feveral Countries, are accounted laudable, will be a Propofition fo far from being certain, that it will not be true. If Vertue be taken for Actions conformable to God's Will, or to the Rule prefcrib'd by God, which is the true and only measure of Vertue,when Vertue is us'd to fignify what is in its own nature right and good; then this Propofition, That Vertue is the beft Worship of God, will be moft true and certain, but of very little use in human Life: fince it will amount to no more but this, viz. That God is pleas'd with the doing of what he commands; which a Man may certainly know to be true, without knowing what it is that God doth command; and fo be as far from any Rule or Principles of his Actions, as he was before: and I think very few will take a Propofition which amounts to no more than this, viz. That God is pleas'd with the doing of what he himself commands, for an innate moral Principle writ on the Minds of all Men (however true and certain it may be) fince it teaches fo little. Whofoever does fo, will have reafon to think hundreds of Propofitions Innate Principles; fince there are many, which have as good a Title as this, to be receiv'd for fuch, which no body yet ever put into that rank of Innate Principles.

§. 19. Nor is the fourth Propofition, (viz.) Men mußt repent of their Sins, much more inftructive, till what those Actions are, that are meant by Sins, be fet down: For the word Peccata, or Sins, being put, as it ufually is, to fignify in general ill Actions, that will draw Punishment upon the Doers; what great Principle of Morality can that be, to tell us we fhould be forry, and cease to do that, which will bring mifchief upon us, without knowing what thofe particular Actions are that will do fo? Indeed, this is a very true Propofition, and fit to be inculcated on, and receiv'd by those who are fuppos'd to have been taught what Actions in all kinds are Sins: but neither this nor the former can be imagin'd to be Innate Principles; nor to be of any use, if they were Innate, unless the particular measures and bounds of all Vertues and Vices, were engraven in mens Minds, and were Innate Principles alfo, which, I think, is very much to be doubted. And therefore, I imagine, it will scarce feem poffible, that God fhould engrave Principles in mens Minds, in words of uncertain Signification, fuch as Vertues and Sins, which amongst different Men stand for different things: Nay, it cannot be fuppos'd to be in words at all, which, being in most of these Principles very general Names, cannot be understood, but by knowing the Particulars comprehended under them. And in the practical Inftances, the mealures muft be taken from the knowledg of the A&tions themfelves, and the Rules of them abftracted from Words, and antecedent to the knowledg of Names; which Rules a Man must know, what Language foever he chance to learn, whether English or Japan, or if he fhould learn no Language at all, or never should understand the ufe of Words, as happens in the Vol. I. D 2

cafe