1. Knowledge is not got from maxims. It having been the common received opinion amongst men of
letters, that maxims were the foundation of all knowledge; and that the sciences were each of them
built upon certain praecognita from whence the understanding was to take its rise, and by which it
was to conduct itself in its inquiries into the matters belonging to that science, the beaten road of the
Schools has been, to lay down in the beginning one or more general propositions, as foundations
whereon to build the knowledge that was to be had of that subject. These doctrines, thus laid down
for foundations of any science, were called principles, as the beginnings from which we must set
out, and look no further backwards in our inquiries, as we have already observed.
2. (The occasion of that opinion.) One thing which might probably give an occasion to this way of
proceeding in other sciences, was (as I suppose) the good success it seemed to have in
mathematics, wherein men, being observed to attain a great certainty of knowledge, these sciences
came by pre-eminence to be called Mathemata, and Mathesis, learning, or things learned,
thoroughly learned, as having of al others the greatest certainty, clearness, and evidence in them.
3. But from comparing clear and distinct ideas. But if any one will consider, he will (I guess) find, that
the great advancement and certainty of real knowledge which men arrived to in these sciences, was
not owing to the influence of these principles, nor derived from any peculiar advantage they received
from two or three general maxims, laid down in the beginning; but from the clear, distinct, complete
ideas their thoughts were employed about, and the relation of equality and excess so clear between
some of them, that they had an intuitive knowledge, and by that a way to discover it in others; and
this without the help of those maxims. For I ask, Is it not possible for a young lad to know that his
whole body is bigger than his little finger, but by virtue of this axiom, that the whole is bigger than a
part; nor be assured of it, till he has learned that maxim? Or cannot a country wench know that,
having received a shilling from one that owes her three, and a shilling also from another that owes
her three, the remaining debts in each of their hands are equal? Cannot she know this, I say, unless
she fetch the certainty of it from this maxim, that if you take equals from equals, the remainder will
be equals, a maxim which possibly she never heard or thought of? I desire any one to consider,
from what has been elsewhere said, which is known first and clearest by most people, the particular
instance, or the general rule; and which it is that gives life and birth to the other. These general rules
are but the comparing our more general and abstract ideas, which are the workmanship of the mind,
made, and names given to them for the easier dispatch in its reasonings, and drawing into
comprehensive terms and short rules its various and multiplied observations. But knowledge began
in the mind, and was founded on particulars; though afterwards, perhaps, no notice was taken
thereof: it being natural for the mind (forward still to enlarge its knowledge) most attentively to lay up
those general notions, and make the proper use of them, which is to disburden the memory of the
cumbersome load of particulars. For I desire it may be considered, what more certainty there is to a
child, or any one, that his body, little finger, and all, is bigger than his little finger alone, after you
have given to his body the name whole, and to his little finger the name part, than he could have
had before; or what new knowledge concerning his body can these two relative terms give him,
which he could not have without them? Could he not know that his body was bigger than his little
finger, if his language were yet so imperfect that he had no such relative terms as whole and part? I
ask, further, when he has got these names, how is he more certain that his body is a whole, and his
little finger a part, than he was or might be certain before he learnt those terms, that his body was
bigger than his little finger? Any one may as reasonably doubt or deny that his little finger is a part of
his body, as that it is less than his body. And he that can doubt whether it be less, will as certainly
doubt whether it be a part. So that the maxim, the whole is bigger than a part, can never be made
use of to prove the little finger less than the body, but when it is useless, by being brought to
convince one of a truth which he knows already. For he that does not certainly know that any parcel
of matter, with another parcel of matter joined to it, is bigger than either of them alone, will never be
able to know it by the help of these two relative terms, whole and part, make of them what maxim
you please.
4. Dangerous to build upon precarious principles. But be it in the mathematics as it will, whether it
be clearer, that, taking an inch from a black line of two inches, and an inch from a red line of two
inches, the remaining parts of the two lines will be equal, or that if you take equals from equals, the
remainder will be equals: which, I say, of these two is the clearer and first known, I leave to any one
to determine, it not being material to my present occasion. That which I have here to do, is to
inquire, whether, if it be the readiest way to knowledge to begin with general maxims, and build
upon them, it be yet a safe way to take the principles which are laid down in any other science as
unquestionable truths; and so receive them without examination, and adhere to them, without
suffering them to be doubted of, because mathematicians have been so happy, or so fair, to use
none but self-evident and undeniable. If this be so, I know not what may not pass for truth in
morality, what may not be introduced and proved in natural philosophy.
