This is a modern-English version of Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One's Reason and of Seeking Truth in the Sciences, originally written by Descartes, René. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

DISCOURSE ON THE METHOD
OF RIGHTLY CONDUCTING THE REASON,
AND SEEKING TRUTH IN THE SCIENCES

by René Descartes


Contents

PREFATORY NOTE
PART I
PART II
PART III
PART IV
PART V
PART VI

PREFATORY NOTE BY THE AUTHOR

If this Discourse appear too long to be read at once, it may be divided into six Parts: and, in the first, will be found various considerations touching the Sciences; in the second, the principal rules of the Method which the Author has discovered, in the third, certain of the rules of Morals which he has deduced from this Method; in the fourth, the reasonings by which he establishes the existence of God and of the Human Soul, which are the foundations of his Metaphysic; in the fifth, the order of the Physical questions which he has investigated, and, in particular, the explication of the motion of the heart and of some other difficulties pertaining to Medicine, as also the difference between the soul of man and that of the brutes; and, in the last, what the Author believes to be required in order to greater advancement in the investigation of Nature than has yet been made, with the reasons that have induced him to write.

If this discourse seems too long to read all at once, it can be divided into six parts: the first part includes various considerations about the sciences; the second outlines the main rules of the method the author has discovered; the third presents some moral rules he has derived from this method; the fourth contains the arguments he uses to prove the existence of God and the human soul, which are the foundations of his metaphysics; the fifth covers the sequence of physical questions he has explored, particularly the explanation of heart motion and other medical challenges, as well as the differences between the human soul and that of animals; finally, the last part explains what the author believes is needed for further progress in the investigation of nature beyond what has already been achieved, along with the reasons that led him to write.

PART I

Good sense is, of all things among men, the most equally distributed; for every one thinks himself so abundantly provided with it, that those even who are the most difficult to satisfy in everything else, do not usually desire a larger measure of this quality than they already possess. And in this it is not likely that all are mistaken the conviction is rather to be held as testifying that the power of judging aright and of distinguishing truth from error, which is properly what is called good sense or reason, is by nature equal in all men; and that the diversity of our opinions, consequently, does not arise from some being endowed with a larger share of reason than others, but solely from this, that we conduct our thoughts along different ways, and do not fix our attention on the same objects. For to be possessed of a vigorous mind is not enough; the prime requisite is rightly to apply it. The greatest minds, as they are capable of the highest excellences, are open likewise to the greatest aberrations; and those who travel very slowly may yet make far greater progress, provided they keep always to the straight road, than those who, while they run, forsake it.

Common sense is, among all people, the most evenly distributed quality. Everyone believes they have plenty of it, and even those who are hardest to satisfy in other areas usually don’t want more of this trait than they already have. It’s unlikely that everyone is wrong about this; rather, the belief suggests that the ability to judge correctly and tell truth from falsehood, which is what we call common sense or reason, is inherently equal among all people. The differences in our opinions, therefore, don’t come from some people having more reason than others, but simply from the fact that we think in different directions and don’t focus on the same things. Having a sharp mind isn’t enough; the key is to apply it correctly. The greatest thinkers can achieve the most remarkable successes, but they can also make the biggest mistakes. Those who move slowly can still make much greater progress, as long as they stay on the right path, than those who speed up while straying from it.

For myself, I have never fancied my mind to be in any respect more perfect than those of the generality; on the contrary, I have often wished that I were equal to some others in promptitude of thought, or in clearness and distinctness of imagination, or in fullness and readiness of memory. And besides these, I know of no other qualities that contribute to the perfection of the mind; for as to the reason or sense, inasmuch as it is that alone which constitutes us men, and distinguishes us from the brutes, I am disposed to believe that it is to be found complete in each individual; and on this point to adopt the common opinion of philosophers, who say that the difference of greater and less holds only among the accidents, and not among the forms or natures of individuals of the same species.

For me, I have never thought my mind was in any way better than those of most people; in fact, I’ve often wished I could match some others in quick thinking, clear imagination, or in having a good and ready memory. Besides these, I don’t know of any other traits that make a mind perfect; because when it comes to reason or sense, which is what makes us human and sets us apart from animals, I believe it’s fully present in each person. I agree with the general view of philosophers, who say that differences in ability only exist among individual traits, and not among the fundamental qualities or natures of individuals within the same species.

I will not hesitate, however, to avow my belief that it has been my singular good fortune to have very early in life fallen in with certain tracks which have conducted me to considerations and maxims, of which I have formed a method that gives me the means, as I think, of gradually augmenting my knowledge, and of raising it by little and little to the highest point which the mediocrity of my talents and the brief duration of my life will permit me to reach. For I have already reaped from it such fruits that, although I have been accustomed to think lowly enough of myself, and although when I look with the eye of a philosopher at the varied courses and pursuits of mankind at large, I find scarcely one which does not appear in vain and useless, I nevertheless derive the highest satisfaction from the progress I conceive myself to have already made in the search after truth, and cannot help entertaining such expectations of the future as to believe that if, among the occupations of men as men, there is any one really excellent and important, it is that which I have chosen.

I won't hesitate to say that I've been incredibly lucky to have, early in my life, come across certain paths that have led me to thoughts and principles. I've developed a method that I believe allows me to gradually expand my knowledge and elevate it, little by little, to the highest level possible, given the limitations of my talents and the short time I have in this world. I've already gained such valuable insights that, despite often thinking poorly of myself and observing the various paths and pursuits people take, many of which seem pointless and useless, I still feel a deep satisfaction from the progress I've made in my quest for truth. I can't help but have high hopes for the future, believing that if there’s anything truly valuable and significant among human pursuits, it’s the one I've chosen.

After all, it is possible I may be mistaken; and it is but a little copper and glass, perhaps, that I take for gold and diamonds. I know how very liable we are to delusion in what relates to ourselves, and also how much the judgments of our friends are to be suspected when given in our favor. But I shall endeavor in this discourse to describe the paths I have followed, and to delineate my life as in a picture, in order that each one may also be able to judge of them for himself, and that in the general opinion entertained of them, as gathered from current report, I myself may have a new help towards instruction to be added to those I have been in the habit of employing.

After all, I might be wrong; maybe I’m just mistaking a little copper and glass for gold and diamonds. I realize how easily we can be fooled about ourselves, and how much we need to question the opinions of our friends when they’re in our favor. But in this talk, I’ll try to describe the paths I’ve taken and illustrate my life like a picture, so that everyone can judge for themselves, and in the general opinion formed about them, based on what people say, I can gain new insights to add to the ones I've usually relied on.

My present design, then, is not to teach the method which each ought to follow for the right conduct of his reason, but solely to describe the way in which I have endeavored to conduct my own. They who set themselves to give precepts must of course regard themselves as possessed of greater skill than those to whom they prescribe; and if they err in the slightest particular, they subject themselves to censure. But as this tract is put forth merely as a history, or, if you will, as a tale, in which, amid some examples worthy of imitation, there will be found, perhaps, as many more which it were advisable not to follow, I hope it will prove useful to some without being hurtful to any, and that my openness will find some favor with all.

My goal here isn’t to teach anyone the best way to think or act, but rather to share how I've tried to manage my own thinking. Those who give advice usually see themselves as having more knowledge than the people they’re advising; if they make even a small mistake, they open themselves up to criticism. However, since this piece is simply a narrative, or a story if you prefer, which includes both examples worth following and others that may be better avoided, I hope it will be helpful to some without causing harm to anyone. I also hope my honesty will be appreciated by all.

From my childhood, I have been familiar with letters; and as I was given to believe that by their help a clear and certain knowledge of all that is useful in life might be acquired, I was ardently desirous of instruction. But as soon as I had finished the entire course of study, at the close of which it is customary to be admitted into the order of the learned, I completely changed my opinion. For I found myself involved in so many doubts and errors, that I was convinced I had advanced no farther in all my attempts at learning, than the discovery at every turn of my own ignorance. And yet I was studying in one of the most celebrated schools in Europe, in which I thought there must be learned men, if such were anywhere to be found. I had been taught all that others learned there; and not contented with the sciences actually taught us, I had, in addition, read all the books that had fallen into my hands, treating of such branches as are esteemed the most curious and rare. I knew the judgment which others had formed of me; and I did not find that I was considered inferior to my fellows, although there were among them some who were already marked out to fill the places of our instructors. And, in fine, our age appeared to me as flourishing, and as fertile in powerful minds as any preceding one. I was thus led to take the liberty of judging of all other men by myself, and of concluding that there was no science in existence that was of such a nature as I had previously been given to believe.

Since my childhood, I have been familiar with letters; and I was led to believe that through them I could gain a clear and certain understanding of everything useful in life, which made me eager to learn. However, once I completed my entire course of study, after which it's customary to be admitted into the learned community, I completely changed my mind. I found myself caught up in so many doubts and mistakes that I was convinced I had made no real progress in my learning, but had only discovered my own ignorance at every turn. Yet, I was studying in one of the most prestigious schools in Europe, where I thought there must be knowledgeable people if they existed anywhere. I had learned everything that was taught there, and not satisfied with just that, I had also read all the books that came my way, covering topics considered the most interesting and rare. I was aware of how others viewed me; still, I found I was not considered inferior to my peers, even though some of them were already being pointed out as future instructors. Ultimately, I perceived my time as thriving and as rich in brilliant minds as any before it. This led me to mistakenly judge all other people by my own experience and to conclude that there was no field of knowledge as I had once been led to believe.

I still continued, however, to hold in esteem the studies of the schools. I was aware that the languages taught in them are necessary to the understanding of the writings of the ancients; that the grace of fable stirs the mind; that the memorable deeds of history elevate it; and, if read with discretion, aid in forming the judgment; that the perusal of all excellent books is, as it were, to interview with the noblest men of past ages, who have written them, and even a studied interview, in which are discovered to us only their choicest thoughts; that eloquence has incomparable force and beauty; that poesy has its ravishing graces and delights; that in the mathematics there are many refined discoveries eminently suited to gratify the inquisitive, as well as further all the arts an lessen the labour of man; that numerous highly useful precepts and exhortations to virtue are contained in treatises on morals; that theology points out the path to heaven; that philosophy affords the means of discoursing with an appearance of truth on all matters, and commands the admiration of the more simple; that jurisprudence, medicine, and the other sciences, secure for their cultivators honors and riches; and, in fine, that it is useful to bestow some attention upon all, even upon those abounding the most in superstition and error, that we may be in a position to determine their real value, and guard against being deceived.

I still continued to value the studies at school. I understood that the languages taught there are essential for understanding ancient texts; that the charm of storytelling inspires the mind; that the remarkable events of history uplift it; and, if read thoughtfully, help shape our judgment; that reading great books is like having conversations with the greatest thinkers of the past who wrote them, allowing us to discover only their best ideas; that eloquence has unmatched power and beauty; that poetry has its enchanting graces and pleasures; that in mathematics, there are many sophisticated discoveries that satisfy the curious, as well as advance all the arts and reduce human effort; that numerous valuable lessons and calls to virtue are found in moral philosophy; that theology shows the way to heaven; that philosophy offers a way to discuss everything convincingly and attracts the admiration of the less informed; that law, medicine, and other sciences provide honors and wealth to their practitioners; and ultimately, that it's beneficial to pay attention to all fields, even those filled with superstition and error, so we can assess their true worth and avoid being misled.

But I believed that I had already given sufficient time to languages, and likewise to the reading of the writings of the ancients, to their histories and fables. For to hold converse with those of other ages and to travel, are almost the same thing. It is useful to know something of the manners of different nations, that we may be enabled to form a more correct judgment regarding our own, and be prevented from thinking that everything contrary to our customs is ridiculous and irrational, a conclusion usually come to by those whose experience has been limited to their own country. On the other hand, when too much time is occupied in traveling, we become strangers to our native country; and the over curious in the customs of the past are generally ignorant of those of the present. Besides, fictitious narratives lead us to imagine the possibility of many events that are impossible; and even the most faithful histories, if they do not wholly misrepresent matters, or exaggerate their importance to render the account of them more worthy of perusal, omit, at least, almost always the meanest and least striking of the attendant circumstances; hence it happens that the remainder does not represent the truth, and that such as regulate their conduct by examples drawn from this source, are apt to fall into the extravagances of the knight-errants of romance, and to entertain projects that exceed their powers.

But I believed that I had already spent enough time on languages, as well as reading the works of ancient authors, their histories, and fables. Talking to people from different times is almost like traveling. It's helpful to understand the customs of different nations so we can better judge our own and avoid thinking that anything different from our way is silly or irrational, which is usually the conclusion of those whose experiences are limited to their own country. On the flip side, if we spend too much time traveling, we risk becoming strangers in our own homeland, and those who are overly curious about past customs often know little about the present ones. Also, made-up stories can lead us to imagine impossible events, and even the most reliable histories, if they don't entirely misrepresent things or exaggerate their importance to make the account more interesting, usually leave out the least noticeable details. As a result, what remains doesn't truly reflect reality, and those who base their actions on examples from this source are likely to end up emulating the wild adventures of fictional knights and pursuing goals beyond their abilities.

I esteemed eloquence highly, and was in raptures with poesy; but I thought that both were gifts of nature rather than fruits of study. Those in whom the faculty of reason is predominant, and who most skillfully dispose their thoughts with a view to render them clear and intelligible, are always the best able to persuade others of the truth of what they lay down, though they should speak only in the language of Lower Brittany, and be wholly ignorant of the rules of rhetoric; and those whose minds are stored with the most agreeable fancies, and who can give expression to them with the greatest embellishment and harmony, are still the best poets, though unacquainted with the art of poetry.

I valued eloquence a lot and was thrilled by poetry; however, I believed that both were natural talents rather than products of study. Those who primarily rely on reason and skillfully organize their thoughts to make them clear and understandable are usually the most convincing, even if they only speak in the dialect of Lower Brittany and know nothing about the rules of rhetoric. Similarly, those whose minds are filled with delightful ideas and can express them with beautiful language and rhythm are often the best poets, even if they don’t know the art of poetry.

I was especially delighted with the mathematics, on account of the certitude and evidence of their reasonings; but I had not as yet a precise knowledge of their true use; and thinking that they but contributed to the advancement of the mechanical arts, I was astonished that foundations, so strong and solid, should have had no loftier superstructure reared on them. On the other hand, I compared the disquisitions of the ancient moralists to very towering and magnificent palaces with no better foundation than sand and mud: they laud the virtues very highly, and exhibit them as estimable far above anything on earth; but they give us no adequate criterion of virtue, and frequently that which they designate with so fine a name is but apathy, or pride, or despair, or parricide.

I was really impressed by mathematics because of the certainty and clarity of its reasoning; however, I didn't yet fully understand its true purpose. I initially thought it only helped improve practical skills, which made me surprised that such a strong and solid foundation hadn't led to something greater built upon it. In contrast, I saw the discussions of ancient moralists as grand and impressive buildings but with foundations no better than sand and mud. They praise virtues highly and present them as far more valuable than anything on earth; yet, they don't provide a proper standard for virtue, and often what they call by such noble names is just apathy, pride, despair, or even murder of a parent.

I revered our theology, and aspired as much as any one to reach heaven: but being given assuredly to understand that the way is not less open to the most ignorant than to the most learned, and that the revealed truths which lead to heaven are above our comprehension, I did not presume to subject them to the impotency of my reason; and I thought that in order competently to undertake their examination, there was need of some special help from heaven, and of being more than man.

I valued our beliefs and wanted as much as anyone to get to heaven. However, I understand that the path is just as accessible to the least knowledgeable as it is to the most educated, and that the truths revealed that lead to heaven are beyond our understanding. I didn't think it was right to limit them by my own reasoning. I believed that to truly explore these truths, I needed special assistance from above and something more than just being human.

Of philosophy I will say nothing, except that when I saw that it had been cultivated for many ages by the most distinguished men, and that yet there is not a single matter within its sphere which is not still in dispute, and nothing, therefore, which is above doubt, I did not presume to anticipate that my success would be greater in it than that of others; and further, when I considered the number of conflicting opinions touching a single matter that may be upheld by learned men, while there can be but one true, I reckoned as well-nigh false all that was only probable.

I won't say much about philosophy, except that when I saw it had been studied for many ages by the most respected figures, and yet there's still not a single topic within it that isn't debated and nothing that is completely certain, I didn't think my success would be any better than theirs. Additionally, when I thought about how many conflicting opinions smart people can have about a single topic, while there can only be one truth, I basically considered everything that was just probable to be almost false.

As to the other sciences, inasmuch as these borrow their principles from philosophy, I judged that no solid superstructures could be reared on foundations so infirm; and neither the honor nor the gain held out by them was sufficient to determine me to their cultivation: for I was not, thank Heaven, in a condition which compelled me to make merchandise of science for the bettering of my fortune; and though I might not profess to scorn glory as a cynic, I yet made very slight account of that honor which I hoped to acquire only through fictitious titles. And, in fine, of false sciences I thought I knew the worth sufficiently to escape being deceived by the professions of an alchemist, the predictions of an astrologer, the impostures of a magician, or by the artifices and boasting of any of those who profess to know things of which they are ignorant.

As for the other sciences, since they take their principles from philosophy, I believed that no solid structures could be built on such weak foundations. Neither the prestige nor the rewards they offered were enough to convince me to pursue them. Fortunately, I wasn't in a position where I had to profit from science to improve my situation. While I didn't claim to disdain glory like a cynic, I didn't value the honor I hoped to gain from mere fake titles. In short, I felt I understood the worth of false sciences well enough to avoid being misled by the claims of an alchemist, the predictions of an astrologer, the tricks of a magician, or the boasts of anyone pretending to know things they do not.

For these reasons, as soon as my age permitted me to pass from under the control of my instructors, I entirely abandoned the study of letters, and resolved no longer to seek any other science than the knowledge of myself, or of the great book of the world. I spent the remainder of my youth in traveling, in visiting courts and armies, in holding intercourse with men of different dispositions and ranks, in collecting varied experience, in proving myself in the different situations into which fortune threw me, and, above all, in making such reflection on the matter of my experience as to secure my improvement. For it occurred to me that I should find much more truth in the reasonings of each individual with reference to the affairs in which he is personally interested, and the issue of which must presently punish him if he has judged amiss, than in those conducted by a man of letters in his study, regarding speculative matters that are of no practical moment, and followed by no consequences to himself, farther, perhaps, than that they foster his vanity the better the more remote they are from common sense; requiring, as they must in this case, the exercise of greater ingenuity and art to render them probable. In addition, I had always a most earnest desire to know how to distinguish the true from the false, in order that I might be able clearly to discriminate the right path in life, and proceed in it with confidence.

