I proceed now to the Sixth and Difficultest part of my Task, which is to shew, That the most general and current Effata and Axioms concerning Nature, that are wont to be imploy’d in the Writings of Philosophers, may have a fair Account given of them, agreeably to the Doctrine I have hitherto propos’d, tho’ these Axioms do some of them suppose, and others seem strongly to support, the receiv’d Notion of Nature.
To clear the way for the ensuing Explications, I must desire you to recall to mind the two Cautions I have formerly offer’d you (in the Fifth Section,) wherewith I would have the common Doctrine, about the Ends or Designs of Nature, to be understood or limited. And therefore I shall not here repeat, what I there said, but only add in two words, that if those, and some few other such things, had been observ’d and duly consider’d, they might perhaps have prevented much of the Obscurity, and some of the Errors, that relate to the Notion of Nature.
I hope you have not forgot, that the design of this Paper was, to examine the Vulgar Notion of Nature, not to establish a new One of my own. And indeed the Ambiguity of the Word is so great, (as hath in the Second Section been made appear) and ‘tis, even by Learned Men, frequently imploy’d to signifie such different Things; that, without Enumerating and Distinguishing its various Acceptions, it were very unsafe to venture a giving a Definition of it, and perhaps it were very impossible to give any, that would not be liable to censure. I shall not therefore here presume to define a Thing, of which I have not found a stated and setled Notion so far agreed on amongst Men, but that I was oblig’d, out of Aristotle and Others, to compile, in the Fourth Section, a Collective Representation of the vulgarly receiv’d Idea, or Notion of Nature: And afterwards to draw up, as well as I could, instead of an accurate Definition, tolerable Descriptions of what, on most occasions, may be intelligibly meant by It. Wherefore, desiring and presuming, that you will retain in your Mind, and, as occasion shall require, apply, in the following Part of this Essay, the Things already delivered in the Fourth Section, I will not trouble you with the Repetition of Them.
But before I descend to treat of the particular Effata or Sentences, that are Receiv’d concerning Nature’s Actings, it may not be improper, nor unuseful, to try if we can clear the way, by considering in what sense Nature may, or may not, be said to act at all, or to do this or that. For, for ought I can clearly discern, whatsoever is perform’d in the merely Material World, is really done by particular Bodies, acting according to the Laws of Motion, Rest, &c. that are setled and maintain’d by God among Things Corporeal. In which Hypothesis, Nature seems rather a Notional Thing, than a true Physical, and distinct or separate, Efficient; such as would be, in case Aristotles Doctrine were true, one of those Intelligences, that he presum’d to be the Movers of the Coelestial Orbs. But Men do oftentimes express themselves so very ambiguously or intricately, when they say, that Nature does this and that, or, that She acts thus and thus; that ‘tis scarce (if at all) possible to translate their Expressions into any Forms of Speech, adequate to the Original and yet Intelligible. For which Reason, though I have in the Section said something to the same purpose with what I am now to propose, yet the difficulty and weight of the Subject makes me think it may be expedient, if not necessary, in this place somewhat more fully to declare what Men do, or should, mean, when they speak of Nature’s acting, or of a Thing’s being Naturally done or performed, by giving their Words and Phrases sometimes one Interpretation, and sometimes another.
I. Sometimes when ‘tis said, that Nature does this or that; ‘tis less proper to say, that ‘tis done by Nature, than, that it is done according to Nature. So that, Nature is not here to be look’d on, as a distinct or separate Agent, but as a Rule, or rather a Systeme of Rules, according to which, those Agents, and the Bodies they work on, are, by the Great Author of Things, determin’d to act and suffer.
Thus, when Water is rais’d in a Sucking-Pump, ‘tis said, that Nature makes the Water ascend after the Sucker, to prevent a Vacuum; though in reality this Ascension is made, not by such a separate Agent, as Nature is fancied to be, but by the Pressure of the Atmosphere, acting upon the Water, according to Statical Rules, or the Laws or the Aequilibrium of Liquors, settled by God among Fluids, whether Visible or Pneumatical. So, when the strict Peripateticks tell us, that all the Visible Coelestial Orbs, being by a Motion, that they call Violent, hurried about the Earth every four and twenty Hours from East to West; each of the Planetary Orbs has a Natural Motion, that is quite contrary, tending from the West to the East: If they will speak congruously to their Master’s Doctrine, they must use the term Natural in the sense our Observation gives It: Since Aristotle will have the Coelestial Orbs to be moved by external or separate Agents namely, Spiritual Intelligences. Our Observation may be also illustrated by other forms of Speech, that are in use; as when ‘tis said, that the Law takes care of Infants and Lunaticks, that their indiscreet Actions or Omissions should not damnifie their Inheritances; and, that the Law Hangs Men for Murther, but only Burns them in the Hand for some lesser Faults; of which Phrases the Meaning is, that Magistrates and other Ministers of Justice, acting according to the Law of the Land, do the things mention’d. And it tends yet more directly to our purpose to take Notice, that ‘tis common to ascribe to Art those things that are really perform’d by Artificers, according to the Prescriptions of the Art, as when ‘tis said, that Geometry (as the Name imports,) measures Lands, Astrology foretels Changes of Weather and other future Accidents, Architecture makes Buildings, and Chymistry prepares Medicines.