Let that principle of some of the old philosophers, That all is Matter, and that there is nothing else,
be received for certain and indubitable, and it will be easy to be seen by the writings of some that
have revived it again in our days, what consequences it will lead us into. Let any one, with Polemo,
take the world; or with the Stoics, the aether, or the sun; or with Anaximenes, the air, to be God; and
what a divinity, religion, and worship must we needs have! Nothing can be so dangerous as
principles thus taken up without questioning or examination; especially if they be such as concern
morality, which influence men's lives, and give a bias to all their actions. Who might not justly expect
another kind of life in Aristippus, who placed happiness in bodily pleasure; and in Antisthenes, who
made virtue sufficient to felicity? And he who, with Plato, shall place beatitude in the knowledge of
God, will have his thoughts raised to other contemplations than those who look not beyond this spot
of earth, and those perishing things which are to be had in it. He that, with Archelaus, shall lay it
down as a principle, that right and wrong, honest and dishonest, are defined only by laws, and not
by nature, will have other measures of moral rectitude and pravity, than those who take it for granted
that we are under obligations antecedent to all human constitutions.
5. To do so is no certain way to truth. If, therefore, those that pass for principles are not certain,
(which we must have some way to know, that we may be able to distinguish them from those that
are doubtful,) but are only made so to us by our blind assent, we are liable to be misled by them;
and instead of being guided into truth, we shall, by principles, be only confirmed in mistake and
error.
6. But to compare clear, complete ideas, under steady names. But since the knowledge of the
certainty of principles, as well as of all other truths, depends only upon the perception we have of
the agreement or disagreement of our ideas, the way to improve our knowledge is not, I am sure,
blindly, and with an implicit faith, to receive and swallow principles; but is, I think, to get and fix in our
minds clear, distinct, and complete ideas, as far as they are to be had, and annex to them proper
and constant names. And thus, perhaps, without any other principles, but barely considering those
perfect ideas, and by comparing them one with another, finding their agreement and disagreement,
and their several relations and habitudes; we shall get more true and clear knowledge by the
conduct of this one rule than by taking up principles, and thereby putting our minds into the disposal
of others.
7. The true method of advancing knowledge is by considering our abstract ideas. We must,
therefore, if we will proceed as reason advises, adapt our methods of inquiry to the nature of the
ideas we examine, and the truth we search after. General and certain truths are only founded in the
habitudes and relations of abstract ideas. A sagacious and methodical application of our thoughts.
for the finding out these relations, is the only way to discover all that can be put with truth and
certainty concerning them into general propositions. By what steps we are to proceed in these, is to
be learned in the schools of the mathematicians, who, from very plain and easy beginnings, by
gentle degrees, and a continued chain of reasonings, proceed to the discovery and demonstration
of truths that appear at first sight beyond human capacity. The art of finding proofs, and the
admirable methods they have invented for the singling out and laying in order those intermediate
ideas that demonstratively show the equality or inequality of unapplicable quantities, is that which
has carried them so far, and produced such wonderful and unexpected discoveries: but whether
something like this, in respect of other ideas, as well as those of magnitude, may not in time be
found out, I will not determine. This, I think, I may say, that if other ideas that are the real as well as
nominal essences of their species, were pursued in the way familiar to mathematicians, they would
carry our thoughts further, and with greater evidence and clearness than possibly we are apt to
imagine.
8. By which morality also may he made clearer. This gave me the confidence to advance that
conjecture, which I suggest, (chap. iii.) viz., that morality is capable of demonstration as well as
mathematics. For the ideas that ethics are conversant about, being all real essences, and such as I
imagine have a discoverable connexion and agreement one with another; so far as we can find their
habitudes and relations, so far we shall be possessed of certain, real, and general truths; and I
doubt not but, if a right method were taken, a great part of morality might be made out with that
clearness, that could leave, to a considering man, no more reason to doubt, than he could have to
doubt of the truth of propositions in mathematics, which have been demonstrated to him.
9. Our knowledge of substances is to be improved, not by contemplation of abstract ideas, but only
by experience. In our search after the knowledge of substances, our want of ideas that are suitable
to such a way of proceeding obliges us to a quite different method. We advance not here, as in the
other, (where our abstract ideas are real as well as nominal essences,) by contemplating our ideas,
and considering their relations and correspondences; that helps us very little, for the reasons, that in
another place we have at large set down. By which I think it is evident, that substances afford matter
of very little general knowledge; and the bare contemplation of their abstract ideas will carry us but a
very little way in the search of truth and certainty. What, then, are we to do for the improvement of
our knowledge in substantial beings? Here we are to take a quite contrary course: the want of ideas
of their real essences sends us from our own thoughts to the things themselves as they exist.