For these reasons, as soon as I was old enough to break free from my teachers, I completely stopped studying traditional subjects and decided to focus solely on understanding myself and the larger world around me. I spent the rest of my youth traveling, visiting courts and armies, engaging with people of different backgrounds and social statuses, gaining varied experiences, testing myself in the different situations that fortune presented, and, most importantly, reflecting on my experiences to ensure my growth. I realized that I would find more truth in the opinions of individuals regarding their own interests—especially since they would face immediate consequences for their judgments—than in the discussions of academics who ponder speculative topics that have no real relevance to them, except perhaps to boost their ego the more outlandish those topics are. Those discussions require more creativity and skill to make them seem likely. Additionally, I had a strong desire to learn how to tell the truth from falsehood so that I could clearly identify the right path in life and confidently follow it.

It is true that, while busied only in considering the manners of other men, I found here, too, scarce any ground for settled conviction, and remarked hardly less contradiction among them than in the opinions of the philosophers. So that the greatest advantage I derived from the study consisted in this, that, observing many things which, however extravagant and ridiculous to our apprehension, are yet by common consent received and approved by other great nations, I learned to entertain too decided a belief in regard to nothing of the truth of which I had been persuaded merely by example and custom; and thus I gradually extricated myself from many errors powerful enough to darken our natural intelligence, and incapacitate us in great measure from listening to reason. But after I had been occupied several years in thus studying the book of the world, and in essaying to gather some experience, I at length resolved to make myself an object of study, and to employ all the powers of my mind in choosing the paths I ought to follow, an undertaking which was accompanied with greater success than it would have been had I never quitted my country or my books.

While I was busy just considering how other people behave, I found little basis for solid beliefs, and I noticed just as much contradiction among them as in the views of philosophers. The biggest benefit I got from this study was realizing that many things, which might seem bizarre and absurd to us, are accepted and approved by other significant cultures. I learned not to hold too strong a belief in anything I had only been convinced of through example and custom. This helped me gradually free myself from many misconceptions that cloud our natural understanding and prevent us from truly listening to reason. After several years spent studying the world and trying to gain some experience, I finally decided to turn my focus on myself, using all my mental faculties to choose the paths I should take. This effort ended up being more successful than it would have been if I had never left my home or my books.

PART II

I was then in Germany, attracted thither by the wars in that country, which have not yet been brought to a termination; and as I was returning to the army from the coronation of the emperor, the setting in of winter arrested me in a locality where, as I found no society to interest me, and was besides fortunately undisturbed by any cares or passions, I remained the whole day in seclusion, with full opportunity to occupy my attention with my own thoughts. Of these one of the very first that occurred to me was, that there is seldom so much perfection in works composed of many separate parts, upon which different hands had been employed, as in those completed by a single master. Thus it is observable that the buildings which a single architect has planned and executed, are generally more elegant and commodious than those which several have attempted to improve, by making old walls serve for purposes for which they were not originally built. Thus also, those ancient cities which, from being at first only villages, have become, in course of time, large towns, are usually but ill laid out compared with the regularity constructed towns which a professional architect has freely planned on an open plain; so that although the several buildings of the former may often equal or surpass in beauty those of the latter, yet when one observes their indiscriminate juxtaposition, there a large one and here a small, and the consequent crookedness and irregularity of the streets, one is disposed to allege that chance rather than any human will guided by reason must have led to such an arrangement. And if we consider that nevertheless there have been at all times certain officers whose duty it was to see that private buildings contributed to public ornament, the difficulty of reaching high perfection with but the materials of others to operate on, will be readily acknowledged. In the same way I fancied that those nations which, starting from a semi-barbarous state and advancing to civilization by slow degrees, have had their laws successively determined, and, as it were, forced upon them simply by experience of the hurtfulness of particular crimes and disputes, would by this process come to be possessed of less perfect institutions than those which, from the commencement of their association as communities, have followed the appointments of some wise legislator. It is thus quite certain that the constitution of the true religion, the ordinances of which are derived from God, must be incomparably superior to that of every other. And, to speak of human affairs, I believe that the pre-eminence of Sparta was due not to the goodness of each of its laws in particular, for many of these were very strange, and even opposed to good morals, but to the circumstance that, originated by a single individual, they all tended to a single end. In the same way I thought that the sciences contained in books (such of them at least as are made up of probable reasonings, without demonstrations), composed as they are of the opinions of many different individuals massed together, are farther removed from truth than the simple inferences which a man of good sense using his natural and unprejudiced judgment draws respecting the matters of his experience. And because we have all to pass through a state of infancy to manhood, and have been of necessity, for a length of time, governed by our desires and preceptors (whose dictates were frequently conflicting, while neither perhaps always counseled us for the best), I farther concluded that it is almost impossible that our judgments can be so correct or solid as they would have been, had our reason been mature from the moment of our birth, and had we always been guided by it alone.

I was in Germany, drawn there by the ongoing wars in that country, which have yet to come to an end. As I was returning to the army after the emperor's coronation, the arrival of winter detained me in a place where, finding no interesting company, and being fortunately free from worries or passions, I spent the whole day in solitude, fully able to focus on my own thoughts. One of the first thoughts that crossed my mind was that there is rarely so much perfection in works made up of many separate parts, done by different hands, as in those completed by a single master. It's noticeable that the buildings designed and built by one architect are generally more elegant and convenient than those that several have tried to improve by making old walls serve new purposes. Similarly, those ancient cities that started as villages and grew into large towns over time are often poorly laid out compared to the orderly towns that a professional architect has planned on an open plain. Even though the individual buildings in the former may often equal or surpass the beauty of those in the latter, when you see their random arrangement—some large, some small—and the resulting crookedness and irregularity of the streets, it’s easy to conclude that chance rather than reason guided such an arrangement. And considering that there have always been certain officials whose job it was to ensure that private buildings contributed to public beauty, it’s clear how difficult it is to achieve high perfection with just resources crafted by others. I also thought that those nations which started from a semi-barbaric state and gradually advanced to civilization, having their laws determined solely by the experience of the harmfulness of certain crimes and disputes, would end up with less perfect institutions than those that, from the start of their community, have followed the guidance of a wise legislator. It’s clear that the structure of true religion, whose ordinances come from God, must be vastly superior to that of any other. In discussing human affairs, I think Sparta's greatness stemmed not from the inherent quality of each of its laws—many of which were quite strange and even against good morals—but from the fact that, created by a single individual, all of them served a single purpose. I also believed that the sciences found in books (especially those based on probable reasoning rather than demonstrated truth), which draw from the opinions of many different people, are further from the truth than the simple conclusions a sensible person derives from their own natural and unbiased judgment about their experiences. Since we all go through a phase of childhood to adulthood and have, for a considerable time, been governed by our desires and teachers (whose teachings were often conflicting and not always in our best interest), I concluded that it is almost impossible for our judgments to be as correct or solid as they could have been if our reasoning had been fully developed from the moment we were born and had always guided us.

It is true, however, that it is not customary to pull down all the houses of a town with the single design of rebuilding them differently, and thereby rendering the streets more handsome; but it often happens that a private individual takes down his own with the view of erecting it anew, and that people are even sometimes constrained to this when their houses are in danger of falling from age, or when the foundations are insecure. With this before me by way of example, I was persuaded that it would indeed be preposterous for a private individual to think of reforming a state by fundamentally changing it throughout, and overturning it in order to set it up amended; and the same I thought was true of any similar project for reforming the body of the sciences, or the order of teaching them established in the schools: but as for the opinions which up to that time I had embraced, I thought that I could not do better than resolve at once to sweep them wholly away, that I might afterwards be in a position to admit either others more correct, or even perhaps the same when they had undergone the scrutiny of reason. I firmly believed that in this way I should much better succeed in the conduct of my life, than if I built only upon old foundations, and leaned upon principles which, in my youth, I had taken upon trust. For although I recognized various difficulties in this undertaking, these were not, however, without remedy, nor once to be compared with such as attend the slightest reformation in public affairs. Large bodies, if once overthrown, are with great difficulty set up again, or even kept erect when once seriously shaken, and the fall of such is always disastrous. Then if there are any imperfections in the constitutions of states (and that many such exist the diversity of constitutions is alone sufficient to assure us), custom has without doubt materially smoothed their inconveniences, and has even managed to steer altogether clear of, or insensibly corrected a number which sagacity could not have provided against with equal effect; and, in fine, the defects are almost always more tolerable than the change necessary for their removal; in the same manner that highways which wind among mountains, by being much frequented, become gradually so smooth and commodious, that it is much better to follow them than to seek a straighter path by climbing over the tops of rocks and descending to the bottoms of precipices.

It’s true that it's not common to tear down all the houses in a town just to rebuild them differently and make the streets look nicer; however, it often happens that a person demolishes their own house to build a new one, and sometimes people have to do this when their houses are at risk of collapsing due to age or unstable foundations. Keeping this in mind, I was convinced it would be ridiculous for an individual to think they could improve a state by completely changing it and overturning everything just to fix it. The same applies to any similar effort to reform the sciences or the way they are taught in schools. As for my previous opinions, I believed it was best to completely discard them so I could either accept more accurate ones or even reconsider the same ideas after critically examining them. I truly thought this approach would lead to a better way of living than if I relied only on old foundations and principles I had accepted without question in my youth. Even though I recognized that this undertaking had its challenges, they were not insurmountable and were nothing compared to the problems that come with even minor changes in public affairs. Large systems, once toppled, are hard to restore or even maintain after being seriously disturbed, and their collapse is always catastrophic. If there are flaws in political systems (and the wide variety of these systems proves that there are), custom has significantly mitigated their downsides, often managing to avoid or subtly correct many issues that common sense alone couldn’t effectively address. In short, the imperfections tend to be more bearable than the upheaval needed to fix them, much like winding mountain roads that, due to heavy use, become so smooth and convenient that it's better to follow them than to try to find a shortcut by climbing over rocky peaks and descending into deep valleys.

Hence it is that I cannot in any degree approve of those restless and busy meddlers who, called neither by birth nor fortune to take part in the management of public affairs, are yet always projecting reforms; and if I thought that this tract contained aught which might justify the suspicion that I was a victim of such folly, I would by no means permit its publication. I have never contemplated anything higher than the reformation of my own opinions, and basing them on a foundation wholly my own. And although my own satisfaction with my work has led me to present here a draft of it, I do not by any means therefore recommend to every one else to make a similar attempt. Those whom God has endowed with a larger measure of genius will entertain, perhaps, designs still more exalted; but for the many I am much afraid lest even the present undertaking be more than they can safely venture to imitate. The single design to strip one’s self of all past beliefs is one that ought not to be taken by every one. The majority of men is composed of two classes, for neither of which would this be at all a befitting resolution: in the first place, of those who with more than a due confidence in their own powers, are precipitate in their judgments and want the patience requisite for orderly and circumspect thinking; whence it happens, that if men of this class once take the liberty to doubt of their accustomed opinions, and quit the beaten highway, they will never be able to thread the byway that would lead them by a shorter course, and will lose themselves and continue to wander for life; in the second place, of those who, possessed of sufficient sense or modesty to determine that there are others who excel them in the power of discriminating between truth and error, and by whom they may be instructed, ought rather to content themselves with the opinions of such than trust for more correct to their own reason.

I can't agree with those restless busybodies who, without any natural or fortunate claim to manage public affairs, are always trying to push reforms. If I thought this piece suggested I fell victim to such foolishness, I wouldn't let it be published. I've never aimed higher than changing my own views and building them on my own solid foundations. Although I'm satisfied with my work enough to share it here, I don't recommend that everyone else try the same thing. Some people blessed with greater genius might have loftier goals, but for most, I'm worried that even this effort is something they shouldn’t attempt to emulate. Completely letting go of past beliefs isn’t a path for everyone. Most people fit into two categories, neither of which should choose this approach: first, those who overconfidently rush their judgments and lack the patience for careful, thoughtful analysis. If they start doubting their usual beliefs and wander off the beaten path, they won't find a better way and may get lost for life. Second, there are those who, with enough sense or humility, realize that others are better at distinguishing truth from error, and rather than relying on their own reasoning, they should be content to learn from those more knowledgeable.

For my own part, I should doubtless have belonged to the latter class, had I received instruction from but one master, or had I never known the diversities of opinion that from time immemorial have prevailed among men of the greatest learning. But I had become aware, even so early as during my college life, that no opinion, however absurd and incredible, can be imagined, which has not been maintained by some on of the philosophers; and afterwards in the course of my travels I remarked that all those whose opinions are decidedly repugnant to ours are not in that account barbarians and savages, but on the contrary that many of these nations make an equally good, if not better, use of their reason than we do. I took into account also the very different character which a person brought up from infancy in France or Germany exhibits, from that which, with the same mind originally, this individual would have possessed had he lived always among the Chinese or with savages, and the circumstance that in dress itself the fashion which pleased us ten years ago, and which may again, perhaps, be received into favor before ten years have gone, appears to us at this moment extravagant and ridiculous. I was thus led to infer that the ground of our opinions is far more custom and example than any certain knowledge. And, finally, although such be the ground of our opinions, I remarked that a plurality of suffrages is no guarantee of truth where it is at all of difficult discovery, as in such cases it is much more likely that it will be found by one than by many. I could, however, select from the crowd no one whose opinions seemed worthy of preference, and thus I found myself constrained, as it were, to use my own reason in the conduct of my life.

For my part, I would probably have fallen into the latter category if I had only learned from one teacher or if I had never encountered the different opinions that have existed among highly knowledgeable people throughout history. But I realized, even during my college years, that no matter how absurd or unbelievable, there’s always been someone among the philosophers who has held that opinion; and later during my travels, I noticed that those whose beliefs strongly contradict ours are not necessarily barbarians or savages. In fact, many of these cultures use their reasoning just as well, if not better, than we do. I also considered the completely different character of a person raised from childhood in France or Germany compared to what that same person would have been like if they had always lived among the Chinese or in a tribal community. Even the fashion we found appealing a decade ago, which may come back into style in another ten years, seems extravagant and ridiculous to us right now. This led me to conclude that the basis of our opinions is more about custom and imitation than any kind of definitive knowledge. Lastly, even though that’s the foundation of our beliefs, I noticed that a variety of opinions doesn’t guarantee the truth, especially when it’s hard to discover; in those cases, it's much more likely that one person will find the truth than many. However, I couldn’t find anyone in the crowd whose opinions stood out as preferable, and so I felt compelled, in a way, to rely on my own reasoning in how I led my life.

But like one walking alone and in the dark, I resolved to proceed so slowly and with such circumspection, that if I did not advance far, I would at least guard against falling. I did not even choose to dismiss summarily any of the opinions that had crept into my belief without having been introduced by reason, but first of all took sufficient time carefully to satisfy myself of the general nature of the task I was setting myself, and ascertain the true method by which to arrive at the knowledge of whatever lay within the compass of my powers.

But like someone walking alone in the dark, I decided to move slowly and carefully, so that even if I didn’t get far, I would at least avoid falling. I didn't just dismiss any of the beliefs that had slipped in without being questioned by reason. Instead, I took the time to understand the overall nature of the task I was setting for myself and figure out the best way to gain knowledge about what I was capable of understanding.

Among the branches of philosophy, I had, at an earlier period, given some attention to logic, and among those of the mathematics to geometrical analysis and algebra,--three arts or sciences which ought, as I conceived, to contribute something to my design. But, on examination, I found that, as for logic, its syllogisms and the majority of its other precepts are of avail--rather in the communication of what we already know, or even as the art of Lully, in speaking without judgment of things of which we are ignorant, than in the investigation of the unknown; and although this science contains indeed a number of correct and very excellent precepts, there are, nevertheless, so many others, and these either injurious or superfluous, mingled with the former, that it is almost quite as difficult to effect a severance of the true from the false as it is to extract a Diana or a Minerva from a rough block of marble. Then as to the analysis of the ancients and the algebra of the moderns, besides that they embrace only matters highly abstract, and, to appearance, of no use, the former is so exclusively restricted to the consideration of figures, that it can exercise the understanding only on condition of greatly fatiguing the imagination; and, in the latter, there is so complete a subjection to certain rules and formulas, that there results an art full of confusion and obscurity calculated to embarrass, instead of a science fitted to cultivate the mind. By these considerations I was induced to seek some other method which would comprise the advantages of the three and be exempt from their defects. And as a multitude of laws often only hampers justice, so that a state is best governed when, with few laws, these are rigidly administered; in like manner, instead of the great number of precepts of which logic is composed, I believed that the four following would prove perfectly sufficient for me, provided I took the firm and unwavering resolution never in a single instance to fail in observing them.

In the field of philosophy, I previously focused on logic, and in mathematics, I looked into geometry and algebra—three disciplines that I thought would help with my project. However, upon closer inspection, I realized that logic, with its syllogisms and most of its other principles, is more useful for communicating what we already know or, like Lully's art, talking about things we don't understand, rather than exploring the unknown. While this field has many valid and excellent principles, there are just as many that are either harmful or unnecessary mixed in, making it almost as challenging to separate the true from the false as it is to carve a figure like Diana or Minerva from a rough piece of marble. As for the analysis of ancient scholars and modern algebra, they deal with abstract concepts that seem useless; the former is so focused on figures that it can only engage the mind by exhausting the imagination, while the latter is so bound by strict rules and formulas that it becomes a confusing and obscure practice that complicates rather than enriches the mind. These thoughts led me to look for a different approach that would capture the benefits of the three fields while avoiding their shortcomings. Just as having too many laws can hinder justice, making a state best governed with few laws strictly enforced, I believed that instead of the numerous principles of logic, the following four would be fully sufficient for me, as long as I made a firm and resolute commitment never to neglect them.

The first was never to accept anything for true which I did not clearly know to be such; that is to say, carefully to avoid precipitancy and prejudice, and to comprise nothing more in my judgement than what was presented to my mind so clearly and distinctly as to exclude all ground of doubt.

The first rule was to never accept anything as true unless I clearly understood it; in other words, to be careful to avoid rushing to conclusions and biases, and to include in my judgment only what was presented to me so clearly and distinctly that it left no room for doubt.

The second, to divide each of the difficulties under examination into as many parts as possible, and as might be necessary for its adequate solution.

