XXX.

_MADAM,_

Your _Author_ says,[1] it is an ancient Truth, _That whatsoever things,

meats being digested and cast out by vomit, are of a sowre taste and

smell, yea, although they were seasoned with much sugar._ But I do

not assent to this opinion; for I think that some Vomits have no more

taste then pure Water hath. Neither am I of his mind, That _Digestion

is hastened by sharpness or tartness:_ For do but try it by one

simple experiment; take any kind of flesh-meat, boyl or stew it with

Vinegar, or sowre wine, or with much salt; and you will find, that it

doth require a longer time, or rather more motions to dissolve, then

if you boyl it in fair water, without such ingredients as are sowre,

sharp, or salt; also if you do but observe, you will find the dregs

more sandy, stony and hard, being drest with much salt, and sharp

wine, or vinegar, then when they are not mixt with such contracting

and fixing Ingredients. Wherefore, if the Ferment of the stomack hath

such a restringent and contracting quality, certainly digestions will

be but slow and unprofitable; but Nature requires expulsion as much

as attraction, and dilation as much as contraction, and digestion is

a kind of dilation. Wherefore, in my judgment; contracting tartness

and sharpness doth rather hinder digestion then further it. Next I

perceive, your _Author_ inclines to the opinion, _That Choler is not

made by meat_:[2] But I would ask him, whether any humor be made of

meat, or whether blood, flesh, &c. are made and nourished by meat? If

they be not, then my answer is, That we eat to no purpose; but if they

be, then Choler is made so too. But if he says, That some are made, and

some not; then I would ask, what that humor is made of, that is not

made by meat or food received into the body? But we find that humors,

blood, flesh, &c. will be sometimes more, sometimes less, according

either to feeding, or to digestion, which digestion is a contribution

of food to every several part of the body for its nourishment; and when

there is a decay of those parts, then it is caused either by fasting,

or by irregular digestion, or by extraordinary evacuation, or by

distempered matter, &c. all which, causes sickness, paleness, leanness,

weakness, and the like. Again: your _Author_ is against the opinion of

the Schools, _That the Gall is a receptacle of superfluous humors and

dregs_: for he says, _it has rather the constitution of a necessary

and vital bowel, and is the balsom of the liver and blood._ Truly, it

may be so, for any thing I know, or it may be not; for your _Author_

could but guess, not assuredly know, unless he had been in a man as big

as the Whale in whose belly _Jonas_ was three days, and had observed

the interior parts and motions of every part for three years time, and

yet he might perchance have been as ignorant at the coming forth, as

if he never had been there; for Natures actions are not onely curious,

but very various; and not onely various, but very obscure; in so much,

as the most ingenious Artists cannot trace her ways, or imitate her

actions; for Art being but a Creature, can do or know no more then a

Creature; and although she is an ingenious Creature, which can and hath

found out some things profitable and useful for the life of others,

yet she is but a handmaid to Nature, and not her Mistress; which your

_Author_, in my opinion, too rashly affirms, when he says,[3] That _the

Art of Chymistry is not onely the Chambermaid and emulating Ape, but

now and then the Mistress of Nature_: For Art is an effect of Nature,

and to prefer the effect before the cause, is absurd. But concerning

Chymistry, I have spoken in another place; I'le return to my former

Discourse: and I wonder much why your _Author_ is so opposite to the

Schools, concerning the doctrine of the Gall's being a receptacle for

superfluities and dregs; for I think there is not any Creature that

has not places or receptacles for superfluous matter, such as we call

dregs; for even the purest and hardest Mineral, as Gold, has its dross,

although in a less proportion then some other Creatures; nay, I am

perswaded, that even Light, which your _Author_ doth so much worship,

may have some superfluous matter, which may be named dregs; and since

Nature has made parts in all Creatures to receive and discharge

superfluous matter, (which receiving and discharging is nothing else

but a joyning and dividing of parts to and from parts,) why may not the

Gall be as well for that use as any other part? But I pray mistake me

not, when I say _superfluous matter or dregs_; for I understand by it,

that which is not useful to the nourishment or consistence of such or

such a Creature; but to speak properly, there is neither superfluity

of matter nor dregs in Nature. Moreover, your _Author_ mentions a

_six-fold digestion_, and makes every digestion to be performed by

inbreathing or inspiration; For _in the first digestion_, he says,

_The spleen doth inspire a sowre Ferment into the Meat: In the second,

The Gall doth inspire a ferment, or fermental blas into the slender

entrails: In the third, The Liver doth inspire a bloody ferment into

the veins of the Mensentery_, &c. I answer, first, I am confident

Nature has more ways then to work onely by Inspirations, not onely in

General, but in every Particular. Next, I believe there are not onely

six, but many more digestions in an animal Creature; for not onely

every sort of food, but every bit that is eaten, may require a several

digestion, and every several part of the body works either to expel, or

preserve, or for both; so that there are numerous several Motions in

every Creature, and many changes of motions in each particular part;

but Nature is in them all. And so leaving her, I rest,

Madam,

_Your Faithful Friend_

_and Servant._

[1] _Ch._ Of a Six-fold digestion.

[2] See _The passive deceiving of the Schools, the humorists,_ c. 1.

[3] _Ch._ Heat doth not digest efficiently.

Philosophical Letters: or, modest Reflections upon some Opinions in Natural Philosophy · 第 119 / 169 题