Experience here must teach me what reason cannot: and it is by trying alone, that I can certainly
know, what other qualities co-exist with those of my complex idea, v.g. whether that yellow, heavy,
fusible body I call gold, be malleable, or no; which experience (which way ever it prove in that
particular body I examine) makes me not certain, that it is so in all, or any other yellow, heavy,
fusible bodies, but that which I have tried. Because it is no consequence one way or the other from
my complex idea: the necessity or inconsistence of malleability hath no visible connexion with the
combination of that colour, weight, and fusibility in any body. What I have said here of the nominal
essence of gold, supposed to consist of a body of such a determinate colour, weight, and fusibility,
will hold true, if malleableness, fixedness, and solubility in aqua regia be added to it. Our reasonings
from these ideas will carry us but a little way in the certain discovery of the other properties in those
masses of matter wherein all these are to be found. Because the other properties of such bodies,
depending not on these, but on that unknown real essence on which these also depend, we cannot
by them discover the rest; we can go no further than the simple ideas of our nominal essence will
carry us, which is very little beyond themselves; and so afford us but very sparingly any certain,
universal, and useful truths. For, upon trial, having found that particular piece (and all others of that
colour, weight, and fusibility, that I ever tried) malleable, that also makes now, perhaps, a part of my
complex idea, part of my nominal essence of gold: whereby though I make my complex idea to
which I affix the name gold, to consist of more simple ideas than before; yet still, it not containing the
real essence of any species of bodies, it helps me not certainly to know (I say to know, perhaps it
may be to conjecture) the other remaining properties of that body, further than they have a visible
connexion with some or all of the simple ideas that make up my nominal essence. For example, I
cannot be certain, from this complex idea, whether gold be fixed or no; because, as before, there is
no necessary connexion or inconsistence to be discovered betwixt a complex idea of a body yellow,
heavy, fusible, malleable; betwixt these, I say, and fixedness; so that I may certainly know, that in
whatsoever body these are found, there fixedness is sure to be. Here, again, for assurance, I must
apply myself to experience; as far as that reaches, I may have certain knowledge, but no further.
10. Experience may procure us convenience, not science. I deny not but a man, accustomed to
rational and regular experiments, shall be able to see further into the nature of bodies and guess
righter at their yet unknown properties than one that is a stranger to them: but yet, as I have said,
this is but judgment and opinion, not knowledge and certainty. This way of getting and improving our
knowledge in substances only by experience and history, which is all that the weakness of our
faculties in this state of mediocrity which we are in in this world can attain to, makes me suspect that
natural philosophy is not capable of being made a science. We are able, I imagine, to reach very
little general knowledge concerning the species of bodies and their several properties. Experiments
and historical observations we may have, from which we may draw advantages of ease and health,
and thereby increase our stock of conveniences for this life; but beyond this I fear our talents reach
not, nor are our faculties, as I guess, able to advance.
11. We are fitted for moral science, but only for probable interpretations of external nature. From
whence it is obvious to conclude that, since our faculties are not fitted to penetrate into the internal
fabric and real essences of bodies; but yet plainly discover to us the being of a God and the
knowledge of ourselves, enough to lead us into a full and clear discovery of our duty and great
concernment; it will become us, as rational creatures, to employ those faculties we have about what
they are most adapted to, and follow the direction of nature, where it seems to point us out the way.
For it is rational to conclude that our proper employment lies in those inquiries, and in that sort of
knowledge which is most suited to our natural capacities, and carries in it our greatest interest, i.e.,
the condition of our eternal estate. Hence I think I may conclude that morality is the proper science
and business of mankind in general, (who are both concerned and fitted to search out their
summum bonum;) as several arts, conversant about several parts of nature, are the lot and private
talent of particular men for the common use of human life and their own particular subsistence in
this world. Of what consequence the discovery of one natural body and its properties may be to
human life the whole great continent of America is a convincing instance: whose ignorance in useful
arts, and want of the greatest part of the conveniences of life, in a country that abounded with all
sorts of natural plenty, I think may be attributed to their ignorance of what was to be found in a very
ordinary, despicable stone; I mean the mineral of iron. And whatever we think of our parts or
improvements in this part of the world, where knowledge and plenty seem to vie with each other; yet
to any one that will seriously reflect on it, I suppose it will appear past doubt, that, were the use of
iron lost among us, we should in a few ages be unavoidably reduced to the wants and ignorance of
the ancient savage Americans, whose natural endowments and provisions come no way short of
those of the most flourishing and polite nations. So that he who first made known the use of that
contemptible mineral, may be truly styled the father of arts, and author of plenty.