The second is to break down each of the difficulties being examined into as many parts as needed for a proper solution.

The third, to conduct my thoughts in such order that, by commencing with objects the simplest and easiest to know, I might ascend by little and little, and, as it were, step by step, to the knowledge of the more complex; assigning in thought a certain order even to those objects which in their own nature do not stand in a relation of antecedence and sequence.

The third was to organize my thoughts in a way that started with the simplest and easiest things to understand, allowing me to gradually and systematically move toward understanding the more complex ones; I aimed to assign a specific order in my mind even to those objects that don't naturally follow each other.

And the last, in every case to make enumerations so complete, and reviews so general, that I might be assured that nothing was omitted.

And the last, in every case to make lists so thorough, and reviews so broad, that I could be sure that nothing was left out.

The long chains of simple and easy reasonings by means of which geometers are accustomed to reach the conclusions of their most difficult demonstrations, had led me to imagine that all things, to the knowledge of which man is competent, are mutually connected in the same way, and that there is nothing so far removed from us as to be beyond our reach, or so hidden that we cannot discover it, provided only we abstain from accepting the false for the true, and always preserve in our thoughts the order necessary for the deduction of one truth from another. And I had little difficulty in determining the objects with which it was necessary to commence, for I was already persuaded that it must be with the simplest and easiest to know, and, considering that of all those who have hitherto sought truth in the sciences, the mathematicians alone have been able to find any demonstrations, that is, any certain and evident reasons, I did not doubt but that such must have been the rule of their investigations. I resolved to commence, therefore, with the examination of the simplest objects, not anticipating, however, from this any other advantage than that to be found in accustoming my mind to the love and nourishment of truth, and to a distaste for all such reasonings as were unsound. But I had no intention on that account of attempting to master all the particular sciences commonly denominated mathematics: but observing that, however different their objects, they all agree in considering only the various relations or proportions subsisting among those objects, I thought it best for my purpose to consider these proportions in the most general form possible, without referring them to any objects in particular, except such as would most facilitate the knowledge of them, and without by any means restricting them to these, that afterwards I might thus be the better able to apply them to every other class of objects to which they are legitimately applicable. Perceiving further, that in order to understand these relations I should sometimes have to consider them one by one and sometimes only to bear them in mind, or embrace them in the aggregate, I thought that, in order the better to consider them individually, I should view them as subsisting between straight lines, than which I could find no objects more simple, or capable of being more distinctly represented to my imagination and senses; and on the other hand, that in order to retain them in the memory or embrace an aggregate of many, I should express them by certain characters the briefest possible. In this way I believed that I could borrow all that was best both in geometrical analysis and in algebra, and correct all the defects of the one by help of the other.

The long chains of simple and straightforward reasoning that geometers use to draw conclusions in their most complex proofs made me think that everything within human understanding is interconnected in the same way. There’s nothing so distant from us that we can’t reach it, or so concealed that we can’t uncover it, as long as we avoid mistaking falsehood for truth and maintain the necessary order in our thoughts to deduce one truth from another. Figuring out where to start was easy, as I was already convinced that it should be with the simplest and easiest things to understand. Noting that among all who have sought truth in the sciences, only mathematicians have found solid proofs—clear and definitive reasons—I believed that this must have been their guiding principle. Therefore, I decided to start by examining the simplest objects, not expecting to gain anything beyond training my mind to appreciate and seek out truth, while developing a dislike for flawed reasoning. I didn’t plan to master all the specific branches typically labeled mathematics. However, I observed that despite their different focuses, all these fields emphasize the various relationships or proportions among those objects. I thought it best to examine these proportions in the most general way possible, without tying them to any specific objects, except those that would make them easier to understand. I also didn’t want to limit myself to those, so I could later apply them to every other category they properly relate to. Additionally, since understanding these relationships would sometimes require me to look at them individually and sometimes just keep them in mind collectively, I figured it would help to view them as existing between straight lines. I couldn’t imagine simpler objects, or ones that could be represented more clearly in my mind and senses. Meanwhile, to remember them or grasp a collection of many, I would use the shortest possible symbols. This approach would allow me to take the best of both geometric analysis and algebra, and use one to correct the shortcomings of the other.

And, in point of fact, the accurate observance of these few precepts gave me, I take the liberty of saying, such ease in unraveling all the questions embraced in these two sciences, that in the two or three months I devoted to their examination, not only did I reach solutions of questions I had formerly deemed exceedingly difficult but even as regards questions of the solution of which I continued ignorant, I was enabled, as it appeared to me, to determine the means whereby, and the extent to which a solution was possible; results attributable to the circumstance that I commenced with the simplest and most general truths, and that thus each truth discovered was a rule available in the discovery of subsequent ones Nor in this perhaps shall I appear too vain, if it be considered that, as the truth on any particular point is one whoever apprehends the truth, knows all that on that point can be known. The child, for example, who has been instructed in the elements of arithmetic, and has made a particular addition, according to rule, may be assured that he has found, with respect to the sum of the numbers before him, and that in this instance is within the reach of human genius. Now, in conclusion, the method which teaches adherence to the true order, and an exact enumeration of all the conditions of the thing sought includes all that gives certitude to the rules of arithmetic.

And actually, following these few guidelines gave me, if I may say so, such ease in figuring out all the questions in these two subjects that in the two or three months I spent studying them, I not only found answers to questions I had previously thought were extremely difficult, but even regarding questions I still didn’t understand, I felt like I could identify the ways and the extent to which a solution was possible. These results were due to the fact that I started with the simplest and most general truths, meaning each truth I discovered served as a guideline for finding later ones. I hope I don’t come off as too arrogant if I point out that since the truth on any particular subject is singular, anyone who understands the truth knows everything that can be known about that subject. For instance, a child who has learned the basics of arithmetic and has performed a particular addition correctly can be confident that they've figured out the sum of the numbers in front of them, which is achievable through human intellect. Lastly, the method that emphasizes following the correct order and a precise counting of all the factors involved in finding what’s sought encompasses everything that provides certainty to the rules of arithmetic.

But the chief ground of my satisfaction with thus method, was the assurance I had of thereby exercising my reason in all matters, if not with absolute perfection, at least with the greatest attainable by me: besides, I was conscious that by its use my mind was becoming gradually habituated to clearer and more distinct conceptions of its objects; and I hoped also, from not having restricted this method to any particular matter, to apply it to the difficulties of the other sciences, with not less success than to those of algebra. I should not, however, on this account have ventured at once on the examination of all the difficulties of the sciences which presented themselves to me, for this would have been contrary to the order prescribed in the method, but observing that the knowledge of such is dependent on principles borrowed from philosophy, in which I found nothing certain, I thought it necessary first of all to endeavor to establish its principles. And because I observed, besides, that an inquiry of this kind was of all others of the greatest moment, and one in which precipitancy and anticipation in judgment were most to be dreaded, I thought that I ought not to approach it till I had reached a more mature age (being at that time but twenty-three), and had first of all employed much of my time in preparation for the work, as well by eradicating from my mind all the erroneous opinions I had up to that moment accepted, as by amassing variety of experience to afford materials for my reasonings, and by continually exercising myself in my chosen method with a view to increased skill in its application.

But the main reason I was satisfied with this method was the confidence I had in exercising my reasoning in all matters, if not with absolute perfection, then at least with the best I could manage. Additionally, I noticed that using this method was helping my mind gradually get used to clearer and more distinct ideas about its subjects. I also hoped that by not limiting this method to any specific topic, I could apply it to the challenges of other sciences with just as much success as I did with algebra. However, I wouldn't have rushed into examining all the scientific difficulties that came to my mind right away, as that would go against the order laid out in the method. Instead, I recognized that understanding such issues relies on principles taken from philosophy, where I found nothing certain. So, I felt it was necessary to first try to establish those principles. Moreover, I realized that this kind of inquiry was particularly important, and that rushing or making hasty judgments would be a mistake, so I decided to wait until I was a bit older (as I was only twenty-three at the time) and to spend a lot of time preparing for the work—by clearing my mind of all the incorrect beliefs I had accepted up until then, gathering a variety of experiences to provide material for my reasoning, and continually practicing my chosen method to improve my skills in applying it.

PART III

And finally, as it is not enough, before commencing to rebuild the house in which we live, that it be pulled down, and materials and builders provided, or that we engage in the work ourselves, according to a plan which we have beforehand carefully drawn out, but as it is likewise necessary that we be furnished with some other house in which we may live commodiously during the operations, so that I might not remain irresolute in my actions, while my reason compelled me to suspend my judgement, and that I might not be prevented from living thenceforward in the greatest possible felicity, I formed a provisory code of morals, composed of three or four maxims, with which I am desirous to make you acquainted.

And finally, as if that weren't enough, before I start rebuilding the house we live in, it's not only necessary to tear it down and gather materials and builders, or to take on the work ourselves based on a plan we've carefully laid out beforehand, but it's also essential that we have another place to live comfortably during the process. This way, I won’t be stuck feeling indecisive while I need to hold off my judgement, and I won’t be hindered from living my best life moving forward. So, I came up with a temporary set of moral guidelines made up of three or four principles that I want to share with you.

The first was to obey the laws and customs of my country, adhering firmly to the faith in which, by the grace of God, I had been educated from my childhood and regulating my conduct in every other matter according to the most moderate opinions, and the farthest removed from extremes, which should happen to be adopted in practice with general consent of the most judicious of those among whom I might be living. For as I had from that time begun to hold my own opinions for nought because I wished to subject them all to examination, I was convinced that I could not do better than follow in the meantime the opinions of the most judicious; and although there are some perhaps among the Persians and Chinese as judicious as among ourselves, expediency seemed to dictate that I should regulate my practice conformably to the opinions of those with whom I should have to live; and it appeared to me that, in order to ascertain the real opinions of such, I ought rather to take cognizance of what they practised than of what they said, not only because, in the corruption of our manners, there are few disposed to speak exactly as they believe, but also because very many are not aware of what it is that they really believe; for, as the act of mind by which a thing is believed is different from that by which we know that we believe it, the one act is often found without the other. Also, amid many opinions held in equal repute, I chose always the most moderate, as much for the reason that these are always the most convenient for practice, and probably the best (for all excess is generally vicious), as that, in the event of my falling into error, I might be at less distance from the truth than if, having chosen one of the extremes, it should turn out to be the other which I ought to have adopted. And I placed in the class of extremes especially all promises by which somewhat of our freedom is abridged; not that I disapproved of the laws which, to provide against the instability of men of feeble resolution, when what is sought to be accomplished is some good, permit engagements by vows and contracts binding the parties to persevere in it, or even, for the security of commerce, sanction similar engagements where the purpose sought to be realized is indifferent: but because I did not find anything on earth which was wholly superior to change, and because, for myself in particular, I hoped gradually to perfect my judgments, and not to suffer them to deteriorate, I would have deemed it a grave sin against good sense, if, for the reason that I approved of something at a particular time, I therefore bound myself to hold it for good at a subsequent time, when perhaps it had ceased to be so, or I had ceased to esteem it such.

The first was to follow the laws and customs of my country, sticking firmly to the beliefs in which, by the grace of God, I had been raised since childhood, and managing my behavior in every other aspect according to the most reasonable views and those farthest from extremes, which were generally accepted by the wisest people among whom I lived. Since I had started to regard my own opinions as insignificant because I wanted to examine them all, I believed that I could do no better than follow the views of the wisest people for the time being; and while there may be some among the Persians and Chinese who are as wise as those in my community, it seemed practical to align my actions with the opinions of those I would be living with. It also seemed to me that, to understand the true beliefs of such people, I should pay more attention to what they practiced than to what they said, not only because, in a world where values are corrupted, few are willing to speak exactly what they believe, but also because many do not even realize what they actually believe; since the mental act of believing something is different from the act of knowing that we believe it, one act often exists without the other. Furthermore, among many equally regarded opinions, I always chose the most moderate ones, not only because they are usually the most practical and probably the best (as any extreme is generally harmful) but also because, if I were to err, I would be closer to the truth than if I had chosen one of the extremes, which might turn out to be the opposite of what I should have chosen. I specifically categorized all promises that restrict our freedom as extremes; not that I disapproved of laws designed to prevent instability in people with weak resolve when pursuing a good outcome, which allow for commitments through vows and contracts binding the parties to stick with it, or even, for business security, similar commitments when the goal is neutral: but because I found nothing in this world that was entirely above change, and because, especially for myself, I hoped to gradually improve my judgments and not let them decline, I would consider it a serious lapse in judgment if, just because I approved of something at a certain time, I was then bound to see it as good at a later time, when it might have stopped being so, or when I had stopped valuing it as such.

My second maxim was to be as firm and resolute in my actions as I was able, and not to adhere less steadfastly to the most doubtful opinions, when once adopted, than if they had been highly certain; imitating in this the example of travelers who, when they have lost their way in a forest, ought not to wander from side to side, far less remain in one place, but proceed constantly towards the same side in as straight a line as possible, without changing their direction for slight reasons, although perhaps it might be chance alone which at first determined the selection; for in this way, if they do not exactly reach the point they desire, they will come at least in the end to some place that will probably be preferable to the middle of a forest. In the same way, since in action it frequently happens that no delay is permissible, it is very certain that, when it is not in our power to determine what is true, we ought to act according to what is most probable; and even although we should not remark a greater probability in one opinion than in another, we ought notwithstanding to choose one or the other, and afterwards consider it, in so far as it relates to practice, as no longer dubious, but manifestly true and certain, since the reason by which our choice has been determined is itself possessed of these qualities. This principle was sufficient thenceforward to rid me of all those repentings and pangs of remorse that usually disturb the consciences of such feeble and uncertain minds as, destitute of any clear and determinate principle of choice, allow themselves one day to adopt a course of action as the best, which they abandon the next, as the opposite.

My second principle was to be as firm and determined in my actions as possible, and not to stick to questionable opinions any less firmly once I adopted them than if they were completely certain; I took inspiration from travelers who, when they lose their way in a forest, should not drift from side to side, much less stay in one spot, but should keep going in a straight line towards one side, without changing direction for minor reasons, even if their initial choice was made by chance. This way, if they don’t reach their exact destination, they will at least end up somewhere better than the middle of a forest. Similarly, since in action it often happens that we can't afford to wait, it’s clear that when we can't determine what is true, we should act according to what seems most probable; and even if we don’t notice a greater probability in one opinion over another, we should still choose one and treat it, in terms of action, as if it were no longer uncertain but clearly true and certain, because the reason behind our choice has those qualities. This principle was enough to free me from all the regrets and pangs of conscience that usually trouble weak and uncertain minds, which, lacking a clear and definite principle of choice, allow themselves one day to adopt one course of action as the best, only to abandon it the next for the opposite.

My third maxim was to endeavor always to conquer myself rather than fortune, and change my desires rather than the order of the world, and in general, accustom myself to the persuasion that, except our own thoughts, there is nothing absolutely in our power; so that when we have done our best in things external to us, all wherein we fail of success is to be held, as regards us, absolutely impossible: and this single principle seemed to me sufficient to prevent me from desiring for the future anything which I could not obtain, and thus render me contented; for since our will naturally seeks those objects alone which the understanding represents as in some way possible of attainment, it is plain, that if we consider all external goods as equally beyond our power, we shall no more regret the absence of such goods as seem due to our birth, when deprived of them without any fault of ours, than our not possessing the kingdoms of China or Mexico, and thus making, so to speak, a virtue of necessity, we shall no more desire health in disease, or freedom in imprisonment, than we now do bodies incorruptible as diamonds, or the wings of birds to fly with. But I confess there is need of prolonged discipline and frequently repeated meditation to accustom the mind to view all objects in this light; and I believe that in this chiefly consisted the secret of the power of such philosophers as in former times were enabled to rise superior to the influence of fortune, and, amid suffering and poverty, enjoy a happiness which their gods might have envied. For, occupied incessantly with the consideration of the limits prescribed to their power by nature, they became so entirely convinced that nothing was at their disposal except their own thoughts, that this conviction was of itself sufficient to prevent their entertaining any desire of other objects; and over their thoughts they acquired a sway so absolute, that they had some ground on this account for esteeming themselves more rich and more powerful, more free and more happy, than other men who, whatever be the favors heaped on them by nature and fortune, if destitute of this philosophy, can never command the realization of all their desires.

My third principle was to always strive to control myself instead of my circumstances, and to adjust my desires rather than trying to change the world. In general, I trained myself to believe that, aside from our own thoughts, nothing is truly within our control. So, once we've done our best with external matters, anything we fail to achieve should be considered, in relation to us, completely impossible. This simple idea seemed enough to stop me from wanting anything that I couldn’t have, and it helped me feel content; because our will naturally seeks only those things that we understand to be somewhat attainable, it’s clear that if we view all external goods as equally out of reach, we won’t regret the absence of things we feel entitled to due to our birth—when we lose them through no fault of our own—any more than we would long for the kingdoms of China or Mexico. By doing this, we can make the best of what we have, meaning we won’t yearn for health when we're sick or freedom when we're imprisoned, just as we don’t wish for bodies that can’t decay like diamonds or wings to fly. However, I admit it requires a lot of practice and reflection to train the mind to see everything this way. I believe this is largely the secret behind the strength of philosophers from the past who managed to rise above the whims of fortune and find happiness amidst hardship and poverty that even their gods might have envied. Constantly focusing on the limitations set by nature, they became wholly convinced that nothing was under their control except their own thoughts. This belief alone was enough to eliminate any longing for other things. They gained such complete mastery over their thoughts that they had grounds to consider themselves richer, more powerful, freer, and happier than others who, regardless of the blessings showered upon them by nature and fortune, if lacking this philosophy, could never fully achieve all their desires.

