OCR Text |
Show '16 No inndte pr:aWcal Principles. Book I. thou ht the Atl:ions of Men the !J;fi Interpreters of their tho,ughts. Bur fince~t is certain, that mo£1 Mens Pratl:1ce, and Come M~n s open Profellions, have either quefiioned or denied rhefe Pnnc1ples, 1t 1s •mpollible to efiabliflun univerfal con(ent ( thougi: . w~ Jhould look font only among£ 1 grown Men) without wh1ch, 1t 1s 1mpolTible to conclude. them innate. Secondly, 'Tis very firange and u~reafonable, to fuppof; mn_"tc pratl:ical Principles, that termmate only m Conte~plauon, I racbcal Principles, derived from Narure, are there for OperatiOn, and mull produ~ e Conformity of Atl:ion, not b,arely fpeculauve aiTent w thcor truth, or elfc they are in vain defiioglllfh d from fpecuhuve Max1ms. Nature,! confefs, has put into Man a delire of H~ppmefs, and an averlion to M,fcry; Thefe indeed arein~ate pradtcal Pnnc1ples, wh1ch (as pratl:tcal Pnnciples ought) do contmue confiantly, to operate and mfluencc all our ~Gbons, without cealing: Thefe may be obfer~ed .m all Perfons and all Ages, lleady and univerfal ; but thefe are lnchnauons of the Wlll and Appetite not Imprellions and Charatl:ers on the Underfiandmg. I deny not, tha~ there are natural tendencies imprinted on the Mmds of Men ; and that, from the very fir£1 in !lances of fenfe and perceptwn, there are fame things that ar~ grateful, and others unwelcome to ~hem ; fome things that they incline to, ancl others that th~y fly : But tlus mak~ nothing for innate Charatl:ers on the Mmd, wluch are to be the Pnnctples of Knowledge, reg~lating our Pratl:ice. Such natural Imprellions on the Und,erfl:anding, ar-e' fo far frolT! bemg confirmed hereby, that tillS I S an Argument againfl: them; fince tf th~re werecerra.m Charatlers, tmpnnted by Nature on the Underfl:andmg, as the Pnnctples of Knowledge, we could not but perceive them confl:antly operate lii us, and mflue~ce our Knowledge, as we do thofe others on the W~l and Appettte; whtch ne· ver ceafe to be the confl:ant Spring and Mottves of all our Acltons, to which we perpetually feel them firongly impelling us. ~.-,:Another Reafon that makes me doubt of any innate pratlical Prin· ~ipleS, is, That I think, time cannot any one'!'oral Rule he propold,wbere· of a Man may not juf/ly demand a Reafon: wluch would be ~erfetlly ndt· culous and abfurd, if they were mnate, or fo much as felf-evtdenr; wluch every innate Principle mull: nc€ds be, and not need any Proof to afcerram its Truth, nor want any Reafon to gain it Approbation, He would be thought void of common Senfe, who asked on the one fide, or on the other fide ;went about to give a Reafon, Wiry it '' impo.ffibte for tbe fan:• thing, to be and not tole. It carries its own Light and E•idence with tt, and needs ~o other Proof: He that underfiands the Terms, aiTents to it for its own fake, or elfe nothing will ever be able to prevail with him to· do it, But fhould that moll: unihaken Rule of Morality, and Foundation of all focial Virtue, )hat one fhould do as be w•uld be done unto, be propos'd to one, who never heard it before, but yet is of capacity to under· Uand its meaning; Might he not without any abfurdity ask a Reafon, why l And were not he that propos'dit,bound to make out the Truth and Reafonablenefs of it to him ! Which plainly fl1ews it not to be innate; filr if it were, it could neither want nor receive any Proof: but mull: needs (at leafl:, as foon as heard and underfl:ood) be received and affi:nted to, as an unquefl:ionable Truth, which a Man can by no means doubt of. So that thetruthofall.thefemoralRules, plainly depends upon fomeothcr antecedent to them, and from which they mu£1 be deduced , whtch could not be , if either they were innate , or fo much as felf·c· vident. §. 