12. In the study of nature we must beware of hypotheses and wrong principles. I would not,
therefore, be thought to disesteem or dissuade the study of nature. I readily agree the contemplation
of his works gives us occasion to admire, revere, and glorify their Author: and, if rightly directed,
may be of greater benefit to mankind than the monuments of exemplary charity that have at so great
charge been raised by the founders of hospitals and almshouses. He that first invented printing,
discovered the use of the compass, or made public the virture and right use of kin kina, did more for
the propagation of knowledge, for the supply and increase of useful commodities, and saved more
from the grave, than those who built colleges, workhouses, and hospitals. All that I would say is, that
we should not be too forwardly possessed with the opinion or expectation of knowledge, where it is
not to be had, or by ways that will not attain to it: that we should not take doubtful systems for
complete sciences; nor unintelligible notions for scientifical demonstrations. In the knowledge of
bodies, we must be content to glean what we can from particular experiments: since we cannot,
from a discovery of their real essences, grasp at a time whole sheaves, and in bundles comprehend
the nature and properties of whole species together. Where our inquiry is concerning co-existence,
or repugnancy to co-exist, which by contemplation of our ideas we cannot discover; there
experience, observation, and natural history, must give us, by our senses and by retail, an insight
into corporeal substances. The knowledge of bodies we must get by our senses, warily employed in
taking notice of their qualities and operations on one another: and what we hope to know of
separate spirits in this world, we must, I think, expect only from revelation. He that shall consider
how little general maxims, precarious principles, and hypotheses laid down at pleasure, have
promoted true knowledge, or helped to satisfy the inquiries of rational men after real improvements;
how little, I say, the setting out at that end has, for many ages together, advanced men's progress,
towards the knowledge of natural philosophy, will think we have reason to thank those who in this
latter age have taken another course, and have trod out to us, though not an easier way to learned
ignorance, yet a surer way to profitable knowledge.
13. The true use of hypotheses. Not that we may not, to explain any phenomena of nature, make
use of any probable hypotheses whatsoever: hypotheses, if they are well made, are at least great
helps to the memory, and often direct us to new discoveries. But my meaning is, that we should not
take up any one too hastily (which the mind, that would always penetrate into the causes of things,
and have principles to rest on, is very apt to do,) till we have very well examined particulars, and
made several experiments, in that thing which we would explain by our hypothesis, and see whether
it will agree to them all; whether our principles will carry us quite through, and not be as inconsistent
with one phenomenon of nature, as they seem to accommodate and explain another. And at least
that we take care that the name of principles deceive us not, nor impose on us, by making us
receive that for an unquestionable truth, which is really at best but a very doubtful conjecture; such
as are most (I had almost said all) of the hypotheses in natural philosophy.
14. Clear and distinct ideas with settled names, and the finding of those intermediate ideas which
show their agreement or disagreement, are the ways to enlarge our knowledge. But whether natural
philosophy be capable of certainty or no, the ways to enlarge our knowledge, as far as we are
capable, seem to me, in short, to be these two:--
First, The first is to get and settle in our minds determined ideas of those things whereof we have
general or specific names; at least, so many of them as we would consider and improve our
knowledge in, or reason about. And if they be specific ideas of substances, we should endeavour
also to make them as complete as we can, whereby I mean, that we should put together as many
simple ideas as, being constantly observed to co-exist, may perfectly determine the species; and
each of those simple ideas which are the ingredients of our complex ones, should be clear and
distinct in our minds. For it being evident that our knowledge cannot exceed our ideas; as far as they
are either imperfect, confused, or obscure, we cannot expect to have certain, perfect, or clear
knowledge.
Secondly, The other is the art of finding out those intermediate ideas, which may show us the
agreement or repugnancy of other ideas, which cannot be immediately compared.
15. Mathematics an instance of this. That these two (and not the relying on maxims, and drawing
consequences from some general propositions) are the right methods of improving our knowledge
in the ideas of other modes besides those of quantity, the consideration of mathematical knowledge
will easily inform us. Where first we shall find that he that has not a perfect and clear idea of those
angles or figures of which he desires to know anything, is utterly thereby incapable of any
knowledge about them. Suppose but a man not to have a perfect exact idea of a right angle, a
scalenum, or trapezium, and there is nothing more certain than that he will in vain seek any
demonstration about them. Further, it is evident that it was not the influence of those maxims which
are taken for principles in mathematics that hath led the masters of that science into those
wonderful discoveries they have made. Let a man of good parts know all the maxims generally
made use of in mathematics ever so perfectly, and contemplate their extent and consequences as
much as he pleases, he will, by their assistance, I suppose, scarce ever come to know that the
square of the hypothenuse in a right-angled triangle is equal to the squares of the two other sides.
The knowledge that "the whole is equal to all its parts," and "if you take equals from equals, the
remainder will be equal," etc., helped him not, I presume, to this demonstration: and a man may, I
think, pore long enough on those axioms without ever seeing one jot the more of mathematical
truths. They have been discovered by the thoughts otherwise applied: the mind had other objects,
other views before it, far different from those maxims, when it first got the knowledge of such truths
in mathematics, which men, well enough acquainted with those received axioms, but ignorant of
their method who first made these demonstrations, can never sufficiently admire. And who knows
what methods to enlarge our knowledge in other parts of science may hereafter be invented,
answering that of algebra in mathematics, which so readily finds out the ideas of quantities to
measure others by; whose equality or proportion we could otherwise very hardly, or, perhaps, never
come to know?