In fine, to conclude this code of morals, I thought of reviewing the different occupations of men in this life, with the view of making choice of the best. And, without wishing to offer any remarks on the employments of others, I may state that it was my conviction that I could not do better than continue in that in which I was engaged, viz., in devoting my whole life to the culture of my reason, and in making the greatest progress I was able in the knowledge of truth, on the principles of the method which I had prescribed to myself. This method, from the time I had begun to apply it, had been to me the source of satisfaction so intense as to lead me to, believe that more perfect or more innocent could not be enjoyed in this life; and as by its means I daily discovered truths that appeared to me of some importance, and of which other men were generally ignorant, the gratification thence arising so occupied my mind that I was wholly indifferent to every other object. Besides, the three preceding maxims were founded singly on the design of continuing the work of self-instruction. For since God has endowed each of us with some light of reason by which to distinguish truth from error, I could not have believed that I ought for a single moment to rest satisfied with the opinions of another, unless I had resolved to exercise my own judgment in examining these whenever I should be duly qualified for the task. Nor could I have proceeded on such opinions without scruple, had I supposed that I should thereby forfeit any advantage for attaining still more accurate, should such exist. And, in fine, I could not have restrained my desires, nor remained satisfied had I not followed a path in which I thought myself certain of attaining all the knowledge to the acquisition of which I was competent, as well as the largest amount of what is truly good which I could ever hope to secure Inasmuch as we neither seek nor shun any object except in so far as our understanding represents it as good or bad, all that is necessary to right action is right judgment, and to the best action the most correct judgment, that is, to the acquisition of all the virtues with all else that is truly valuable and within our reach; and the assurance of such an acquisition cannot fail to render us contented.

To wrap up this moral code, I reflected on the various professions people engage in throughout life to determine which might be the best. Without intending to critique others' jobs, I believe I couldn't do better than to continue with my current path, which was to dedicate my life to sharpening my reasoning skills and making as much progress as possible in understanding the truth according to the method I had established for myself. This method has brought me such deep satisfaction since I started using it that I felt there couldn't be anything more complete or innocent to experience in life. Additionally, because I discovered truths that seemed significant to me, and that most people were unaware of, the joy it brought me occupied my thoughts so much that I became indifferent to everything else. Furthermore, the three previous principles were solely aimed at continuing my journey of self-education. Since God has granted each of us a spark of reason to distinguish between truth and error, I couldn't accept relying on someone else's opinions for even a moment unless I committed to using my own judgment to evaluate them when I was ready. Nor could I follow such opinions without hesitation, believing that I would miss the chance to discover even more accurate ones, if they existed. Ultimately, I couldn't have suppressed my desires or found contentment unless I pursued a path where I was confident I could gain all the knowledge I was capable of, as well as the most substantial good I could hope to achieve. Since we only seek or avoid things based on our understanding of them as good or bad, right action requires sound judgment, and the best actions demand the most accurate judgments, leading to the acquisition of all virtues and everything truly valuable within our grasp; the certainty of such attainment surely brings us contentment.

Having thus provided myself with these maxims, and having placed them in reserve along with the truths of faith, which have ever occupied the first place in my belief, I came to the conclusion that I might with freedom set about ridding myself of what remained of my opinions. And, inasmuch as I hoped to be better able successfully to accomplish this work by holding intercourse with mankind, than by remaining longer shut up in the retirement where these thoughts had occurred to me, I betook me again to traveling before the winter was well ended. And, during the nine subsequent years, I did nothing but roam from one place to another, desirous of being a spectator rather than an actor in the plays exhibited on the theater of the world; and, as I made it my business in each matter to reflect particularly upon what might fairly be doubted and prove a source of error, I gradually rooted out from my mind all the errors which had hitherto crept into it. Not that in this I imitated the sceptics who doubt only that they may doubt, and seek nothing beyond uncertainty itself; for, on the contrary, my design was singly to find ground of assurance, and cast aside the loose earth and sand, that I might reach the rock or the clay. In this, as appears to me, I was successful enough; for, since I endeavored to discover the falsehood or incertitude of the propositions I examined, not by feeble conjectures, but by clear and certain reasonings, I met with nothing so doubtful as not to yield some conclusion of adequate certainty, although this were merely the inference, that the matter in question contained nothing certain. And, just as in pulling down an old house, we usually reserve the ruins to contribute towards the erection, so, in destroying such of my opinions as I judged to be Ill-founded, I made a variety of observations and acquired an amount of experience of which I availed myself in the establishment of more certain. And further, I continued to exercise myself in the method I had prescribed; for, besides taking care in general to conduct all my thoughts according to its rules, I reserved some hours from time to time which I expressly devoted to the employment of the method in the solution of mathematical difficulties, or even in the solution likewise of some questions belonging to other sciences, but which, by my having detached them from such principles of these sciences as were of inadequate certainty, were rendered almost mathematical: the truth of this will be manifest from the numerous examples contained in this volume. And thus, without in appearance living otherwise than those who, with no other occupation than that of spending their lives agreeably and innocently, study to sever pleasure from vice, and who, that they may enjoy their leisure without ennui, have recourse to such pursuits as are honorable, I was nevertheless prosecuting my design, and making greater progress in the knowledge of truth, than I might, perhaps, have made had I been engaged in the perusal of books merely, or in holding converse with men of letters.

After gathering these principles and keeping them alongside the fundamental truths of faith that have always been central to my beliefs, I concluded that I could freely work on discarding the remaining opinions I held. I believed I would be more successful in this task by interacting with others rather than staying isolated in the place where I'd come up with these thoughts, so I set off traveling again before winter was fully over. Over the next nine years, I roamed from one place to another, wanting to be an observer instead of an actor in the world’s drama. As I reflected on what could be reasonably doubted and what might lead to error, I gradually cleared my mind of the misconceptions that had built up over time. Unlike skeptics who doubt for the sake of doubt and seek nothing beyond uncertainty, my goal was to find solid ground and discard the loose soil and sand to reach something reliable like rock or clay. I felt I was fairly successful in this because, while trying to discover the falsehood or uncertainty in the ideas I examined—not through weak guesses, but through clear and certain logic—I found nothing so uncertain that it didn't lead to some conclusion with enough certainty, even if that conclusion was simply that the issue at hand had no certainties. Just as when tearing down an old building we often save the ruins to use in construction, in dismantling the opinions I deemed misguided, I gathered various observations and experiences that I later used to establish more certain beliefs. I also continued practicing the method I had developed; besides generally directing all my thoughts according to its rules, I set aside time occasionally to specifically focus on using the method for solving mathematical problems or some questions from other sciences, which, by removing them from the less certain principles of those sciences, became nearly mathematical: the truth of this is demonstrated through the numerous examples in this volume. Thus, while I seemed to live like those who occupy themselves solely with enjoying their lives and separating pleasure from vice, engaging in honorable pursuits to avoid boredom, I was nonetheless advancing my quest for knowledge of truth more than I might have if I had been only reading books or conversing with scholars.

These nine years passed away, however, before I had come to any determinate judgment respecting the difficulties which form matter of dispute among the learned, or had commenced to seek the principles of any philosophy more certain than the vulgar. And the examples of many men of the highest genius, who had, in former times, engaged in this inquiry, but, as appeared to me, without success, led me to imagine it to be a work of so much difficulty, that I would not perhaps have ventured on it so soon had I not heard it currently rumored that I had already completed the inquiry. I know not what were the grounds of this opinion; and, if my conversation contributed in any measure to its rise, this must have happened rather from my having confessed my Ignorance with greater freedom than those are accustomed to do who have studied a little, and expounded perhaps, the reasons that led me to doubt of many of those things that by others are esteemed certain, than from my having boasted of any system of philosophy. But, as I am of a disposition that makes me unwilling to be esteemed different from what I really am, I thought it necessary to endeavor by all means to render myself worthy of the reputation accorded to me; and it is now exactly eight years since this desire constrained me to remove from all those places where interruption from any of my acquaintances was possible, and betake myself to this country, in which the long duration of the war has led to the establishment of such discipline, that the armies maintained seem to be of use only in enabling the inhabitants to enjoy more securely the blessings of peace and where, in the midst of a great crowd actively engaged in business, and more careful of their own affairs than curious about those of others, I have been enabled to live without being deprived of any of the conveniences to be had in the most populous cities, and yet as solitary and as retired as in the midst of the most remote deserts.

These nine years went by before I reached any clear judgment about the difficulties that scholars dispute over, or began to look for principles of any philosophy more certain than common beliefs. The examples of many brilliant individuals from the past who tried to tackle this issue, but, in my opinion, did so without success, made me think it was such a tough task that I might not have dared to take it on so soon if I hadn’t heard rumors that I had already completed the inquiry. I don’t know what led to that belief; if my conversations played any role in it, it would have been more because I openly admitted my ignorance in a way that those who have studied a bit don’t usually do, and maybe explained why I doubted many things that others consider certain, rather than boasting about any philosophical system. However, since I’m naturally inclined to be honest about who I really am, I felt the need to try to live up to the reputation that was given to me. It’s been exactly eight years since this desire pushed me to distance myself from places where interruptions from acquaintances were possible and settle in this country, where the long duration of war has established a kind of order that makes it seem like the armies exist only to allow the residents to enjoy the blessings of peace more securely. Here, in the midst of a bustling crowd focused on their own affairs rather than being curious about others', I’ve been able to live without missing any conveniences you’d find in the most populated cities, yet I feel as solitary and as secluded as if I were in the most remote deserts.

PART IV

I am in doubt as to the propriety of making my first meditations in the place above mentioned matter of discourse; for these are so metaphysical, and so uncommon, as not, perhaps, to be acceptable to every one. And yet, that it may be determined whether the foundations that I have laid are sufficiently secure, I find myself in a measure constrained to advert to them. I had long before remarked that, in relation to practice, it is sometimes necessary to adopt, as if above doubt, opinions which we discern to be highly uncertain, as has been already said; but as I then desired to give my attention solely to the search after truth, I thought that a procedure exactly the opposite was called for, and that I ought to reject as absolutely false all opinions in regard to which I could suppose the least ground for doubt, in order to ascertain whether after that there remained aught in my belief that was wholly indubitable. Accordingly, seeing that our senses sometimes deceive us, I was willing to suppose that there existed nothing really such as they presented to us; and because some men err in reasoning, and fall into paralogisms, even on the simplest matters of geometry, I, convinced that I was as open to error as any other, rejected as false all the reasonings I had hitherto taken for demonstrations; and finally, when I considered that the very same thoughts (presentations) which we experience when awake may also be experienced when we are asleep, while there is at that time not one of them true, I supposed that all the objects (presentations) that had ever entered into my mind when awake, had in them no more truth than the illusions of my dreams. But immediately upon this I observed that, whilst I thus wished to think that all was false, it was absolutely necessary that I, who thus thought, should be somewhat; and as I observed that this truth, I think, therefore I am (COGITO ERGO SUM), was so certain and of such evidence that no ground of doubt, however extravagant, could be alleged by the sceptics capable of shaking it, I concluded that I might, without scruple, accept it as the first principle of the philosophy of which I was in search.

I'm unsure about the appropriateness of discussing my initial thoughts in the previously mentioned place; they are so philosophical and unusual that they might not be accepted by everyone. Still, to determine whether the foundations I've laid are solid, I feel somewhat compelled to mention them. I had noticed before that in practice, it’s sometimes necessary to adopt opinions that we know to be very uncertain, as mentioned earlier. However, since I wanted to focus entirely on finding the truth, I felt that the opposite approach was required. I decided to reject all opinions for which I could imagine even the slightest doubt, to see if anything in my beliefs remained completely certain. Therefore, recognizing that our senses can deceive us, I was willing to assume that nothing truly exists as presented to us by our senses. And since some people make mistakes in reasoning and fall into errors even about the simplest concepts in geometry, I, recognizing that I could be just as prone to error as anyone else, rejected as false all the reasoning I had previously accepted as demonstrations. Eventually, I realized that the very same thoughts we have when we're awake can also occur when we’re asleep, and none of those thoughts hold any truth when we dream. So, I assumed that all the things I ever experienced when awake had no more truth than the illusions of my dreams. However, I quickly noticed that while I wanted to believe everything was false, it was absolutely necessary for me, the thinker, to exist in some form. I realized that the statement "I think, therefore I am" (COGITO ERGO SUM) was so certain and evident that no matter how far-fetched the skeptics' doubts might be, they couldn't undermine it. I concluded that I could accept this as the foundational principle of the philosophy I was seeking.

In the next place, I attentively examined what I was and as I observed that I could suppose that I had no body, and that there was no world nor any place in which I might be; but that I could not therefore suppose that I was not; and that, on the contrary, from the very circumstance that I thought to doubt of the truth of other things, it most clearly and certainly followed that I was; while, on the other hand, if I had only ceased to think, although all the other objects which I had ever imagined had been in reality existent, I would have had no reason to believe that I existed; I thence concluded that I was a substance whose whole essence or nature consists only in thinking, and which, that it may exist, has need of no place, nor is dependent on any material thing; so that “I,” that is to say, the mind by which I am what I am, is wholly distinct from the body, and is even more easily known than the latter, and is such, that although the latter were not, it would still continue to be all that it is.

Next, I carefully examined who I was, and as I noticed that I could imagine I had no body, and that there was no world or place where I could be, I realized I couldn't therefore assume that I didn't exist. In fact, the very act of doubting the truth of other things made it clear and certain that I did exist. On the flip side, if I stopped thinking entirely, even if everything I ever imagined was real, I would have no reason to believe that I existed. From this, I concluded that I was a substance whose entire essence or nature consists solely in thinking, and that, to exist, it doesn’t require a place or depend on anything material. Thus, “I,” which means the mind that makes me who I am, is completely separate from the body and is even easier to understand than the body. In fact, even if the body didn’t exist, the mind would still be exactly what it is.

After this I inquired in general into what is essential to the truth and certainty of a proposition; for since I had discovered one which I knew to be true, I thought that I must likewise be able to discover the ground of this certitude. And as I observed that in the words I think, therefore I am, there is nothing at all which gives me assurance of their truth beyond this, that I see very clearly that in order to think it is necessary to exist, I concluded that I might take, as a general rule, the principle, that all the things which we very clearly and distinctly conceive are true, only observing, however, that there is some difficulty in rightly determining the objects which we distinctly conceive.

After this, I asked broadly about what is essential for the truth and certainty of a statement. Since I had found one that I knew to be true, I thought I should also be able to identify the basis of this certainty. As I noticed that in the phrase "I think, therefore I am," there is nothing that assures me of its truth other than the clear understanding that to think, one must exist, I concluded that I could adopt, as a general rule, the principle that everything we clearly and distinctly conceive is true, while also noting that there is some challenge in correctly identifying the objects we distinctly conceive.

In the next place, from reflecting on the circumstance that I doubted, and that consequently my being was not wholly perfect (for I clearly saw that it was a greater perfection to know than to doubt), I was led to inquire whence I had learned to think of something more perfect than myself; and I clearly recognized that I must hold this notion from some nature which in reality was more perfect. As for the thoughts of many other objects external to me, as of the sky, the earth, light, heat, and a thousand more, I was less at a loss to know whence these came; for since I remarked in them nothing which seemed to render them superior to myself, I could believe that, if these were true, they were dependencies on my own nature, in so far as it possessed a certain perfection, and, if they were false, that I held them from nothing, that is to say, that they were in me because of a certain imperfection of my nature. But this could not be the case with-the idea of a nature more perfect than myself; for to receive it from nothing was a thing manifestly impossible; and, because it is not less repugnant that the more perfect should be an effect of, and dependence on the less perfect, than that something should proceed from nothing, it was equally impossible that I could hold it from myself: accordingly, it but remained that it had been placed in me by a nature which was in reality more perfect than mine, and which even possessed within itself all the perfections of which I could form any idea; that is to say, in a single word, which was God. And to this I added that, since I knew some perfections which I did not possess, I was not the only being in existence (I will here, with your permission, freely use the terms of the schools); but, on the contrary, that there was of necessity some other more perfect Being upon whom I was dependent, and from whom I had received all that I possessed; for if I had existed alone, and independently of every other being, so as to have had from myself all the perfection, however little, which I actually possessed, I should have been able, for the same reason, to have had from myself the whole remainder of perfection, of the want of which I was conscious, and thus could of myself have become infinite, eternal, immutable, omniscient, all-powerful, and, in fine, have possessed all the perfections which I could recognize in God. For in order to know the nature of God (whose existence has been established by the preceding reasonings), as far as my own nature permitted, I had only to consider in reference to all the properties of which I found in my mind some idea, whether their possession was a mark of perfection; and I was assured that no one which indicated any imperfection was in him, and that none of the rest was awanting. Thus I perceived that doubt, inconstancy, sadness, and such like, could not be found in God, since I myself would have been happy to be free from them. Besides, I had ideas of many sensible and corporeal things; for although I might suppose that I was dreaming, and that all which I saw or imagined was false, I could not, nevertheless, deny that the ideas were in reality in my thoughts. But, because I had already very clearly recognized in myself that the intelligent nature is distinct from the corporeal, and as I observed that all composition is an evidence of dependency, and that a state of dependency is manifestly a state of imperfection, I therefore determined that it could not be a perfection in God to be compounded of these two natures and that consequently he was not so compounded; but that if there were any bodies in the world, or even any intelligences, or other natures that were not wholly perfect, their existence depended on his power in such a way that they could not subsist without him for a single moment.

Next, I reflected on the fact that I had doubts, which meant my existence wasn't completely perfect (since I could see that knowing was a greater perfection than doubting). This made me question where I learned to think of something more perfect than myself; I realized I must have gotten this idea from a nature that was genuinely more perfect. As for my thoughts about many other things outside of me, like the sky, the earth, light, heat, and countless others, I found it easier to figure out where those ideas came from. I didn't see anything in them that made them superior to me, so I could believe that if they were real, they depended on my own nature to a certain extent, and if they were false, it was just because of some imperfection in me. However, that couldn't be the case with the idea of a nature more perfect than myself because it was clearly impossible for me to get it from nothing; it was equally implausible for something more perfect to arise from something less perfect as it was for something to come from nothing. Therefore, it had to have come from a nature that was truly more perfect than mine, a nature that contained all the perfections I could even imagine; in short, that was God. I also realized that since I was aware of some perfections I didn't have, I couldn't be the only being that existed (I will use the terms from the schools, if you don’t mind); rather, there must necessarily be some other being that was more perfect, upon whom I depended and from whom I received everything I had. If I existed alone and independently of any other being, having all the perfection, no matter how small, that I actually possessed, I would have been able to generate the full range of perfection that I knew I lacked, meaning I could have made myself infinite, eternal, unchangeable, all-knowing, all-powerful, and ultimately, have held all the perfections I recognized in God. In order to understand the nature of God (whose existence has been established through the reasoning so far), as far as my nature allowed, I just needed to think about whether possessing all the qualities I could imagine indicated perfection. I realized that none of these qualities showed any imperfection and that God lacked none of the others. Thus, I understood that doubt, inconsistency, sadness, and similar traits couldn't be present in God since I would have gladly been free from them. Additionally, I had ideas about many sensory and physical things; even if I thought I was dreaming, making everything I saw or imagined false, I couldn't deny that these ideas were genuinely in my thoughts. However, since I had clearly recognized that the intelligent nature was different from the physical, and since I observed that any composition indicated dependency, which was clearly an imperfection, I concluded that it couldn't be a perfection in God to combine those two natures, and therefore, he wasn't compounded in that way. If there were any bodies in the world, or even any intelligences or other natures that weren't entirely perfect, their existence depended on his power in such a way that they couldn't exist without him for even a moment.

