_MADAM,_
I understand by your last, that you have read the Book of that most
learned and famous Physician and Anatomist, Dr. _Harvey_, which treats
of Generation; and in the reading of it, you have mark'd several
scruples, which you have framed into several questions concerning that
subject, to which you desire my answer. Truly, _Madam_, I am loth to
imbarque my self in this difficult argument, not onely for the reasons
I have given you heretofore, but also that I do not find my self
able enough to give you such a satisfactory answer as perhaps you do
expect. But since your Commands are so powerful with me, that I can
hardly resist them, and your Nature so good that you easily pardon any
thing that is amiss, I will venture upon it according to the strength
of my Natural Reason, and endeavour to give you my opinion as well
and as clearly as I can. Your first question is; _Whether the action
of one or more producers be the onely cause of Natural Production
or Generation, without imparting or transferring any of their own
substance or Matter._ I answer: The sole co-action of the Producers may
make a change of exterior forms or figures, but not produce another
Creature; for if there were not substance or matter, as well as action,
both transferred together, there would not be new Creatures made out
of old Matter, but every production would require new Matter, which
is impossible, if there be but one Matter, and that infinite; and
certainly, humane sense and reason may well perceive, that there can be
but one Matter, for several kinds of Matter would make a confusion; and
thus if new Creatures were made onely by substanceless motion, it would
not onely be an infinite trouble to Nature, to create something out of
nothing perpetually, but, as I said, it would make a confusion amongst
all Nature's works, which are her several Parts or Creatures. But by
reason there is but one Matter, which is Infinite and Eternal, and this
Matter has self-motion in it, both Matter and Motion must of necessity
transmigrate, or be transferred together without any separation, as
being but one thing, to wit, Corporeal Motion. 'Tis true, one part of
animate or self-moving Matter, may without Translation move, or rather
occasion other parts to move; but one Creature cannot naturally produce
another without the transferring of its corporeal motions. But it is
well to be observed, that there is great difference between the actions
of Nature; for all actions are not generating, but some are patterning,
and some transforming, and the like; and as for the transforming
action, that may be without translation, as being nothing else but
a change of motions in one and the same part or parts of Matter, to
wit, when the same parts of Matter do change into several figures,
and return into the same figures again. Also the action of Patterning
is without Translation; for to pattern out, is nothing else but to
imitate, and to make a figure in its own substance or parts of Matter
like another figure. But in generation every producer doth transfer
both Matter and Motion, that is, Corporeal Motion into the produced;
and if there be more producers then one, they all do contribute to
the produced; and if one Creature produces many Creatures, those many
Creatures do partake more or less of their producer. But you may say,
If the producer transfers its own Matter, or rather its own corporeal
motions into the produced, many productions will soon dissolve the
producer, and he will become a sacrifice to his off-spring. I answer;
That doth not follow: for as one or more Creatures contribute to one
or more other Creatures, so other Creatures do contribute to them,
although not after one and the same manner or way, but after divers
manners or ways; but all manners and ways must be by translation to
repair and assist; for no Creature can subsist alone and of it self,
but all Creatures traffick and commerce from and to each other, and
must of necessity do so, since they are all parts of the same Matter:
Neither can Motion subsist without Matter, nor quit Matter, nor act
without Matter, no more, then an Artificer can work without materials,
and without self-motion Matter would be dead and useless; Wherefore
Matter and Motion must upon necessity not onely be inseparable, but
be one body, to wit, corporeal motion; which motion by dividing and
composing its several parts, and acting variously, is the cause of all
Production, Generation, Metamorphosing, or any other thing that is done
in Nature. But if, according to your _Author_, the sole action be the
cause of Generation without transferring of substance, then Matter is
useless, and of none or little effect; which, in my opinion, is not
probable.
Your second question is, _Whether the Production or Generation of
animals is as the Conceptions of the Brain, which the Learned say are
Immaterial?_ I answer: The Conceptions of the Brain, in my opinion,
are not Immaterial, but Corporeal; for though the corporeal motions
of the brain, or the matter of its conceptions, is invisible to
humane Creatures, and that when the brain is dissected, there is no
such matter found, yet that doth not prove, that there is no Matter,
because it is not so gross a substance as to be perceptible by our
exterior senses: Neither will your _Authors_ example hold, that as a
builder erects a house according to his conception in the brain, the
same happens in all other natural productions or generations; for, in
my opinion, the house is materially made in the brain, which is the
conception of the builder, although not of such gross materials, as
Stone, Brick, Wood, and the like, yet of such matter as is the Rational
Matter, that is, the house when it is conceived in the brain, is made
by the rational corporeal figurative motions of their own substance
or degree of Matter; But if all Animals should be produced by meer
fancies, and a Man and a Woman should beget by fancying themselves
together in copulation, then the produced would be a true Platonick
Child; But if a Woman being from her Husband should be so got with
Child, the question is, whether the Husband would own the Child; and
if amorous Lovers (which are more contagious for appetite and fancy
then Married persons) should produce Children by Immaterial contagions,
there would be more Children then Parents to own them.
