C. Father Malebranche, reasons in another way, and denies the women
have equal understanding with the men, on account of their brains being
more soft and tender than those of the other sex. I really don’t know
whether what he supposes about this greater degree of softness be true
or not, but I have read two treatises on anatomy, and did not find the
least mention of it in either of them. Perhaps, from having taken it
for granted, that the brains of women were more humid, he concluded
they were more soft; but this is not always a certain consequence, for
ice is humid and not soft, and melted metal is soft, but not humid; or
perhaps, from having observed the women were of a more soft and docile
disposition than men, he inferred, that in their material composition
they were the same; for there have been people so superficial, as to
form ideas upon these sort of analogies, which afterwards, for want of
due reflection, have been adopted by persons of great perspicuity.
CI. But taking all this for granted, I would be glad to know, how a
greater degree of softness in the brain, produces or occasions, an
imperfection in the understanding? I should rather think, that on
account of its being more pliable to the impression of the spirits, it
would be an instrument or organ, better suited or adapted to mental
operations. This argument, is strengthened by the doctrine of the
author, because he says in another place, the vestiges or traces,
which the impression of the animal spirits leaves on the brain, are
the lines, with which the faculty of the imagination, forms on it the
effigies of objects; and the larger or more distinct these vestiges
or impressions are, the greater will be the force and clearness,
with which the understanding must perceive the objects. _Cur igitur
imaginatio consistat in sola virtute, qua mens sibi imagines objectorum
efformare potest, eas imprimendo, ut ita loquar, fibris cerebri, certe
quo vestigia, spirituum animalium, quæ sunt veluti imaginum illarum
lineamenta erunt distinctiora, & grandiora, eo fortius, & distinctius
mens objecta illa imaginabitur._ (Lib. 2. de Inquirenda Veritate, part
1, cap. 1.)
CII. Now then, it being admitted, the softer the brain is, with greater
ease will the animal spirits make impressions on it, and that, for the
same reason, the vestiges or traces will be larger and more distinct;
they will make them with greater ease, and bigger, because the matter
resists less; more distinct because the fibres being somewhat rigid,
they would, by means of their elasticity, make efforts to restore
themselves to their former shape and position; and thus, the path on
traces made by the course of the animal spirits, would be very faint,
if not quite effaced. The fibres of the brain of a woman, being then
more flexible than those of the brain of a man, they are capable of
having larger and more distinct images impressed on them, and they must
consequently, according to this doctrine, perceive objects better than
men.
CIII. But I would not be understood to admit, that the women have
more understanding than the men; I only mean to retort on father
Malebranche, the doctrine, from which he pretends to infer the
advantage to be on the side of the men, in contradiction to what in
another place, he himself has asserted. My own opinion of the matter
is, that, by such sort of philosophical reasoning, you may prove every
thing, when in reality you prove nothing. Every one philosophizes in
his own mode, and if I was to write with a view of flattering, or
from caprice or ostentation, or with a design of making parade of my
ingenuity, I could easily, by deducing consequences from admitted
principles, elevate the understandings of the women, superior to
those of the men, by many degrees; but this is not my nature, or
disposition; on the contrary, I had much rather propound my sentiments
with sincerity; and therefore I say, that neither father Malebranche,
nor any other person, even to this day, has known the punctual actings,
or specific manœuvres, by which the organs of the head, administer to
the faculties of the soul. We don’t know as yet, how fire burns, or how
snow occasions cold, although they are things which are manifest to
our sight and our touch; and would father Malebranche, and the other
Cartesians, persuade us, that they have registered and examined all
that passes in the most hidden and remote corners of the cabinet of
the rational soul? Neither do these maxims appear to me well founded,
which, by reducing every thing to mechanical principles, figure to us
the spirit, stamping materially the images of objects on the brain, in
the same manner, that impressions are made on copper with a chissel.
I am also aware of the serious difficulties, that are attendant on,
and annexed to, the intentional species of Aristotle. But what is the
result of all this? Why, that none of us have done more, than just
touch the outside covering of Nature. We all walk blindfold, and he
is the most blind, who fancies he perceives things with the greatest
clearness, and may be compared to a servant of Seneca, named Harpacta,
who was so infatuated, after having lost all his visual faculties, and
having become stone-blind, as to fancy he could see. It is certain,
that those who live in a confidence, that they can penetrate and look
into Nature, are the most exposed to dangerous errors; because he who
walks on with much boldness, having but a dim light to guide him, runs
the most hazard of falling; on the contrary, he is the furthest from
this danger, who knowing the way is dark, proceeds with caution.
CIV. But granting to father Malebranche, and the rest of the
Cartesians, that the representation of objects to the mind, is made by
means of these material traces, which, in their course, the spirits
impress on the brain; what follows from it is, that the brains of
women being softer than those of men, the marks, on account of the
pliability of the matter, will be larger and more distinct in the
first, than in the last; and what can be inferred from this? Why, by
the doctrine of father Malebranche, you may make whichever of the two
following inferences you like best, either that the women comprehend
better than the men, or that they do not comprehend so well. The
first, may be inferred from the place we a little before cited; and
the second, because where he explains himself with regard to what he
has said against the women, he maintains, that the excessive lively
imaginations, which result from these large images or impressions,
are unfavourable to the right comprehension of objects. _Cum enim
tenuiora objecta ingentes in delicatis cerebri fibris excitent motus,
in mente protinus etiam excitant sensationes ita vividas, ut ijs tota
occupetur._ Lib. 2. part ii. cap. 1.
CV. But this second is contrary to all reason, for it does not follow
from this doctrine of large images, that small ones do not represent
objects well, for in some cases they rather conduce to represent them
best; atoms, for example, being better seen through a microscope than
larger bodies; and liveliness of imagination, if it does not extend to
madness, contributes much to a perspicuous understanding of things.
CVI. But, in reality, from this greater softness of the brain, it
cannot be deduced, that the understandings of women are either larger
or smaller, because you cannot infer from it, that the impressions
made by the spirits on the organ, are bigger or less; which is the
principle, from whence you must conclude both the one and the other;
the reason is, because it seems most probable, that the impulse of the
spirits is proportioned to the docility of the matter, and thus, that
spirits feebly impelled, do not make a larger impression on a soft
brain, than that which is made on a more firm and tense one, by spirits
which move with greater force and impetuosity; in the same manner,
that by regulating the force of your hand, you may make as superficial
a mark with a tool on wax, as you may on lead. My opinion of the matter
is, that from this system of the brains of women, all you can infer is,
that the corporeal movements in them, are less vigorous than they are
in men; on which account, the nerves which have their origin in the
fibres of the brain, and the spinal marrow, have less power in women,
or move with more feeble impulses in them than they do in men; but not
that their mental operations are more or less perfect.