I was disposed straightway to search for other truths and when I had represented to myself the object of the geometers, which I conceived to be a continuous body or a space indefinitely extended in length, breadth, and height or depth, divisible into divers parts which admit of different figures and sizes, and of being moved or transposed in all manner of ways (for all this the geometers suppose to be in the object they contemplate), I went over some of their simplest demonstrations. And, in the first place, I observed, that the great certitude which by common consent is accorded to these demonstrations, is founded solely upon this, that they are clearly conceived in accordance with the rules I have already laid down In the next place, I perceived that there was nothing at all in these demonstrations which could assure me of the existence of their object: thus, for example, supposing a triangle to be given, I distinctly perceived that its three angles were necessarily equal to two right angles, but I did not on that account perceive anything which could assure me that any triangle existed: while, on the contrary, recurring to the examination of the idea of a Perfect Being, I found that the existence of the Being was comprised in the idea in the same way that the equality of its three angles to two right angles is comprised in the idea of a triangle, or as in the idea of a sphere, the equidistance of all points on its surface from the center, or even still more clearly; and that consequently it is at least as certain that God, who is this Perfect Being, is, or exists, as any demonstration of geometry can be.

I was immediately inclined to look for other truths, and when I thought about the object of the geometers, which I understood to be a continuous body or a space that stretches endlessly in length, width, and height or depth, divisible into various parts that can take on different shapes and sizes, and can be moved or rearranged in all sorts of ways (since the geometers assume all this is in the object they study), I reviewed some of their simplest proofs. First, I noticed that the strong certainty commonly agreed upon for these proofs is based solely on the fact that they are clearly understood according to the rules I've already outlined. Next, I realized that there was nothing in these proofs that could assure me of the existence of their object: for example, if a triangle is given, I clearly saw that its three angles must equal two right angles, but that didn't provide any assurance that any triangle actually existed. On the other hand, when I examined the concept of a Perfect Being, I found that the existence of this Being was included in the idea just as the equality of its three angles to two right angles is included in the idea of a triangle, or as in the concept of a sphere, where all points on its surface are equally distant from the center, or even more clearly; and so it is at least as certain that God, who is this Perfect Being, exists, as any proof in geometry can be.

But the reason which leads many to persuade them selves that there is a difficulty in knowing this truth, and even also in knowing what their mind really is, is that they never raise their thoughts above sensible objects, and are so accustomed to consider nothing except by way of imagination, which is a mode of thinking limited to material objects, that all that is not imaginable seems to them not intelligible. The truth of this is sufficiently manifest from the single circumstance, that the philosophers of the schools accept as a maxim that there is nothing in the understanding which was not previously in the senses, in which however it is certain that the ideas of God and of the soul have never been; and it appears to me that they who make use of their imagination to comprehend these ideas do exactly the some thing as if, in order to hear sounds or smell odors, they strove to avail themselves of their eyes; unless indeed that there is this difference, that the sense of sight does not afford us an inferior assurance to those of smell or hearing; in place of which, neither our imagination nor our senses can give us assurance of anything unless our understanding intervene.

But the reason many convince themselves that there's a struggle in knowing this truth, and even in understanding what their mind truly is, is that they never elevate their thoughts beyond what they can sense. They’re so used to thinking only through imagination—a way of thinking that's limited to material objects—that anything that isn't imaginable seems unintelligible to them. This is clearly evident from the simple fact that philosophers have a saying that there’s nothing in the understanding that wasn't first in the senses, even though it's certain that the ideas of God and the soul have never been sensed. It seems to me that those who try to use their imagination to grasp these ideas are doing exactly the same thing as if they were trying to hear sounds or smell scents by using only their eyes. The difference is this: sight doesn't provide any less certainty than smell or hearing; however, neither our imagination nor our senses can reassure us of anything without the involvement of our understanding.

Finally, if there be still persons who are not sufficiently persuaded of the existence of God and of the soul, by the reasons I have adduced, I am desirous that they should know that all the other propositions, of the truth of which they deem themselves perhaps more assured, as that we have a body, and that there exist stars and an earth, and such like, are less certain; for, although we have a moral assurance of these things, which is so strong that there is an appearance of extravagance in doubting of their existence, yet at the same time no one, unless his intellect is impaired, can deny, when the question relates to a metaphysical certitude, that there is sufficient reason to exclude entire assurance, in the observation that when asleep we can in the same way imagine ourselves possessed of another body and that we see other stars and another earth, when there is nothing of the kind. For how do we know that the thoughts which occur in dreaming are false rather than those other which we experience when awake, since the former are often not less vivid and distinct than the latter? And though men of the highest genius study this question as long as they please, I do not believe that they will be able to give any reason which can be sufficient to remove this doubt, unless they presuppose the existence of God. For, in the first place even the principle which I have already taken as a rule, viz., that all the things which we clearly and distinctly conceive are true, is certain only because God is or exists and because he is a Perfect Being, and because all that we possess is derived from him: whence it follows that our ideas or notions, which to the extent of their clearness and distinctness are real, and proceed from God, must to that extent be true. Accordingly, whereas we not infrequently have ideas or notions in which some falsity is contained, this can only be the case with such as are to some extent confused and obscure, and in this proceed from nothing (participate of negation), that is, exist in us thus confused because we are not wholly perfect. And it is evident that it is not less repugnant that falsity or imperfection, in so far as it is imperfection, should proceed from God, than that truth or perfection should proceed from nothing. But if we did not know that all which we possess of real and true proceeds from a Perfect and Infinite Being, however clear and distinct our ideas might be, we should have no ground on that account for the assurance that they possessed the perfection of being true.

Finally, if there are still people who aren’t completely convinced of the existence of God and the soul by the arguments I’ve presented, I want them to understand that all the other claims they might feel more sure about—like that we have a body, that stars and the earth exist, and so on—are actually less certain. Even though we have a strong moral assurance of these things, which makes it seem outrageous to doubt their existence, at the same time, no one—unless they are not thinking clearly—can deny that when it comes to metaphysical certainty, there are good reasons to question complete assurance. For when we sleep, we can imagine having another body and seeing other stars and an entirely different earth, even though none of that exists. How do we know that the thoughts we have while dreaming are false rather than the ones we experience when we’re awake, since the dreams can often be just as vivid and clear as our waking thoughts? And even if the greatest minds study this question for as long as they want, I don't think they’ll find any reason strong enough to eliminate this doubt unless they assume the existence of God. First of all, the principle I’ve already taken as a rule—that everything we clearly and distinctly conceive is true—is only certain because God exists as a Perfect Being, and everything we have comes from Him. Therefore, our ideas or concepts, which are real to the extent that they are clear and distinct, come from God and must be true to that extent. Conversely, when we have ideas or concepts that contain some falsehood, it can only be due to those ideas being somewhat confused and unclear, which arise from nothing (involve negation), meaning they exist in us in this unclear way because we are not entirely perfect. It's clear that it’s just as unacceptable for falsehood or imperfection to come from God as it is for truth or perfection to arise from nothing. But if we didn’t know that everything we have that is real and true comes from a Perfect and Infinite Being, no matter how clear and distinct our ideas might be, we wouldn’t have any real basis for believing they are truly perfect.

But after the knowledge of God and of the soul has rendered us certain of this rule, we can easily understand that the truth of the thoughts we experience when awake, ought not in the slightest degree to be called in question on account of the illusions of our dreams. For if it happened that an individual, even when asleep, had some very distinct idea, as, for example, if a geometer should discover some new demonstration, the circumstance of his being asleep would not militate against its truth; and as for the most ordinary error of our dreams, which consists in their representing to us various objects in the same way as our external senses, this is not prejudicial, since it leads us very properly to suspect the truth of the ideas of sense; for we are not infrequently deceived in the same manner when awake; as when persons in the jaundice see all objects yellow, or when the stars or bodies at a great distance appear to us much smaller than they are. For, in fine, whether awake or asleep, we ought never to allow ourselves to be persuaded of the truth of anything unless on the evidence of our reason. And it must be noted that I say of our reason, and not of our imagination or of our senses: thus, for example, although we very clearly see the sun, we ought not therefore to determine that it is only of the size which our sense of sight presents; and we may very distinctly imagine the head of a lion joined to the body of a goat, without being therefore shut up to the conclusion that a chimaera exists; for it is not a dictate of reason that what we thus see or imagine is in reality existent; but it plainly tells us that all our ideas or notions contain in them some truth; for otherwise it could not be that God, who is wholly perfect and veracious, should have placed them in us. And because our reasonings are never so clear or so complete during sleep as when we are awake, although sometimes the acts of our imagination are then as lively and distinct, if not more so than in our waking moments, reason further dictates that, since all our thoughts cannot be true because of our partial imperfection, those possessing truth must infallibly be found in the experience of our waking moments rather than in that of our dreams.

But once we understand the knowledge of God and our soul, we can easily grasp that the truth of our thoughts when we’re awake shouldn’t be questioned just because of the illusions we have in dreams. For example, if someone were to come up with a clear idea, like a mathematician discovering a new proof, it wouldn’t matter that they were asleep; the truth of that idea remains valid. Additionally, the common errors in our dreams, where we perceive various objects just like we do with our senses, actually serve to make us doubt the reliability of sensory ideas. We're often misled in the same way while awake; for instance, people with jaundice see everything as yellow, or distant stars appear much smaller than they really are. Ultimately, whether we are awake or asleep, we should never accept the truth of anything unless it’s supported by our reason. It’s important to note that I refer to our reason, not our imagination or senses. For instance, even though we see the sun very clearly, we shouldn’t assume it’s only as big as it appears to our sight; we can also vividly imagine a lion’s head attached to a goat’s body, but that doesn’t mean a chimera actually exists. Our reason tells us that what we see or imagine isn’t necessarily real; however, it also indicates that all our ideas must hold some truth, or else God—who is completely perfect and truthful—would not have placed them in us. And since our reasoning is never as clear or complete while we’re asleep as it is when we’re awake, even though our imagination might seem just as lively or even more so at times, reason further suggests that the truths we hold must be found in our waking experiences rather than in our dreams.

PART V

I would here willingly have proceeded to exhibit the whole chain of truths which I deduced from these primary but as with a view to this it would have been necessary now to treat of many questions in dispute among the earned, with whom I do not wish to be embroiled, I believe that it will be better for me to refrain from this exposition, and only mention in general what these truths are, that the more judicious may be able to determine whether a more special account of them would conduce to the public advantage. I have ever remained firm in my original resolution to suppose no other principle than that of which I have recently availed myself in demonstrating the existence of God and of the soul, and to accept as true nothing that did not appear to me more clear and certain than the demonstrations of the geometers had formerly appeared; and yet I venture to state that not only have I found means to satisfy myself in a short time on all the principal difficulties which are usually treated of in philosophy, but I have also observed certain laws established in nature by God in such a manner, and of which he has impressed on our minds such notions, that after we have reflected sufficiently upon these, we cannot doubt that they are accurately observed in all that exists or takes place in the world and farther, by considering the concatenation of these laws, it appears to me that I have discovered many truths more useful and more important than all I had before learned, or even had expected to learn.

I would have liked to present the entire chain of truths I derived from these fundamental ideas, but doing so would require addressing many debated questions among scholars, and I don't want to get caught up in that. I think it's better for me to hold off on this detailed exposition and just mention generally what these truths are so that those who are discerning can decide whether a more detailed discussion would benefit the public. I have always stuck to my original decision to consider no other principle than the one I've recently used to demonstrate the existence of God and the soul, and I accept as true only what seems to me clearer and more certain than the demonstrations of geometers appeared in the past. Still, I dare to say that I have found ways to resolve all the main issues usually discussed in philosophy in a short amount of time. I have also noted certain laws established in nature by God in such a way and with notions impressed upon our minds that, after pondering them enough, we cannot doubt their accurate application in everything that exists or happens in the world. Furthermore, by examining the connections between these laws, it seems to me that I have discovered many truths that are more useful and important than everything I have learned before or even expected to learn.

But because I have essayed to expound the chief of these discoveries in a treatise which certain considerations prevent me from publishing, I cannot make the results known more conveniently than by here giving a summary of the contents of this treatise. It was my design to comprise in it all that, before I set myself to write it, I thought I knew of the nature of material objects. But like the painters who, finding themselves unable to represent equally well on a plain surface all the different faces of a solid body, select one of the chief, on which alone they make the light fall, and throwing the rest into the shade, allow them to appear only in so far as they can be seen while looking at the principal one; so, fearing lest I should not be able to compense in my discourse all that was in my mind, I resolved to expound singly, though at considerable length, my opinions regarding light; then to take the opportunity of adding something on the sun and the fixed stars, since light almost wholly proceeds from them; on the heavens since they transmit it; on the planets, comets, and earth, since they reflect it; and particularly on all the bodies that are upon the earth, since they are either colored, or transparent, or luminous; and finally on man, since he is the spectator of these objects. Further, to enable me to cast this variety of subjects somewhat into the shade, and to express my judgment regarding them with greater freedom, without being necessitated to adopt or refute the opinions of the learned, I resolved to leave all the people here to their disputes, and to speak only of what would happen in a new world, if God were now to create somewhere in the imaginary spaces matter sufficient to compose one, and were to agitate variously and confusedly the different parts of this matter, so that there resulted a chaos as disordered as the poets ever feigned, and after that did nothing more than lend his ordinary concurrence to nature, and allow her to act in accordance with the laws which he had established. On this supposition, I, in the first place, described this matter, and essayed to represent it in such a manner that to my mind there can be nothing clearer and more intelligible, except what has been recently said regarding God and the soul; for I even expressly supposed that it possessed none of those forms or qualities which are so debated in the schools, nor in general anything the knowledge of which is not so natural to our minds that no one can so much as imagine himself ignorant of it. Besides, I have pointed out what are the laws of nature; and, with no other principle upon which to found my reasonings except the infinite perfection of God, I endeavored to demonstrate all those about which there could be any room for doubt, and to prove that they are such, that even if God had created more worlds, there could have been none in which these laws were not observed. Thereafter, I showed how the greatest part of the matter of this chaos must, in accordance with these laws, dispose and arrange itself in such a way as to present the appearance of heavens; how in the meantime some of its parts must compose an earth and some planets and comets, and others a sun and fixed stars. And, making a digression at this stage on the subject of light, I expounded at considerable length what the nature of that light must be which is found in the sun and the stars, and how thence in an instant of time it traverses the immense spaces of the heavens, and how from the planets and comets it is reflected towards the earth. To this I likewise added much respecting the substance, the situation, the motions, and all the different qualities of these heavens and stars; so that I thought I had said enough respecting them to show that there is nothing observable in the heavens or stars of our system that must not, or at least may not appear precisely alike in those of the system which I described. I came next to speak of the earth in particular, and to show how, even though I had expressly supposed that God had given no weight to the matter of which it is composed, this should not prevent all its parts from tending exactly to its center; how with water and air on its surface, the disposition of the heavens and heavenly bodies, more especially of the moon, must cause a flow and ebb, like in all its circumstances to that observed in our seas, as also a certain current both of water and air from east to west, such as is likewise observed between the tropics; how the mountains, seas, fountains, and rivers might naturally be formed in it, and the metals produced in the mines, and the plants grow in the fields and in general, how all the bodies which are commonly denominated mixed or composite might be generated and, among other things in the discoveries alluded to inasmuch as besides the stars, I knew nothing except fire which produces light, I spared no pains to set forth all that pertains to its nature,--the manner of its production and support, and to explain how heat is sometimes found without light, and light without heat; to show how it can induce various colors upon different bodies and other diverse qualities; how it reduces some to a liquid state and hardens others; how it can consume almost all bodies, or convert them into ashes and smoke; and finally, how from these ashes, by the mere intensity of its action, it forms glass: for as this transmutation of ashes into glass appeared to me as wonderful as any other in nature, I took a special pleasure in describing it. I was not, however, disposed, from these circumstances, to conclude that this world had been created in the manner I described; for it is much more likely that God made it at the first such as it was to be. But this is certain, and an opinion commonly received among theologians, that the action by which he now sustains it is the same with that by which he originally created it; so that even although he had from the beginning given it no other form than that of chaos, provided only he had established certain laws of nature, and had lent it his concurrence to enable it to act as it is wont to do, it may be believed, without discredit to the miracle of creation, that, in this way alone, things purely material might, in course of time, have become such as we observe them at present; and their nature is much more easily conceived when they are beheld coming in this manner gradually into existence, than when they are only considered as produced at once in a finished and perfect state.