Your third question is, _Whether Animals may not be produced, as many
Diseases are, by contagion?_ I answer: Although contagions may be made
at a distance, by perception; yet those diseases are not begotten
by immaterial motions, but by the rational and sensitive corporeal
motions, which work such diseases in the body of a Creature, by the
association of parts, like as the same disease is made in another body:
Neither are diseases always produced after one and the same manner, but
after divers manners; whereas animals are produced as animals, that
is, after one natural and proper way; for although all the effects in
particular be not alike, yet the general way or manner to produce those
effects is the same: As for example; there is no other way to produce
a fruitful Egg, but by a Cock and a Hen; But a Contagious disease, as
the small-Pox, or the like, may be produced by the way of Surfeits or
by Conceit, which may cause the sensitive corporeal parts, through the
irregular motions of the rational corporeal parts, to work and produce
such a disease, or any other ways. But neither a disease, nor no
creature else can be produced without matter, by substanceless motion;
for wheresoever is motion, there is also matter, matter and motion
being but one thing.
Your fourth question is, _Whether an Animal Creature is perfectly
shaped or formed at the first Conception?_ I answer: If the Creature
be composed of many and different parts, my opinion is, it cannot be.
You may say, That if it hath not all his parts produced at there will
be required many acts of generation to beget or produce every part,
otherwise the producers would not be the Parents of the produced in
whole, but in part. I answer: The Producer is the designer, architect,
and founder of the whole Creature produced; for the sensitive and
rational corporeal motions, which are transferred from the producer or
producers, joyn to build the produced like to the producer in specie,
but the transferred parts may be invisible and insensible to humane
Creatures, both through their purity and little quantity, until the
produced is framed to some visible degree; for a stately building may
proceed from a small beginning, neither can humane sense tell what
manner of building is designed at the first foundation. But you may
say, That many Eggs may be made by one act of the producers, to wit,
the Cock and the Hen, and those many Eggs may be laid at several
times, as also hatched at several times, and become Chickens at several
times. I answer; It may well and easily be so: for the rational and
sensitive parts or corporeal motions which were transferred in one act,
designed many produced through that one act; for those transferred
corporeal motions, although they have not a sufficient quantity of
themselves to make all the produced in their perfect shapes at once,
yet they are the chief designer, architect and founder of all that are
to be produced; for the corporeal motions which are transferred, joyn
with those they are transferred to, and being associates, work to one
design, the sensitive being the architect, the rational the designer,
which together with the inanimate parts of matter, can never want
materials, neither can the materials want labourers; for the degrees of
matter are inseparable, and do make but one body or substance. Again
you may say, That some parts of Matter may produce another Creature
not like to the producer in its species, as for example, Monsters.
I answer, That is possible to be done, but yet it is not usual; for
Monsters are not commonly born, but those corporeal motions which dwell
in one species, work according to the nature of the same species; and
when the parts of Matter are transferred from Creature to Creature,
that is, are separated from some parts, and joyned to other parts of
the same species, and the same nature; those transferred parts of
matter, although invisible in quantity, by reason of their purity and
subtilty, begin the work of the produced according to its natural
species, and the labourers in other parts of matter work to the same
end; just as it is in the artificial building of a house, where the
house is first designed by the Architect, or Master, and then the
labourers work not after their own fancy, (else it would not be the
same house that was designed, nor any uniformity in it) but according
to the architects or surveyors design; so those parts of matter or
corporeal motions that are transferred from the producer, are like the
architect, but the labourers or workmen are the assisting and adjoyning
parts of matter. But you will say, How comes it, that many creatures
may be made by one or two? I answer: As one owner or two partners may
be the cause of many buildings, so few or more transferred rational
and sensitive corporeal motions may make and produce as many creatures
as they can get materials and labourers; for if they get one, they
get the other, by reason the degrees of matter, _viz._ animate and
inanimate, are inseparably mixt, and make but one body or substance;
and the proof of it is, that all animals are not constant in the number
of their off-spring, but sometimes produce more, and sometimes fewer,
and sometimes their off-spring is less, and sometimes larger, according
to the quantity of matter. Again you may say, That in some Creatures
there is no passage to receive the transferred matter into the place
of the architecture. I answer: That all passages are not visible to
humane sense; and some humane Creatures have not a sufficient humane
reason to conceive, that most of Natures works are not so gross as
to be subject to their exterior senses; but as for such parts and
passages, whether exterior or interior, visible or invisible, as also
for copulation, conception, formation, nourishment, and the like in
Generation, I leave you to Physicians and Anatomists. And to conclude
this question, we may observe, that not any animal Creatures shape
dissolveth in one instant of time, but by degrees; why should we
believe then, that Animals are generated or produced in their perfect
shape in one instant of time, and by one act of Nature? But sense and
reason knows by observation, that an animal Creature requires more time
to be generated, then to be dissolved, like as an house is sooner and
with less pains pull'd down, then built up.