5· That Chap. III. No innate praflical Principles, 9. 5· That Men fl1ould keep their CompaCts, is certainly a great and undeniable Rule in Morality: But yct,if a Chrifl:ian, who has the view of Happinefs and Mifery in another Life, be asked why a Man mu£1 keep his Word, he will gi11e this as a Reafon: Becaufc God, who has rite Power of eternal Life and Death, requires it of us. But if an Ho£6ijl be asked why; he will anfwer: Bccaufe the Publick requires it, and the LeviatiMn will punifh you, if you do not. And if one of the old Heat ben Philofophers had been asked, he would have anfwer~d: Becaufe it was dillionefl:, below the D•gmty ol a Man, and oppolitc to Vertue, the highcfl: Per!C. tlion of humane Nature. ~, 6. Hence naturally flows the great variety of Opinions, concerning Moral Rules, wh1ch are to be found among£1 Men, accordm~ to the dit: ferent forti; of Happinefs, they have a Profpetl of, or propoie to them· fdves: Which cou1d not be, if pratl:ical Pnnciples were innate, and im· pr;nted in our Minds immediately by the Hand of God. I grant tile exitlence of God, is fo many ways manife£1, and the Ob~dience we owe him fo congrt~ous to the Light of Rcafon, that a great port of Mankind giv; Tefl:unonyro the Law of Nature: But yet I think it muil be allowed, That feveral Moral Rules, rna y receive, from Mankind, a very general Approbation, without either knowing, or admitting the true ground of Mom· lity; which can only be tbe Law of a God, who fees Men in the dark and has Power enough to pu1\i!h ~he proude£1 O~ender. ForGod,having: by an mfeparable connetltdn, JOmed VertNe ~nd publick H•ppinefs together ; and made the Pra:.tice thereof, neceiTary to the prefervation of Society, and vifibly 6enejicialto all, with whom the vertuous Man has to do; it is no wonder, that every one fl10uld, not only allow, but recommend, and magnifie thofe Rules to others, from whofe obfervance of them he is fure to reap Advantage to himfelf. He moy, out oflnterefl:, os weli as ConviCtion, cry up that for Sacred; which if once trampled on, and prophaned, he himfelf cannot be fafe nor fecure. This, though it takes nothing from the Moral and Eternal Obligation, which thefe Rules evi· dently have; yet it fl1ews, that the outward acknowledgment Men pay to them in thetr Words, proves not that they are innate Principles: Nay, It proves not fo much, as, that Men aiTent to them inwarclly in their own Minds, as the inviolable Rules of their own Practice : Since we find that felf-Intere£1 and the Conveniences of this Life, make many Men own an outward ProfeiTion and Approbatton of them, whofe Atl:ions fuJliciently prove, tllat they very httle confider the Law-giver, that prefcribed thefe Rules; nor,the Hell he has ordain'd for the Punifhmenrof thofe that tranfgrefsthem. §. J. For, if we will not in Civility allow too much Sincerity to the Profeflions of mo£1 Men, but think their Actions to be the Interpreters of thetr Thoughts; we fhall find, that they have no fuch internal Veneration for thefe Rules, nor fo full a P~rjiva(ion of tbeir Certai•ty and Obligation. The great Pnnc1ple ot Morahty, J'o do as one IVould 6e done to, is more commended, than pratl:ifed. But the Breach of this Rule cannot be a greater V1ce, than to teach others, That it is no Moral Rule, nor Obligatory, would be thought Madnefs, and contrary to that lnterefl Men f.1crifice to when they br<:lk it themfelves. PerhapsConfciena will be urged as check: ing us for fuch Breaches, and fo the internal Obligation and Eftablifl1ment ot the Rule be preferved. §.8, To whiclt,I anfwer,Thatl doubt not,but without being written on tbeJt Hearts, many Men, may, by the fame way that they come to the Knowledge of other things, come to aifenr to feveral Moral Rules, and D be '7 |