But since I have tried to explain the main points of these discoveries in a treatise that I can’t publish for certain reasons, I can only share the results by giving a summary of what this treatise contains. My goal was to include everything I thought I knew about the nature of material objects before I began writing it. However, like painters who find it hard to capture all the different angles of a solid object on a flat surface, I chose to focus on one main aspect, letting light shine on it while placing the rest in shadow, allowing them to be seen only as they relate to the main point. Fearing I would not be able to cover everything in my thoughts, I decided to elaborate, at some length, on my views regarding light; then I would take the chance to add thoughts on the sun and the fixed stars since almost all light comes from them; on the heavens since they transmit it; on the planets, comets, and earth since they reflect it; and especially on all the bodies on earth, since they can be colored, transparent, or luminous; and finally on humans, as they are the observers of these objects. Furthermore, to allow myself to express my views on this variety of topics with more freedom, without needing to tackle or refute the scholarly opinions, I decided to leave all the debates aside and focus solely on what would happen in a new world if God were to create matter sufficient to form such a place and mix its various parts in a way that resulted in a chaos as chaotic as any poets have imagined, after which He would simply let nature take its course according to the laws He established. Given this assumption, I first described this matter and tried to represent it clearly, clearer than anything else recently discussed regarding God and the soul; I even specifically assumed it had none of the forms or qualities hotly debated in schools, nor anything that our minds wouldn’t naturally grasp, something no one could imagine being ignorant of. Additionally, I identified the laws of nature; and with no other principle to base my reasoning on except the infinite perfection of God, I attempted to demonstrate all aspects that might cause doubt and to prove that these laws would hold whether God created more worlds or not. Next, I explained how most of the matter from this chaos, in accordance with these laws, would arrange itself to resemble skies; how some parts would form the earth, some planets, and comets, while others would create a sun and fixed stars. Then, I digressed to discuss light and extensively detailed the nature of the light found in the sun and stars, how it traverses the vast spaces of the heavens in an instant, and how it is reflected towards the earth from the planets and comets. I also added a lot about the substance, location, motions, and various qualities of these heavens and stars, believing I had sufficiently shown that nothing observable in the heavens or stars of our system could not, or at least might not, appear exactly the same in those of the system I described. I proceeded to specifically discuss the earth and demonstrate how, even though I had clearly assumed that God gave no weight to its material, this would not prevent all its parts from tending toward its center; how with water and air on its surface, the arrangement of the heavens and heavenly bodies, especially the moon, would cause tides that mirror those in our seas, as well as a certain current of water and air from east to west, similar to what is seen between the tropics; how mountains, seas, springs, and rivers could form naturally, and how metals could be mined along with plants naturally growing in fields; and in general, how all bodies commonly referred to as mixed or composite could be generated and, among other discoveries alluded to, since besides the stars, I knew nothing else that produces light except fire, I spared no effort to detail everything about its nature—the way it is produced and sustained, how heat can sometimes exist without light, and light without heat; how it can impart various colors to different bodies and other diverse qualities; how it can liquefy some bodies while hardening others; how it can consume many bodies, turning them to ashes and smoke; and finally, how it can transform ashes into glass through sheer intensity of action: for this transformation of ashes into glass seemed to me as remarkable as any other in nature, and I took special pleasure in describing it. However, I was not inclined to conclude that this world was created in the manner I described; it is much more likely that God made it from the outset as it was meant to be. But it is certain, and a commonly held view among theologians, that the action by which He now sustains it is the same as that by which He originally created it; thus, even if He had only given it the chaotic form from the beginning, provided He established certain laws of nature and allowed it to operate under those laws, it could be believed, without undermining the miracle of creation, that material things could gradually develop into their current state over time; and their nature is much easier to understand when viewed as gradually coming into existence rather than being seen as produced all at once in a completed and perfect state.

From the description of inanimate bodies and plants, I passed to animals, and particularly to man. But since I had not as yet sufficient knowledge to enable me to treat of these in the same manner as of the rest, that is to say, by deducing effects from their causes, and by showing from what elements and in what manner nature must produce them, I remained satisfied with the supposition that God formed the body of man wholly like to one of ours, as well in the external shape of the members as in the internal conformation of the organs, of the same matter with that I had described, and at first placed in it no rational soul, nor any other principle, in room of the vegetative or sensitive soul, beyond kindling in the heart one of those fires without light, such as I had already described, and which I thought was not different from the heat in hay that has been heaped together before it is dry, or that which causes fermentation in new wines before they are run clear of the fruit. For, when I examined the kind of functions which might, as consequences of this supposition, exist in this body, I found precisely all those which may exist in us independently of all power of thinking, and consequently without being in any measure owing to the soul; in other words, to that part of us which is distinct from the body, and of which it has been said above that the nature distinctively consists in thinking, functions in which the animals void of reason may be said wholly to resemble us; but among which I could not discover any of those that, as dependent on thought alone, belong to us as men, while, on the other hand, I did afterwards discover these as soon as I supposed God to have created a rational soul, and to have annexed it to this body in a particular manner which I described.

From discussing inanimate objects and plants, I moved on to animals, especially humans. However, since I didn’t yet have enough knowledge to address them the same way as the others—by linking effects to their causes and explaining what elements and how nature must create them—I was content with the idea that God made the human body just like ours, both in the external shape of its parts and in the internal structure of its organs, using the same matter I had described. Initially, I believed it had no rational soul or any other principle in place of a vegetative or sensitive soul, except for igniting a kind of fire in the heart that I had already mentioned, which I thought was similar to the heat in hay that’s piled up before it dries or that which causes fermentation in new wine before it clears of the fruit. When I looked at the kinds of functions that might arise from this assumption in this body, I found exactly those that can exist in us without any thinking ability and thus aren’t attributed to the soul; in other words, they relate to that part of us that’s separate from the body, which has been previously described as being defined by thinking. These functions are ones that non-reasoning animals share with us entirely. However, I couldn’t find any that depend solely on thought and belong to us as humans. On the other hand, I later discovered these functions as soon as I imagined that God created a rational soul and attached it to this body in a specific way that I went on to explain.

But, in order to show how I there handled this matter, I mean here to give the explication of the motion of the heart and arteries, which, as the first and most general motion observed in animals, will afford the means of readily determining what should be thought of all the rest. And that there may be less difficulty in understanding what I am about to say on this subject, I advise those who are not versed in anatomy, before they commence the perusal of these observations, to take the trouble of getting dissected in their presence the heart of some large animal possessed of lungs (for this is throughout sufficiently like the human), and to have shown to them its two ventricles or cavities: in the first place, that in the right side, with which correspond two very ample tubes, viz., the hollow vein (vena cava), which is the principal receptacle of the blood, and the trunk of the tree, as it were, of which all the other veins in the body are branches; and the arterial vein (vena arteriosa), inappropriately so denominated, since it is in truth only an artery, which, taking its rise in the heart, is divided, after passing out from it, into many branches which presently disperse themselves all over the lungs; in the second place, the cavity in the left side, with which correspond in the same manner two canals in size equal to or larger than the preceding, viz., the venous artery (arteria venosa), likewise inappropriately thus designated, because it is simply a vein which comes from the lungs, where it is divided into many branches, interlaced with those of the arterial vein, and those of the tube called the windpipe, through which the air we breathe enters; and the great artery which, issuing from the heart, sends its branches all over the body. I should wish also that such persons were carefully shown the eleven pellicles which, like so many small valves, open and shut the four orifices that are in these two cavities, viz., three at the entrance of the hollow veins where they are disposed in such a manner as by no means to prevent the blood which it contains from flowing into the right ventricle of the heart, and yet exactly to prevent its flowing out; three at the entrance to the arterial vein, which, arranged in a manner exactly the opposite of the former, readily permit the blood contained in this cavity to pass into the lungs, but hinder that contained in the lungs from returning to this cavity; and, in like manner, two others at the mouth of the venous artery, which allow the blood from the lungs to flow into the left cavity of the heart, but preclude its return; and three at the mouth of the great artery, which suffer the blood to flow from the heart, but prevent its reflux. Nor do we need to seek any other reason for the number of these pellicles beyond this that the orifice of the venous artery being of an oval shape from the nature of its situation, can be adequately closed with two, whereas the others being round are more conveniently closed with three. Besides, I wish such persons to observe that the grand artery and the arterial vein are of much harder and firmer texture than the venous artery and the hollow vein; and that the two last expand before entering the heart, and there form, as it were, two pouches denominated the auricles of the heart, which are composed of a substance similar to that of the heart itself; and that there is always more warmth in the heart than in any other part of the body--and finally, that this heat is capable of causing any drop of blood that passes into the cavities rapidly to expand and dilate, just as all liquors do when allowed to fall drop by drop into a highly heated vessel.

But to explain how I handled this matter, I want to clarify the movement of the heart and arteries, which is the first and most general motion observed in animals, allowing us to easily understand the rest. To make it easier to grasp what I'm about to say, I suggest that those who aren't familiar with anatomy should take the time to have the heart of a large animal with lungs dissected in front of them (since this is quite similar to the human heart) and to see its two ventricles or chambers. First, observe the right side, which connects to two large tubes: the hollow vein (vena cava), the main reservoir of blood, and the trunk from which all other veins branch off in the body; and the arterial vein (vena arteriosa), misleadingly named as it's actually just an artery, which starts in the heart and divides into many branches that spread throughout the lungs. Second, check out the left chamber, which corresponds to two canals that are equal to or larger than the previous ones: the venous artery (arteria venosa), also misnamed since it's really just a vein from the lungs, branching out and intertwining with those of the arterial vein and the windpipe, through which we breathe; and the large artery that comes from the heart and sends branches all over the body. I would also like those observing to carefully note the eleven flaps that act like small valves, opening and closing the four openings in these two chambers: three at the entrance of the hollow veins, arranged in such a way that they don’t prevent blood from flowing into the right ventricle but do prevent it from flowing out; three at the entrance to the arterial vein, arranged opposite to the former, allowing blood to flow from this chamber into the lungs while preventing blood from returning to it; and likewise, two at the mouth of the venous artery that allow blood from the lungs to flow into the left chamber of the heart but prevent its return; and three at the entrance of the large artery that let blood flow from the heart while preventing its backflow. We don’t need to look for any other reason for the number of these flaps beyond the fact that the opening of the venous artery is oval in shape, requiring two to close it adequately, whereas the others, being round, are better closed with three. Additionally, I want these individuals to notice that the large artery and the arterial vein are much tougher and firmer than the venous artery and the hollow vein; and that the latter two expand before entering the heart, forming what can be called the heart’s auricles, composed of material similar to that of the heart itself; and that the heart is always warmer than any other part of the body—and finally, that this heat can cause any drop of blood entering the chambers to quickly expand and dilate, just like liquids do when dropped drop by drop into a hot vessel.

For, after these things, it is not necessary for me to say anything more with a view to explain the motion of the heart, except that when its cavities are not full of blood, into these the blood of necessity flows,--from the hollow vein into the right, and from the venous artery into the left; because these two vessels are always full of blood, and their orifices, which are turned towards the heart, cannot then be closed. But as soon as two drops of blood have thus passed, one into each of the cavities, these drops which cannot but be very large, because the orifices through which they pass are wide, and the vessels from which they come full of blood, are immediately rarefied, and dilated by the heat they meet with. In this way they cause the whole heart to expand, and at the same time press home and shut the five small valves that are at the entrances of the two vessels from which they flow, and thus prevent any more blood from coming down into the heart, and becoming more and more rarefied, they push open the six small valves that are in the orifices of the other two vessels, through which they pass out, causing in this way all the branches of the arterial vein and of the grand artery to expand almost simultaneously with the heart which immediately thereafter begins to contract, as do also the arteries, because the blood that has entered them has cooled, and the six small valves close, and the five of the hollow vein and of the venous artery open anew and allow a passage to other two drops of blood, which cause the heart and the arteries again to expand as before. And, because the blood which thus enters into the heart passes through these two pouches called auricles, it thence happens that their motion is the contrary of that of the heart, and that when it expands they contract. But lest those who are ignorant of the force of mathematical demonstrations and who are not accustomed to distinguish true reasons from mere verisimilitudes, should venture, without examination, to deny what has been said, I wish it to be considered that the motion which I have now explained follows as necessarily from the very arrangement of the parts, which may be observed in the heart by the eye alone, and from the heat which may be felt with the fingers, and from the nature of the blood as learned from experience, as does the motion of a clock from the power, the situation, and shape of its counterweights and wheels.

After all this, I don’t need to explain the heart’s movement any further, except to say that when its chambers aren’t filled with blood, blood naturally flows into them—from the hollow vein into the right side, and from the venous artery into the left side. These two vessels are always filled with blood, and their openings, which face the heart, can’t then close. But as soon as two drops of blood have entered, one in each chamber, these drops must be quite large since the openings they pass through are wide, and the vessels they come from are full of blood. They quickly expand and stretch due to the heat they encounter. This expansion causes the entire heart to expand and simultaneously pushes closed the five small valves at the entrances of the two vessels they flow from, preventing more blood from entering the heart and getting even more rarefied. Instead, they push open the six small valves at the openings of the other two vessels, allowing blood to flow out, causing all the branches of the arterial vein and the main artery to expand almost at the same time as the heart, which soon starts to contract, just like the arteries, because the blood entering them has cooled. The six small valves close, while the five small valves of the hollow vein and venous artery open again to let in another two drops of blood, which causes the heart and arteries to expand once more as before. Because the blood entering the heart passes through these two pouches called auricles, their movement is opposite to that of the heart—when the heart expands, they contract. But, to avoid misunderstandings from those who aren’t familiar with the principles of mathematical explanations and can’t distinguish true reasoning from mere appearances, I want to emphasize that the movement I’ve just explained is necessarily derived from the very arrangement of the heart’s parts, which can be observed with the naked eye, from the heat felt by touch, and from the nature of blood understood through experience, just as the motion of a clock stems from the power, positioning, and shape of its weights and gears.

But if it be asked how it happens that the blood in the veins, flowing in this way continually into the heart, is not exhausted, and why the arteries do not become too full, since all the blood which passes through the heart flows into them, I need only mention in reply what has been written by a physician of England, who has the honor of having broken the ice on this subject, and of having been the first to teach that there are many small passages at the extremities of the arteries, through which the blood received by them from the heart passes into the small branches of the veins, whence it again returns to the heart; so that its course amounts precisely to a perpetual circulation. Of this we have abundant proof in the ordinary experience of surgeons, who, by binding the arm with a tie of moderate straitness above the part where they open the vein, cause the blood to flow more copiously than it would have done without any ligature; whereas quite the contrary would happen were they to bind it below; that is, between the hand and the opening, or were to make the ligature above the opening very tight. For it is manifest that the tie, moderately straightened, while adequate to hinder the blood already in the arm from returning towards the heart by the veins, cannot on that account prevent new blood from coming forward through the arteries, because these are situated below the veins, and their coverings, from their greater consistency, are more difficult to compress; and also that the blood which comes from the heart tends to pass through them to the hand with greater force than it does to return from the hand to the heart through the veins. And since the latter current escapes from the arm by the opening made in one of the veins, there must of necessity be certain passages below the ligature, that is, towards the extremities of the arm through which it can come thither from the arteries. This physician likewise abundantly establishes what he has advanced respecting the motion of the blood, from the existence of certain pellicles, so disposed in various places along the course of the veins, in the manner of small valves, as not to permit the blood to pass from the middle of the body towards the extremities, but only to return from the extremities to the heart; and farther, from experience which shows that all the blood which is in the body may flow out of it in a very short time through a single artery that has been cut, even although this had been closely tied in the immediate neighborhood of the heart and cut between the heart and the ligature, so as to prevent the supposition that the blood flowing out of it could come from any other quarter than the heart.

But if you ask how it is that the blood in the veins keeps flowing into the heart continuously without running out, and why the arteries don't get too full since all the blood that goes through the heart flows into them, I only need to mention what a physician from England has written. He was the first to address this topic and teach that there are many small channels at the ends of the arteries where blood from the heart moves into the tiny branches of the veins, from which it returns to the heart. This creates a continuous circulation. We have plenty of evidence from everyday experiences of surgeons, who find that by tying the arm moderately tight above where they open the vein, the blood flows more abundantly than it would without the tie. In contrast, if they were to tie it below the opening, or if the tie above the opening were too tight, a different result would occur. It's clear that a moderately tight tie can stop the blood in the arm from returning to the heart through the veins, but it can’t stop new blood from flowing through the arteries, because the arteries are located below the veins, and their thicker walls are harder to compress. Additionally, the blood from the heart moves towards the hand with more force than it does to return from the hand to the heart through the veins. Since the blood exits the arm through the opening made in one of the veins, there must be certain pathways below the tie, towards the ends of the arm, that allow blood to flow in from the arteries. This physician also provides strong evidence for his claims about blood movement, pointing to certain thin membranes positioned in various places along the veins like small valves. These membranes don’t allow blood to flow from the middle of the body towards the ends but only let it return from the ends to the heart. Furthermore, experience shows that all the blood in the body can quickly drain out through a single artery that has been cut, even if that artery was tightly tied close to the heart and then cut between the heart and the tie, preventing any notion that the blood could have come from anywhere other than the heart.