Your Fifth question is, _Whether Animals are not generated by the way
of Metamorphosing?_ To which I answer, That it is not possible that a
third Creature can be made without translation of corporeal motions;
and since Metamorphosing is onely a change of motions in the same parts
of Matter, without any translation of corporeal motions, no animal
Creature can be produced or generated by the way of Metamorphosing.
Your Sixth question is, _Whether a whole may be made out of a part?_ I
answer: There is no whole in Nature, except you will call Nature her
self a whole; for all Creatures are but parts of Infinite Matter.
Your Seventh question is, _Whether all Animals, as also Vegetables,
are made or generated by the way of Eggs?_ I have said heretofore,
That it is not probable, that different sorts, nay, different kinds
of Creatures, should all have but one manner or way of production;
for why should not Nature make different ways of productions, as well
as different Creatures? And as for Vegetables, if all their Seeds be
likened unto Eggs, then Eggs may very well be likened to Seeds; which
if so, then a Peas-cod is the Hen, and the Peas in the Cod is the
cluster of Eggs: the like of ears of Corn. And those animals that
produce but one creature or seed at a time, may be like the kernel
of a Nut, when the shell is broke, the creature comes forth. But how
this will agree with your _Author_, who says, that the creature in the
shell must make its own passage, I cannot tell; for if the Nut be not
broken by some external means or occasion, the kernel is not like to
get forth. And as for humane Eggs, I know not what to answer; for it is
said, that the first Woman was made of a mans ribb; but whether that
ribb was an egg, I cannot tell. And why may not Minerals and Elements
be produced by the way of Eggs as well as Vegetables and Animals? Nay,
why may not the whole World be likened unto an Egg? Which if so, the
two Poles are the two ends the Egg; and for the Elements, the Yolk is
the Fire, the White, the Water; the Film, the Air; and the Shell it
self will very well serve for the Earth: But then it must first be
broken, and pounded into one lump or solid mass, and so sink or swim
into the midst of the liquid parts, as to the Center; and as for the
several foetuses in this great Egg, they are the several Creatures in
it. Or it might be said, that the Chaos was an Egg, and the Universe,
the Chicken. But leaving this similizing, it is like, that some
studious Men may by long study upon one part of the body, conceive and
believe that all other parts are like that one part; like as those that
have gazed long upon the Sun, all they see for a time, are Suns to
them; or like as those which having heard much of Hobgoblins, all they
see are Hobgoblins, their fancies making such things. But, _Madam_, to
make a conclusion also of this question, I repeat what I said before,
that all Creatures have not one way of production; and as they have
not all one way of production, so they have neither one instant of
time either for perfection or dissolution, but their perfection and
dissolution is made by degrees.
Your Eighth question is, _Whether it may not be, that the sensitive and
rational corporeal motions in an Egg do pattern out the figure of the
Hen and Cock, whilest the Hen sits upon the Egg, and so bring forth
Chickens by the way of patterning?_ I answer: The action of patterning,
is not the action of Generation; for as I said heretofore, the actions
of Nature are different, and Generation must needs be performed by the
way of translation, which translation is not required in the action
of Patterning; but according as the Producers are, which transfer
their own matter into the produced, so is the produced concerning its
species; which is plainly proved by common examples; for if Pheasants,
or Turky, or Goose-eggs, be laid under an ordinary Hen, or an ordinary
Hens-egg be laid under a Pheasant, Turky, or Goose, the Chickens of
those Eggs will never be of any other species then of those that
produced the Egg; for an ordinary Hen, if she sit upon Pheasants,
Turky, or Goose-eggs, doth not hatch Chickens of her own species, but
the Chickens will be of the species either of the Pheasant, or Turky,
or Goose, which did at first produce the Egg; which proves, that in
Generation, or Natural production, there is not onely required the
action of the Producers, but also a Transferring of some of their own
parts to form the produced. But you may say, What doth the sitting Hen
contribute then to the production of the Chicken? I answer: The sitting
Hen doth onely assist the Egg in the production of the Chicken, as the
Ground doth the Seed.
