_MADAM,_
I have taken several questions out of your new _Author_, which I
intend to answer in this present Letter according to the conceptions
of my own sense and reason, and to submit them to your censure; which
if you vouchsafe to grant me without partiality, I shall acknowledg
my self much obliged to you for this favour. The first question is,
_Why wet Linnen is dried in the Air?_ I answer; That, according to my
sense and reason, the water which is spred upon the linnen, being not
united in a full and close body, dilates beyond the Circle-degree of
water and wetness, and so doth easily change from water to vapour,
and from vapour to air, whereby the linnen becomes as dry, as it
was before it became wet. The second question is, _Why Water and
Wine intermix so easily and suddenly together?_ I answer: All wet
liquors, although their exterior figures do differ, yet their interior
natures, figures and forms are much alike, and those things that are
of the same interior nature, do easily and suddenly joyn as into one:
Wherefore Wine and Water having both wet natures, do soon incorporate
together, whereas, were they of different natures, they would not so
peaceably joyn together, but by their contrary natures become enemies,
and strive to destroy each other; but this is to be observed, that
the sharp points of the Circle-lines of Wine, by passing through the
smooth Circle-lines of Water, help to make a more hasty and sudden
conjunction. The third question, is, _Why Light, which in its nature is
white, shining through a coloured Glass, doth appear of the same colour
which the Glass is of, either Blew, Green, Red, or the like?_ I answer:
The reason is, that though Light in its nature be white, and the Glass
clear and transparent, yet when as the Glass is stained or painted with
colours, both the clearness of the glass, and the whiteness of the
light, is obstructed by the figure of that colour the glass is stained
or painted withal, and the light spreading upon or thorow the glass,
represents it self in the figure of that same colour; indeed, in all
probability to sense and reason, it appears, that the lines or beams
of light, which are straight, small, even, and parallel, do contract
in their entrance through the glass into the figure of the colour the
glass is stained or painted with, so that the light passes through the
glass figuratively, in so much, as it seems to be of the same colour
the glass is of, although in it self it is white, lucent, and clear;
and as the light appears, so the eye receives it, if the sight be not
destructive. The fourth question, is, _Whether_ (as your _Authors_
opinion is) _kisses feel pleasing and delightful by the thinness of
the parts, and a gentle stirring and quavering of the tangent spirits,
that give a pleasing tact?_ I answer: If this were so, then all kisses
would be pleasing, which surely are not; for some are thought very
displeasing, especially from thin lips; wherefore, in my opinion, it
is neither the thinness of the parts of the lips, nor the quavering of
the tangent spirits, but the appetites and passions of life, reason,
and soul, that cause the pleasure; Nevertheless, I grant, the stirring
up of the spirits may contribute to the increasing, heightening, or
strengthning of that tact, but it is not the prime cause of it. The
fifth question, is, _Whether the greatest man have always the greatest
strength?_ I answer, Not: for strength and greatness of bulk doth not
always consist together, witness experience: for a little man may be,
and is oftentimes stronger then a tall man. The like of other animal
Creatures: As for example, some Horses of a little or middle size,
have a great deal more strength then others which are high and big;
for it is the quantity of sensitive matter that gives strength, and
not the bigness or bulk of the body. The sixth question, is, _Whether
this World or Universe be the biggest Creature?_ I answer: It is not
possible to be known, unless Man could perfectly know its dimension
or extension, or whether there be more Worlds then one: But, to speak
properly, there is no such thing as biggest or least in Nature. The
seventh question, is, _Whether the Earth be the Center of Matter, or of
the World?_ As for Matter, it being Infinite, has no Center, by reason
it has no Circumference; and, as for this World, its Center cannot be
known, unless man knew the utmost parts of its circumference, for no
Center can be known without its circumference; and although some do
imagine this world so little, that in comparison to Infinite Matter, it
would not be so big as the least Pins head, yet their knowledg cannot
extend so far as to know the circumference of this little World; by
which you may perceive the Truth of the old saying, Man talks much, but
knows little. The eighth question is, _Whether all Centers must needs
be full, and close, as a stufft Cushion; and whether the matter in
the Center of the Universe or World be dense, compact, and heavy?_ I
answer: This can no more be known, then the circumference of the World;
for what man is able to know, whether the Center of the world be rare,
or dense, since he doth not know where its Center is; and as for other
particular Centers, some Centers may be rare, some dense, and some may
have less matter then their circumferences. The ninth question is,
_Whether Finite Creatures can be produced out of an Infinite material
cause?_ I answer: That, to my sense and reason, an Infinite cause must
needs produce Infinite effects, though not in each Particular, yet in
General; that is, Matter, being Infinite in substance, must needs be
dividable into Infinite parts in number, and thus Infinite Creatures
must needs be produced out of Infinite Matter; but Man being but a
finite part, thinks all must be finite too, not onely each particular
Creature, but also the Matter out of which all Creatures are produced,
which is corporeal Nature. Nevertheless, those Infinite effects in
Nature are equalized by her different motions which are her different
actions; for it is not _non_-sence, but most demonstrable to sense and
reason that there are equalities or a union in Infinite. The tenth
question is, _Whether the Elements be the onely matter out of which
all other Creatures are produced?_ I answer: The Elements, as well as
all other Creatures, as it appears to humane sense and reason, are all
of one and the same Matter, which is the onely Infinite Matter; and
therefore the Elements cannot be the Matter of all other Creatures,
for several sorts of Creatures have several ways of productions, and
I know no reason to the contrary, but that Animals, Vegetables, and
Minerals, may as well derive their essence from each other, as from
the Elements, or the Elements from them; for as all Creatures do
live by each other, so they are produced from each other, according
to the several ways or manners of productions. But mistake me not,
_Madam_, for I speak of production in General, and not of such natural
production whereby the several species of Creatures are maintained: As
for example, Generation in Animals; for an Element cannot generate an
Animal in that manner as an Animal can generate or produce its like;
for as Nature is wise, so her actions are all wise and orderly, or
else it would make a horrid confusion amongst the Infinite parts of
Nature. The eleventh question is, _What is meant by Natural Theology?_
I answer: Natural Theology, in my opinion, is nothing else but Moral
Philosophy; for as for our belief, it is grounded upon the Scripture,
and not upon Reason.
These, _Madam_, are the questions which I have pickt out of your new
_Author_, together with my answers, of which I desire your impartial
Judgment: But I must add one thing more before I conclude, which is,
I am much pleased with your _Authors_ opinion, That Sound may be
perceived by the Eye, Colour by the Ear, and that Sound and Colour may
be smell'd and tasted; and I have been of this opinion eleven years
since, as you will find in my Book of Poems, whose first Edition was
printed in the Year, 1653. And thus I take my leave of you, and remain
constantly,
Madam,
_Your Faithful Friend_
_to serve you._