But there are many other circumstances which evince that what I have alleged is the true cause of the motion of the blood: thus, in the first place, the difference that is observed between the blood which flows from the veins, and that from the arteries, can only arise from this, that being rarefied, and, as it were, distilled by passing through the heart, it is thinner, and more vivid, and warmer immediately after leaving the heart, in other words, when in the arteries, than it was a short time before passing into either, in other words, when it was in the veins; and if attention be given, it will be found that this difference is very marked only in the neighborhood of the heart; and is not so evident in parts more remote from it. In the next place, the consistency of the coats of which the arterial vein and the great artery are composed, sufficiently shows that the blood is impelled against them with more force than against the veins. And why should the left cavity of the heart and the great artery be wider and larger than the right cavity and the arterial vein, were it not that the blood of the venous artery, having only been in the lungs after it has passed through the heart, is thinner, and rarefies more readily, and in a higher degree, than the blood which proceeds immediately from the hollow vein? And what can physicians conjecture from feeling the pulse unless they know that according as the blood changes its nature it can be rarefied by the warmth of the heart, in a higher or lower degree, and more or less quickly than before? And if it be inquired how this heat is communicated to the other members, must it not be admitted that this is effected by means of the blood, which, passing through the heart, is there heated anew, and thence diffused over all the body? Whence it happens, that if the blood be withdrawn from any part, the heat is likewise withdrawn by the same means; and although the heart were as-hot as glowing iron, it would not be capable of warming the feet and hands as at present, unless it continually sent thither new blood. We likewise perceive from this, that the true use of respiration is to bring sufficient fresh air into the lungs, to cause the blood which flows into them from the right ventricle of the heart, where it has been rarefied and, as it were, changed into vapors, to become thick, and to convert it anew into blood, before it flows into the left cavity, without which process it would be unfit for the nourishment of the fire that is there. This receives confirmation from the circumstance, that it is observed of animals destitute of lungs that they have also but one cavity in the heart, and that in children who cannot use them while in the womb, there is a hole through which the blood flows from the hollow vein into the left cavity of the heart, and a tube through which it passes from the arterial vein into the grand artery without passing through the lung. In the next place, how could digestion be carried on in the stomach unless the heart communicated heat to it through the arteries, and along with this certain of the more fluid parts of the blood, which assist in the dissolution of the food that has been taken in? Is not also the operation which converts the juice of food into blood easily comprehended, when it is considered that it is distilled by passing and repassing through the heart perhaps more than one or two hundred times in a day? And what more need be adduced to explain nutrition, and the production of the different humors of the body, beyond saying, that the force with which the blood, in being rarefied, passes from the heart towards the extremities of the arteries, causes certain of its parts to remain in the members at which they arrive, and there occupy the place of some others expelled by them; and that according to the situation, shape, or smallness of the pores with which they meet, some rather than others flow into certain parts, in the same way that some sieves are observed to act, which, by being variously perforated, serve to separate different species of grain? And, in the last place, what above all is here worthy of observation, is the generation of the animal spirits, which are like a very subtle wind, or rather a very pure and vivid flame which, continually ascending in great abundance from the heart to the brain, thence penetrates through the nerves into the muscles, and gives motion to all the members; so that to account for other parts of the blood which, as most agitated and penetrating, are the fittest to compose these spirits, proceeding towards the brain, it is not necessary to suppose any other cause, than simply, that the arteries which carry them thither proceed from the heart in the most direct lines, and that, according to the rules of mechanics which are the same with those of nature, when many objects tend at once to the same point where there is not sufficient room for all (as is the case with the parts of the blood which flow forth from the left cavity of the heart and tend towards the brain), the weaker and less agitated parts must necessarily be driven aside from that point by the stronger which alone in this way reach it I had expounded all these matters with sufficient minuteness in the treatise which I formerly thought of publishing. And after these, I had shown what must be the fabric of the nerves and muscles of the human body to give the animal spirits contained in it the power to move the members, as when we see heads shortly after they have been struck off still move and bite the earth, although no longer animated; what changes must take place in the brain to produce waking, sleep, and dreams; how light, sounds, odors, tastes, heat, and all the other qualities of external objects impress it with different ideas by means of the senses; how hunger, thirst, and the other internal affections can likewise impress upon it divers ideas; what must be understood by the common sense (sensus communis) in which these ideas are received, by the memory which retains them, by the fantasy which can change them in various ways, and out of them compose new ideas, and which, by the same means, distributing the animal spirits through the muscles, can cause the members of such a body to move in as many different ways, and in a manner as suited, whether to the objects that are presented to its senses or to its internal affections, as can take place in our own case apart from the guidance of the will. Nor will this appear at all strange to those who are acquainted with the variety of movements performed by the different automata, or moving machines fabricated by human industry, and that with help of but few pieces compared with the great multitude of bones, muscles, nerves, arteries, veins, and other parts that are found in the body of each animal. Such persons will look upon this body as a machine made by the hands of God, which is incomparably better arranged, and adequate to movements more admirable than is any machine of human invention. And here I specially stayed to show that, were there such machines exactly resembling organs and outward form an ape or any other irrational animal, we could have no means of knowing that they were in any respect of a different nature from these animals; but if there were machines bearing the image of our bodies, and capable of imitating our actions as far as it is morally possible, there would still remain two most certain tests whereby to know that they were not therefore really men. Of these the first is that they could never use words or other signs arranged in such a manner as is competent to us in order to declare our thoughts to others: for we may easily conceive a machine to be so constructed that it emits vocables, and even that it emits some correspondent to the action upon it of external objects which cause a change in its organs; for example, if touched in a particular place it may demand what we wish to say to it; if in another it may cry out that it is hurt, and such like; but not that it should arrange them variously so as appositely to reply to what is said in its presence, as men of the lowest grade of intellect can do. The second test is, that although such machines might execute many things with equal or perhaps greater perfection than any of us, they would, without doubt, fail in certain others from which it could be discovered that they did not act from knowledge, but solely from the disposition of their organs: for while reason is an universal instrument that is alike available on every occasion, these organs, on the contrary, need a particular arrangement for each particular action; whence it must be morally impossible that there should exist in any machine a diversity of organs sufficient to enable it to act in all the occurrences of life, in the way in which our reason enables us to act. Again, by means of these two tests we may likewise know the difference between men and brutes. For it is highly deserving of remark, that there are no men so dull and stupid, not even idiots, as to be incapable of joining together different words, and thereby constructing a declaration by which to make their thoughts understood; and that on the other hand, there is no other animal, however perfect or happily circumstanced, which can do the like. Nor does this inability arise from want of organs: for we observe that magpies and parrots can utter words like ourselves, and are yet unable to speak as we do, that is, so as to show that they understand what they say; in place of which men born deaf and dumb, and thus not less, but rather more than the brutes, destitute of the organs which others use in speaking, are in the habit of spontaneously inventing certain signs by which they discover their thoughts to those who, being usually in their company, have leisure to learn their language. And this proves not only that the brutes have less reason than man, but that they have none at all: for we see that very little is required to enable a person to speak; and since a certain inequality of capacity is observable among animals of the same species, as well as among men, and since some are more capable of being instructed than others, it is incredible that the most perfect ape or parrot of its species, should not in this be equal to the most stupid infant of its kind or at least to one that was crack-brained, unless the soul of brutes were of a nature wholly different from ours. And we ought not to confound speech with the natural movements which indicate the passions, and can be imitated by machines as well as manifested by animals; nor must it be thought with certain of the ancients, that the brutes speak, although we do not understand their language. For if such were the case, since they are endowed with many organs analogous to ours, they could as easily communicate their thoughts to us as to their fellows. It is also very worthy of remark, that, though there are many animals which manifest more industry than we in certain of their actions, the same animals are yet observed to show none at all in many others: so that the circumstance that they do better than we does not prove that they are endowed with mind, for it would thence follow that they possessed greater reason than any of us, and could surpass us in all things; on the contrary, it rather proves that they are destitute of reason, and that it is nature which acts in them according to the disposition of their organs: thus it is seen, that a clock composed only of wheels and weights can number the hours and measure time more exactly than we with all our skin.

But there are many other circumstances that show what I have claimed is the true cause of blood movement: first, the difference between the blood that flows from veins and that from arteries arises because, after passing through the heart, it becomes thinner, more vibrant, and warmer right after leaving the heart—in other words, when it is in the arteries—compared to when it was just in the veins. If you pay attention, you’ll see this difference is most noticeable near the heart and less obvious further away. Additionally, the strength of the walls of the arterial vein and the great artery shows that blood is pushed against them with more force than against the veins. Why else would the left side of the heart and the great artery be wider and larger than the right side and the arterial vein, except that the blood from the venous artery, after passing through the lungs post-heart, is thinner and more easily rarefied than the blood from the hollow vein? What can doctors deduce from feeling the pulse if they don’t recognize that as blood changes, it can be warmed by the heart to varying degrees and at different speeds? And if we wonder how this heat spreads throughout the body, we must acknowledge that it happens through the blood, which gets heated again in the heart and then circulates throughout the body. Thus, if blood is removed from any part, the heat also goes away; and even if the heart were as hot as glowing iron, it wouldn’t warm the hands and feet unless it continually sent fresh blood there. We also understand that the main purpose of breathing is to bring in enough fresh air to the lungs, which allows the blood flowing from the right ventricle of the heart—where it's become rarefied and almost vapor-like—to thicken and turn back into blood before it enters the left side; without this process, it's unsuitable for nourishing the fire there. This is confirmed by the fact that animals without lungs have only one chamber in their heart, and children who can't use them in the womb have a hole allowing blood to flow from the hollow vein into the left side of the heart, and a tube letting it pass from the arterial vein into the grand artery without going through the lung. Next, how could digestion occur in the stomach unless the heart supplied it with heat through the arteries and also provided some of the fluid parts of the blood that help dissolve the food? Isn’t it easy to understand how the juice from food transforms into blood when you consider that it circulates back and forth through the heart perhaps over a hundred times a day? What more evidence is needed to explain nutrition and the creation of the body's different fluids than to say that the force of the rarefied blood flowing from the heart toward the extremities of the arteries causes some of its components to remain in the areas they reach, taking the place of others expelled by them? Depending on the arrangement, shape, or size of the openings they encounter, some parts flow more readily into certain areas, similar to how different sieves separate various grains due to their different perforations. Finally, what’s particularly noteworthy here is the generation of animal spirits, which are like a fine breeze or a pure and bright flame that continuously rises in abundance from the heart to the brain and then spreads through the nerves into the muscles, allowing movement in all the limbs; thus, to explain how other parts of the blood, which are more active and penetrating, move toward the brain, there’s no need to posit any other cause than that the arteries carrying them directly emanate from the heart. According to mechanical principles, when many objects converge at the same point where space is limited—such as the blood parts flowing from the left side of the heart toward the brain—the weaker and less lively parts are pushed aside by the stronger parts that reach it. I discussed all these matters in detail in the treatise I initially considered publishing. After that, I demonstrated what the structure of the nerves and muscles must be to give the contained animal spirits the ability to move the limbs, as seen when heads still move and bite the earth shortly after being severed, even without life; what changes occur in the brain to facilitate waking, sleep, and dreams; how light, sound, smell, taste, heat, and other qualities from the outside world leave different impressions through the senses; how hunger, thirst, and other internal feelings also impress varied ideas; what is meant by common sense in which these ideas are received, by memory which retains them, by imagination that can rearrange them or form new ideas from them, and which, through the same means, distributes the animal spirits through the muscles to enable the body parts to move in various ways in response to external stimuli or inner feelings, just as occurs in our own case without the need for conscious will. This will not seem strange to those familiar with the variety of movements performed by different automata or machines created by human ingenuity, especially given the small number of components compared to the vast array of bones, muscles, nerves, arteries, veins, and other parts in each animal's body. Such individuals will view this body as a machine crafted by God, marvelously arranged and capable of movements far more impressive than any human-made machine. I took special care to point out that if machines existed which perfectly resembled the organs and outer appearance of an ape or any other non-rational animal, we would have no means of knowing that they were any different from those animals; however, if there were machines resembling our bodies and able to imitate our actions as closely as morally possible, two definitive tests would still remain to show they were not genuinely human. The first is that they could never use words or signs arranged effectively to communicate thoughts as we do; we can easily imagine a machine that emits sounds and even produces responses to changes in its external surroundings—for instance, making requests if touched in certain ways or expressing pain if hurt—but it could never organize those sounds spontaneously to respond appropriately in conversation, as even the most basic human can do. The second test is that although such machines might perform many tasks as well or even better than we do, they would definitely fail in certain areas, revealing that their actions stemmed from their mechanical arrangements rather than knowledge or understanding: since reason is a universal tool applicable in all situations, these machines would require specific configurations for each individual task, making it practically impossible for any machine to have a diverse set of parts sufficient for acting in all life’s situations as our reason allows us to do. Using these two tests, we can also understand the distinction between humans and animals. It’s worth noting that there are no humans, even the slowest or least intelligent, who are incapable of combining different words to express their thoughts; moreover, there isn't any animal, regardless of its abilities or fortunate circumstances, that can do this. This inability doesn’t arise from a lack of organs, as we see magpies and parrots can mimic our words, yet they do not speak with understanding like we do; on the other hand, deaf and mute individuals, deprived of the organs others use for speech, are known to invent signs that convey their thoughts to those around them. This not only demonstrates that animals possess less reason than humans but implies they possess none at all: it's evident that very little is needed for someone to speak; since variations in communication abilities exist among animals of the same species, as well as among humans, it's unbelievable that the most capable ape or parrot wouldn't match a very simple child unless the essence of animal souls is fundamentally different from ours. We shouldn’t confuse speech with natural movements that express emotions, which can be imitated by machines and animals alike; nor should we believe, as some ancients thought, that animals have their own language that we simply don’t comprehend. If that were true, given their similar organs to ours, they could easily convey their thoughts to us just as well as to one another. Additionally, it's noteworthy that while many animals demonstrate more skill than we do in certain tasks, they are still observed to lack effort in numerous others: so, the fact that they sometimes excel does not indicate they possess minds; rather, it shows they are devoid of reason, with nature acting through them based on their physical configurations. In that sense, a clock made only of gears and weights can tell the time more accurately than we can with our entire bodies.

I had after this described the reasonable soul, and shown that it could by no means be educed from the power of matter, as the other things of which I had spoken, but that it must be expressly created; and that it is not sufficient that it be lodged in the human body exactly like a pilot in a ship, unless perhaps to move its members, but that it is necessary for it to be joined and united more closely to the body, in order to have sensations and appetites similar to ours, and thus constitute a real man. I here entered, in conclusion, upon the subject of the soul at considerable length, because it is of the greatest moment: for after the error of those who deny the existence of God, an error which I think I have already sufficiently refuted, there is none that is more powerful in leading feeble minds astray from the straight path of virtue than the supposition that the soul of the brutes is of the same nature with our own; and consequently that after this life we have nothing to hope for or fear, more than flies and ants; in place of which, when we know how far they differ we much better comprehend the reasons which establish that the soul is of a nature wholly independent of the body, and that consequently it is not liable to die with the latter and, finally, because no other causes are observed capable of destroying it, we are naturally led thence to judge that it is immortal.

I had previously explained the concept of the reasonable soul and shown that it cannot be derived from the power of matter, unlike other things I discussed. Instead, it must be specifically created. It's not enough for it to just exist in the human body like a pilot in a ship, merely to control its movements; it must be more closely connected to the body in order to experience sensations and desires like ours, thus making a true human being. I then delved into the topic of the soul in detail, as it is extremely important. After addressing the mistake of those who deny the existence of God, an error I believe I've adequately refuted, there is no belief more misleading that can divert weak minds from the path of virtue than the idea that the souls of animals are the same as our own. This leads to the conclusion that after this life, we have nothing to hope for or fear, just like flies and ants. However, when we understand how different we are, we can better grasp the reasons that prove the soul is entirely separate from the body and is therefore not subject to dying with it. Ultimately, since we observe no other causes that can destroy it, we are naturally inclined to believe that it is immortal.

PART VI

Three years have now elapsed since I finished the treatise containing all these matters; and I was beginning to revise it, with the view to put it into the hands of a printer, when I learned that persons to whom I greatly defer, and whose authority over my actions is hardly less influential than is my own reason over my thoughts, had condemned a certain doctrine in physics, published a short time previously by another individual to which I will not say that I adhered, but only that, previously to their censure I had observed in it nothing which I could imagine to be prejudicial either to religion or to the state, and nothing therefore which would have prevented me from giving expression to it in writing, if reason had persuaded me of its truth; and this led me to fear lest among my own doctrines likewise some one might be found in which I had departed from the truth, notwithstanding the great care I have always taken not to accord belief to new opinions of which I had not the most certain demonstrations, and not to give expression to aught that might tend to the hurt of any one. This has been sufficient to make me alter my purpose of publishing them; for although the reasons by which I had been induced to take this resolution were very strong, yet my inclination, which has always been hostile to writing books, enabled me immediately to discover other considerations sufficient to excuse me for not undertaking the task. And these reasons, on one side and the other, are such, that not only is it in some measure my interest here to state them, but that of the public, perhaps, to know them.

Three years have now passed since I finished the treatise covering all these topics; and I was starting to revise it, planning to hand it over to a printer, when I learned that respected individuals, whose opinions weigh heavily on my actions, had condemned a specific doctrine in physics recently published by someone else. I won’t say I supported it, but I had observed nothing in it that I thought was harmful to religion or the state, which would have stopped me from writing about it if I believed it to be true. This made me worry that some of my own ideas might also stray from the truth, despite my constant effort not to accept new opinions without strong evidence and to avoid saying anything that could harm anyone. This was enough to make me reconsider my decision to publish them; although my reasons for doing so were compelling, my long-standing reluctance to write books quickly led me to find other justifications for stepping back from the task. These reasons, on both sides, are such that I believe it’s important for me to share them, and perhaps for the public to know them as well.

I have never made much account of what has proceeded from my own mind; and so long as I gathered no other advantage from the method I employ beyond satisfying myself on some difficulties belonging to the speculative sciences, or endeavoring to regulate my actions according to the principles it taught me, I never thought myself bound to publish anything respecting it. For in what regards manners, every one is so full of his own wisdom, that there might be found as many reformers as heads, if any were allowed to take upon themselves the task of mending them, except those whom God has constituted the supreme rulers of his people or to whom he has given sufficient grace and zeal to be prophets; and although my speculations greatly pleased myself, I believed that others had theirs, which perhaps pleased them still more. But as soon as I had acquired some general notions respecting physics, and beginning to make trial of them in various particular difficulties, had observed how far they can carry us, and how much they differ from the principles that have been employed up to the present time, I believed that I could not keep them concealed without sinning grievously against the law by which we are bound to promote, as far as in us lies, the general good of mankind. For by them I perceived it to be possible to arrive at knowledge highly useful in life; and in room of the speculative philosophy usually taught in the schools, to discover a practical, by means of which, knowing the force and action of fire, water, air the stars, the heavens, and all the other bodies that surround us, as distinctly as we know the various crafts of our artisans, we might also apply them in the same way to all the uses to which they are adapted, and thus render ourselves the lords and possessors of nature. And this is a result to be desired, not only in order to the invention of an infinity of arts, by which we might be enabled to enjoy without any trouble the fruits of the earth, and all its comforts, but also and especially for the preservation of health, which is without doubt, of all the blessings of this life, the first and fundamental one; for the mind is so intimately dependent upon the condition and relation of the organs of the body, that if any means can ever be found to render men wiser and more ingenious than hitherto, I believe that it is in medicine they must be sought for. It is true that the science of medicine, as it now exists, contains few things whose utility is very remarkable: but without any wish to depreciate it, I am confident that there is no one, even among those whose profession it is, who does not admit that all at present known in it is almost nothing in comparison of what remains to be discovered; and that we could free ourselves from an infinity of maladies of body as well as of mind, and perhaps also even from the debility of age, if we had sufficiently ample knowledge of their causes, and of all the remedies provided for us by nature. But since I designed to employ my whole life in the search after so necessary a science, and since I had fallen in with a path which seems to me such, that if any one follow it he must inevitably reach the end desired, unless he be hindered either by the shortness of life or the want of experiments, I judged that there could be no more effectual provision against these two impediments than if I were faithfully to communicate to the public all the little I might myself have found, and incite men of superior genius to strive to proceed farther, by contributing, each according to his inclination and ability, to the experiments which it would be necessary to make, and also by informing the public of all they might discover, so that, by the last beginning where those before them had left off, and thus connecting the lives and labours of many, we might collectively proceed much farther than each by himself could do.