Your Ninth question is, _Concerning the Soul of a particular Animal
Creature, as whether it be wholly of it self and subsists wholly in
and by it self?_ But you must give me leave first to ask you what Soul
you mean, whether the Divine, or the Natural Soul, for there is great
difference betwixt them, although not the least that ever I heard,
rightly examined and distinguished; and if you mean the Divine Soul,
I shall desire you to excuse me, for that belongs to Divines, and not
to Natural Philosophers; neither am I so presumptuous as to intrench
upon their sacred order. But as for the Natural Soul, the Learned have
divided it into three parts, to wit, the Vegetative, Sensitive, and
Rational Soul; and according to these three Souls, made three kinds
of lives, as the Vegetative, Sensitive, and Rational Life. But they
might as well say, there are infinite bodies, lives, and souls, as
three; for in Nature there is but one life, soul, and body, consisting
all of one Matter, which is corporeal Nature. But yet by reason this
life and soul is material, it is divided into numerous parts, which
make numerous lives and souls in every particular Creature; for each
particular part of the rational self-moving Matter, is each particular
soul in each particular Creature, but all those parts considered in
general, make but one soul of Nature; and as this self-moving Rational
Matter hath power to unite its parts, so it hath ability or power to
divide its united parts. And thus the rational soul of every particular
Creature is composed of parts, (I mean parts of a material substance;
for whatsoever is substanceless and incorporeal, belongs not to
Nature, but is Supernatural;) for by reason the Infinite and Onely
matter is by self-motion divided into self-parts, not any Creature can
have a soul without parts; neither can the souls of Creatures subsist
without commerce of other rational parts, no more then one body can
subsist without the assistance of other bodies; for all parts belong
to one body, which is Nature: nay, if any thing could subsist of it
self, it were a God, and not a Creature: Wherefore not any Creature
can challenge a soul absolutely to himself, unless Man, who hath a
divine soul, which no other Creature hath. But that which makes so many
confusions and disputes amongst learned men is, that they conceive,
first, there is no rational soul but onely in man; next, that this
rational soul in every man is individable. But if the rational soul is
material, as certainly to all sense and reason it is, then it must not
onely be in all material Creatures, but be dividable too; for all that
is material or corporeal hath parts, and is dividable, and therefore
there is no such thing in any one Creature as one intire soul; nay, we
might as well say, there is but one Creature in Nature, as say, there
is but one individable natural soul in one Creature.
Your Tenth question is, _Whether Souls are producible, or can be
produced?_ I answer: in my opinion, they are producible, by reason all
parts in Nature are so. But mistake me not; for I do not mean that any
one part is produced out of Nothing, or out of new matter; but one
Creature is produced by another, by the dividing and uniting, joyning
and disjoyning of the several parts of Matter, and not by substanceless
Motion out of new Matter. And because there is not any thing in
Nature, that has an absolute subsistence of it self, each Creature is a
producer, as well as a produced, in some kind or other; for no part of
Nature can subsist single, and without reference and assistance of each
other, or else every single part would not onely be a whole of it self,
but be as a God without controle; and though one part is not another
part, yet one part belongs to another part, and all parts to one whole,
and that whole to all the parts, which whole is one corporeal Nature.
And thus, as I said before, productions of one or more creatures, by
one or more producers, without matter, meerly by immaterial motions,
are impossible, to wit, that something should be made or produced
out of nothing; for if this were so, there would consequently be an
annihilation or turning into nothing, and those creatures, which
produce others by the way of immaterial motions, would rather be as a
God, then a part of Nature, or Natural Matter. Besides, it would be an
endless labour, and more trouble to create particular Creatures out
of nothing, then a World at once; whereas now it is easie for Nature
to create by production and transmigration; and therefore it is not
probable, that any one Creature hath a particular life, soul, or body
to it self, as subsisting by it self, and as it were precised from the
rest, having its own subsistence without the assistance of any other;
nor is it probable, that any one Creature is new, for all that is, was,
and shall be, till the Omnipotent God disposes Nature otherwise.
As for the rest of your questions, as whether the Sun be the cause of
all motions, and of all natural productions; and whether the life of a
Creature be onely in the blood, or whether it have its beginning from
the blood, or whether the blood be the chief architect of an animal, or
be the seat of the soul; sense and reason, in my opinion, doth plainly
contradict them; for concerning the blood, if it were the seat of the
Soul, then in the circulation of the blood, if the Soul hath a brain,
it would become very dizzie by its turning round; but perchance some
may think the Soul to be a Sun, and the Blood the Zodiack, and the body
the Globe of the Earth, which the Soul surrounds in such time as the
Blood is flowing about. And so leaving those similizing Fancies, I'le
add no more, but repeat what I said in the beginning, that I rely upon
the goodness of your Nature, from which I hope for pardon, if I have
not so exactly and solidly answered your desire; for the argument of
this discourse being so difficult, may easily lead me into an error,
which your better judgment will soon correct; and in so doing you will
add to those favours for which I am already,
Madam,
_Your Ladiships most obliged Friend_
_and humble Servant._