_MADAM,_
Your desire is to know, since I say Nature is Wise, Whether all her
parts must be wise also? To which, I answer; That (by your favour) all
her parts are not fools: but yet it is no necessary consequence, that
because Nature is infinitely wise, all her parts must be so too, no
more then if I should say, Nature is Infinite, therefore every part
must be Infinite: But it is rather necessary, that because Nature
is Infinite, therefore not any single part of hers can be Infinite,
but must be finite. Next, you desire to know, Whether Nature or the
self-moving matter is subject to err, and to commit mistakes? I answer:
Although Nature has naturally an Infinite wisdom and knowledg, yet she
has not a most pure and intire perfection, no more then she has an
absolute power; for a most pure and intire perfection belongs onely
to God: and though she is infinitely naturally wise in her self, yet
her parts or particular creatures may commit errors and mistakes; the
truth is, it is impossible but that parts or particular Creatures must
be subject to errors, because no part can have a perfect or general
knowledg, as being but a part, and not a whole; for knowledg is in
parts, as parts are in Matter: Besides several corporeal motions, that
is, several self-moving parts do delude and oppose each other by their
opposite motions; and this opposition is very requisite in Nature to
keep a mean, and hinder extreams; for were there not opposition of
parts, Nature would run into extreams, which would confound her, and
all her parts. And as for delusion, it is part of Natures delight,
causing the more variety; but there be some actions in Nature which
are neither perfect mistakes, nor delusions, but onely want of a clear
and thorow perception: As for example; when a man is sailing in a
Ship, he thinks the shore moves from the ship, when as it is the ship
that moves from the shore: Also when a man is going backward from a
Looking-glass, he thinks, the figure in the Glass goeth inward, whereas
it is himself that goes backward, and not his figure in the glass. The
cause of it is, That the perception in the eye perceives the distanced
body, but not the motion of the distance or medium; for though the man
may partly see the motion of the visible parts, yet he doth not see the
parts or motion of the distance or medium, which is invisible, and not
subject to the perception of sight; and since a pattern cannot be made
if the object be not visible, hence I conclude, that the motion of the
medium cannot make perception, but that it is the perceptive motions
of the eye, which pattern out an object as it is visibly presented
to the corporeal motions in the eye; for according as the object is
presented, the pattern is made, if the motions be regular: For example;
a fired end of a stick, if you move it in a circular figure, the
sensitive corporeal motions in the eye pattern out the figure of fire,
together with the exterior or circular motion, and apprehend it as a
fiery circle; and if the stick be moved any otherwise, they pattern
out such a figure as the fired end of the stick is moved in; so that
the sensitive pattern is made according to the exterior corporeal
figurative motion of the object, and not according to its interior
figure or motions. And this, _Madam_, is in short my answer to your
propounded questions, by which, I hope, you understand plainly the
meaning of,
Madam,
_Your Faithful Friend_
_and Servant._