I've never thought much of the ideas that come from my own mind; and as long as the only benefit I got from my method was satisfying my curiosity about some tough questions in the speculative sciences, or trying to guide my actions based on the principles it taught me, I didn't feel compelled to publish anything about it. When it comes to manners, everyone has their own wisdom; if anyone were allowed to take on the task of improving them, there would be as many reformers as there are people, except for those who God has appointed as the supreme leaders of His people or those He's gifted with the grace and zeal to be prophets. Even though my thoughts pleased me a lot, I assumed others had theirs, which probably satisfied them even more. But once I gained some general ideas about physics, and started testing them on various specific problems, noticing how far they could take us and how different they were from the principles previously used, I felt I couldn't keep them to myself without seriously failing the duty we have to promote, as much as we can, the general good of humanity. I realized that these ideas could lead to useful knowledge in life; instead of the speculative philosophy usually taught in schools, I uncovered a practical way to understand the forces and actions of fire, water, air, the stars, the heavens, and all the other bodies around us, as clearly as we know the different trades of our craftsmen. This understanding could be applied similarly to all their uses, allowing us to become the masters and possessors of nature. This goal is desirable, not just for inventing countless arts that would let us enjoy the earth's fruits and comforts effortlessly, but especially for preserving health, which is undoubtedly the most essential blessing of life; the mind relies so closely on the condition and function of the body's organs that if there's a way to make people wiser and more ingenious than before, I believe it lies in medicine. It's true that the current science of medicine has few things of remarkable utility: but without intending to downplay it, I’m convinced that even among professionals, everyone agrees that what we know is almost nothing compared to what’s still left to discover; and that we could free ourselves from countless ailments of both body and mind, and possibly even the frailties of old age, if we had a comprehensive understanding of their causes and the remedies that nature offers us. Since I planned to dedicate my entire life to pursuing this important science, and since I found a path that seems likely to lead to the desired goal—unless life is too short or we lack experiments—I believed the best way to mitigate these two obstacles was to share with the public everything little I might discover, and inspire those with greater abilities to push further by contributing, each in their own way, to the necessary experiments, and also by sharing their findings with everyone. This way, building on the last points where earlier efforts stopped, and by linking the lives and work of many, we could collectively advance far beyond what anyone could achieve alone.

I remarked, moreover, with respect to experiments, that they become always more necessary the more one is advanced in knowledge; for, at the commencement, it is better to make use only of what is spontaneously presented to our senses, and of which we cannot remain ignorant, provided we bestow on it any reflection, however slight, than to concern ourselves about more uncommon and recondite phenomena: the reason of which is, that the more uncommon often only mislead us so long as the causes of the more ordinary are still unknown; and the circumstances upon which they depend are almost always so special and minute as to be highly difficult to detect. But in this I have adopted the following order: first, I have essayed to find in general the principles, or first causes of all that is or can be in the world, without taking into consideration for this end anything but God himself who has created it, and without educing them from any other source than from certain germs of truths naturally existing in our minds In the second place, I examined what were the first and most ordinary effects that could be deduced from these causes; and it appears to me that, in this way, I have found heavens, stars, an earth, and even on the earth water, air, fire, minerals, and some other things of this kind, which of all others are the most common and simple, and hence the easiest to know. Afterwards when I wished to descend to the more particular, so many diverse objects presented themselves to me, that I believed it to be impossible for the human mind to distinguish the forms or species of bodies that are upon the earth, from an infinity of others which might have been, if it had pleased God to place them there, or consequently to apply them to our use, unless we rise to causes through their effects, and avail ourselves of many particular experiments. Thereupon, turning over in my mind I the objects that had ever been presented to my senses I freely venture to state that I have never observed any which I could not satisfactorily explain by the principles had discovered. But it is necessary also to confess that the power of nature is so ample and vast, and these principles so simple and general, that I have hardly observed a single particular effect which I cannot at once recognize as capable of being deduced in man different modes from the principles, and that my greatest difficulty usually is to discover in which of these modes the effect is dependent upon them; for out of this difficulty cannot otherwise extricate myself than by again seeking certain experiments, which may be such that their result is not the same, if it is in the one of these modes at we must explain it, as it would be if it were to be explained in the other. As to what remains, I am now in a position to discern, as I think, with sufficient clearness what course must be taken to make the majority those experiments which may conduce to this end: but I perceive likewise that they are such and so numerous, that neither my hands nor my income, though it were a thousand times larger than it is, would be sufficient for them all; so that according as henceforward I shall have the means of making more or fewer experiments, I shall in the same proportion make greater or less progress in the knowledge of nature. This was what I had hoped to make known by the treatise I had written, and so clearly to exhibit the advantage that would thence accrue to the public, as to induce all who have the common good of man at heart, that is, all who are virtuous in truth, and not merely in appearance, or according to opinion, as well to communicate to me the experiments they had already made, as to assist me in those that remain to be made.

I also noted that experiments become increasingly necessary as our knowledge grows. At the beginning, it’s better to rely on what we can easily observe with our senses, which we can’t ignore if we think about it, rather than getting caught up in rare and complex phenomena. The reason is that uncommon events often mislead us while we’re still figuring out the causes of the more common ones, and the specific details they depend on tend to be so unique and subtle that they’re hard to recognize. In this regard, I approached my inquiry in the following way: first, I tried to identify the fundamental principles or causes of everything that exists in the world, focusing solely on God, who created everything, without drawing from any sources other than obvious truths that are naturally present in our minds. Second, I looked into the most basic effects that could be derived from these causes, and I believe that through this method, I found elements like the heavens, stars, the earth, and even basic components on earth like water, air, fire, minerals, and other fundamental things, all of which are the most common and straightforward, making them easier to understand. When I then tried to narrow my focus, I encountered so many different objects that I found it nearly impossible for the human mind to differentiate between the various forms of bodies on earth and countless others that could exist if it pleased God to place them there, or to apply them for our use, without rising to the causes through their effects and conducting many specific experiments. Reflecting on all the objects I’ve ever encountered through my senses, I confidently state that I have never observed anything that I couldn’t satisfactorily explain using the principles I’ve discovered. However, I must admit that nature’s power is so vast and these principles so simple and general that I’ve hardly come across a particular effect that I can recognize as being deducible in different ways from these principles, and my greatest challenge is often to determine which of these ways the effect relies upon. I can only resolve this challenge by seeking out specific experiments that yield different results, depending on which mode we are using to explain them. As for what remains, I now feel equipped to clearly identify the steps needed to conduct most of the experiments that will help achieve this goal. However, I also realize that there are so many that neither my resources nor my income, even if it were a thousand times greater, would suffice to handle them all. So, from now on, as I gain the means to conduct more or fewer experiments, my progress in understanding nature will vary accordingly. This was my intention in writing the treatise, to clearly communicate the benefits that would come to the public, motivating everyone who truly cares about the common good of humanity—not just in appearance or opinion—to share with me the experiments they’ve already conducted and to assist me with those that still need to be done.

But since that time other reasons have occurred to me, by which I have been led to change my opinion, and to think that I ought indeed to go on committing to writing all the results which I deemed of any moment, as soon as I should have tested their truth, and to bestow the same care upon them as I would have done had it been my design to publish them. This course commended itself to me, as well because I thus afforded myself more ample inducement to examine them thoroughly, for doubtless that is always more narrowly scrutinized which we believe will be read by many, than that which is written merely for our private use (and frequently what has seemed to me true when I first conceived it, has appeared false when I have set about committing it to writing), as because I thus lost no opportunity of advancing the interests of the public, as far as in me lay, and since thus likewise, if my writings possess any value, those into whose hands they may fall after my death may be able to put them to what use they deem proper. But I resolved by no means to consent to their publication during my lifetime, lest either the oppositions or the controversies to which they might give rise, or even the reputation, such as it might be, which they would acquire for me, should be any occasion of my losing the time that I had set apart for my own improvement. For though it be true that every one is bound to promote to the extent of his ability the good of others, and that to be useful to no one is really to be worthless, yet it is likewise true that our cares ought to extend beyond the present, and it is good to omit doing what might perhaps bring some profit to the living, when we have in view the accomplishment of other ends that will be of much greater advantage to posterity. And in truth, I am quite willing it should be known that the little I have hitherto learned is almost nothing in comparison with that of which I am ignorant, and to the knowledge of which I do not despair of being able to attain; for it is much the same with those who gradually discover truth in the sciences, as with those who when growing rich find less difficulty in making great acquisitions, than they formerly experienced when poor in making acquisitions of much smaller amount. Or they may be compared to the commanders of armies, whose forces usually increase in proportion to their victories, and who need greater prudence to keep together the residue of their troops after a defeat than after a victory to take towns and provinces. For he truly engages in battle who endeavors to surmount all the difficulties and errors which prevent him from reaching the knowledge of truth, and he is overcome in fight who admits a false opinion touching a matter of any generality and importance, and he requires thereafter much more skill to recover his former position than to make great advances when once in possession of thoroughly ascertained principles. As for myself, if I have succeeded in discovering any truths in the sciences (and I trust that what is contained in this volume I will show that I have found some), I can declare that they are but the consequences and results of five or six principal difficulties which I have surmounted, and my encounters with which I reckoned as battles in which victory declared for me. I will not hesitate even to avow my belief that nothing further is wanting to enable me fully to realize my designs than to gain two or three similar victories; and that I am not so far advanced in years but that, according to the ordinary course of nature, I may still have sufficient leisure for this end. But I conceive myself the more bound to husband the time that remains the greater my expectation of being able to employ it aright, and I should doubtless have much to rob me of it, were I to publish the principles of my physics: for although they are almost all so evident that to assent to them no more is needed than simply to understand them, and although there is not one of them of which I do not expect to be able to give demonstration, yet, as it is impossible that they can be in accordance with all the diverse opinions of others, I foresee that I should frequently be turned aside from my grand design, on occasion of the opposition which they would be sure to awaken.

But since then, I've come to other realizations that have changed my mind, leading me to think I should continue writing down all the significant findings I believe to be true, as soon as I have verified them, and to treat them with the same care as if I planned to publish them. This approach appeals to me, not only because it encourages me to thoroughly examine my ideas—after all, we tend to scrutinize things more closely when we think they will be read by many rather than just for our own use (and often what seemed true when I first thought of it appears false when I try to write it down)—but also because it allows me to contribute to the public good as much as I can. Additionally, if my writings have any value, those who come across them after my death can use them as they see fit. However, I've decided not to allow them to be published while I'm alive, to avoid any disputes or controversies that might take away from the time I set aside for my own growth. It's true everyone should contribute to the well-being of others to the best of their ability, and being useless to anyone essentially makes one worthless. Still, our concerns should extend beyond the present, and sometimes it’s better to refrain from actions that might benefit the current generation if they're in pursuit of greater goals that will benefit future generations even more. Honestly, I'm willing to admit that what little I've learned so far is almost nothing compared to what I don't know and to which I still aspire to attain knowledge; for those seeking truth in science often find it easier to make great discoveries as their understanding deepens, just like how a wealthy person finds it less challenging to acquire riches compared to when they were poor. Or they can be likened to army commanders, whose forces typically grow with each victory, needing more skill to maintain their troops after a defeat than to conquer towns and territories after a win. A real battle is fought by those who strive to overcome all the obstacles and mistakes that hinder their pursuit of knowledge, and one is defeated when they accept a false belief on a significant matter; afterwards, it requires much more skill to regain ground than it does to make significant progress once they have solid, proven principles. As for me, if I've discovered any truths in science (and I hope to demonstrate in this volume that I have), I can say they stem from overcoming five or six main obstacles, and I considered my struggles with them as battles where I achieved victory. I’m confident that all I need to fully realize my goals is to achieve two or three more similar victories, and I’m still young enough, according to the natural order, that I should have enough time for this. However, the greater my expectations of using my remaining time wisely, the more I feel I must conserve it, and I would undoubtedly be distracted if I published my physics principles. Although almost all of them are so clear that understanding them requires nothing more than agreement, and I expect to be able to provide evidence for each one, I realize that it's impossible for them to align with everyone's diverse opinions. I anticipate that I would frequently be diverted from my overall goal due to the opposition they would likely generate.

It may be said, that these oppositions would be useful both in making me aware of my errors, and, if my speculations contain anything of value, in bringing others to a fuller understanding of it; and still farther, as many can see better than one, in leading others who are now beginning to avail themselves of my principles, to assist me in turn with their discoveries. But though I recognize my extreme liability to error, and scarce ever trust to the first thoughts which occur to me, yet-the experience I have had of possible objections to my views prevents me from anticipating any profit from them. For I have already had frequent proof of the judgments, as well of those I esteemed friends, as of some others to whom I thought I was an object of indifference, and even of some whose malignancy and envy would, I knew, determine them to endeavor to discover what partiality concealed from the eyes of my friends. But it has rarely happened that anything has been objected to me which I had myself altogether overlooked, unless it were something far removed from the subject: so that I have never met with a single critic of my opinions who did not appear to me either less rigorous or less equitable than myself. And further, I have never observed that any truth before unknown has been brought to light by the disputations that are practised in the schools; for while each strives for the victory, each is much more occupied in making the best of mere verisimilitude, than in weighing the reasons on both sides of the question; and those who have been long good advocates are not afterwards on that account the better judges.

It can be said that these contrasts would be helpful in making me aware of my mistakes and, if my ideas have any value, in helping others to understand them more fully. Additionally, since many can see things better than one person, those who are just starting to understand my principles could help me in return with their insights. But while I know I’m very prone to making mistakes and rarely trust my first thoughts, the experience I've had with possible objections to my views stops me from expecting any benefits from them. I've already seen numerous judgments, both from friends I valued and from others who seemed indifferent, including some who I knew would try to find flaws because of their malice and envy. However, it has rarely happened that someone pointed out a flaw I hadn’t already considered, unless it was something completely off-topic. Because of this, I’ve never met a critic of my views who didn’t seem to me either less rigorous or less fair than I am. Moreover, I’ve never noticed that any previously unknown truth has been uncovered through the debates that happen in schools; while everyone is eager to win, they’re much more focused on appearing credible than on considering the arguments from both sides. Those who have been good advocates for a long time do not necessarily become better judges because of it.

As for the advantage that others would derive from the communication of my thoughts, it could not be very great; because I have not yet so far prosecuted them as that much does not remain to be added before they can be applied to practice. And I think I may say without vanity, that if there is any one who can carry them out that length, it must be myself rather than another: not that there may not be in the world many minds incomparably superior to mine, but because one cannot so well seize a thing and make it one’s own, when it has been learned from another, as when one has himself discovered it. And so true is this of the present subject that, though I have often explained some of my opinions to persons of much acuteness, who, whilst I was speaking, appeared to understand them very distinctly, yet, when they repeated them, I have observed that they almost always changed them to such an extent that I could no longer acknowledge them as mine. I am glad, by the way, to take this opportunity of requesting posterity never to believe on hearsay that anything has proceeded from me which has not been published by myself; and I am not at all astonished at the extravagances attributed to those ancient philosophers whose own writings we do not possess; whose thoughts, however, I do not on that account suppose to have been really absurd, seeing they were among the ablest men of their times, but only that these have been falsely represented to us. It is observable, accordingly, that scarcely in a single instance has any one of their disciples surpassed them; and I am quite sure that the most devoted of the present followers of Aristotle would think themselves happy if they had as much knowledge of nature as he possessed, were it even under the condition that they should never afterwards attain to higher. In this respect they are like the ivy which never strives to rise above the tree that sustains it, and which frequently even returns downwards when it has reached the top; for it seems to me that they also sink, in other words, render themselves less wise than they would be if they gave up study, who, not contented with knowing all that is intelligibly explained in their author, desire in addition to find in him the solution of many difficulties of which he says not a word, and never perhaps so much as thought. Their fashion of philosophizing, however, is well suited to persons whose abilities fall below mediocrity; for the obscurity of the distinctions and principles of which they make use enables them to speak of all things with as much confidence as if they really knew them, and to defend all that they say on any subject against the most subtle and skillful, without its being possible for any one to convict them of error. In this they seem to me to be like a blind man, who, in order to fight on equal terms with a person that sees, should have made him descend to the bottom of an intensely dark cave: and I may say that such persons have an interest in my refraining from publishing the principles of the philosophy of which I make use; for, since these are of a kind the simplest and most evident, I should, by publishing them, do much the same as if I were to throw open the windows, and allow the light of day to enter the cave into which the combatants had descended. But even superior men have no reason for any great anxiety to know these principles, for if what they desire is to be able to speak of all things, and to acquire a reputation for learning, they will gain their end more easily by remaining satisfied with the appearance of truth, which can be found without much difficulty in all sorts of matters, than by seeking the truth itself which unfolds itself but slowly and that only in some departments, while it obliges us, when we have to speak of others, freely to confess our ignorance. If, however, they prefer the knowledge of some few truths to the vanity of appearing ignorant of none, as such knowledge is undoubtedly much to be preferred, and, if they choose to follow a course similar to mine, they do not require for this that I should say anything more than I have already said in this discourse. For if they are capable of making greater advancement than I have made, they will much more be able of themselves to discover all that I believe myself to have found; since as I have never examined aught except in order, it is certain that what yet remains to be discovered is in itself more difficult and recondite, than that which I have already been enabled to find, and the gratification would be much less in learning it from me than in discovering it for themselves. Besides this, the habit which they will acquire, by seeking first what is easy, and then passing onward slowly and step by step to the more difficult, will benefit them more than all my instructions. Thus, in my own case, I am persuaded that if I had been taught from my youth all the truths of which I have since sought out demonstrations, and had thus learned them without labour, I should never, perhaps, have known any beyond these; at least, I should never have acquired the habit and the facility which I think I possess in always discovering new truths in proportion as I give myself to the search. And, in a single word, if there is any work in the world which cannot be so well finished by another as by him who has commenced it, it is that at which I labour.

As for the advantage others might gain from sharing my thoughts, it’s not very significant; I haven’t yet developed them enough to be ready for practical application. I can say without being vain that if anyone can expand on them, it would be me rather than anyone else: not because there aren’t many minds out there that are much more capable than mine, but because it’s hard to truly grasp something you learned from someone else compared to when you discover it yourself. This is especially true for what I’m discussing because even though I’ve often explained my ideas to very sharp individuals who seemed to grasp them clearly while I spoke, I’ve noticed that when they repeated them, they almost always changed them to the point where I wouldn’t recognize them as mine anymore. I’m also glad to take this chance to ask future generations not to believe in hearsay that anything has come from me unless I published it myself. I’m not surprised by the wild interpretations attributed to ancient philosophers whose writings we don’t have; I don’t think their thoughts were truly foolish, as they were among the most capable individuals of their time, but they’ve just been misrepresented to us. It’s worth noting that hardly any of their followers have surpassed them; I’m quite sure that the most devoted followers of Aristotle would consider themselves lucky to have the same understanding of nature as he did, even if it meant they'd never know more. In this way, they are like ivy that doesn’t try to grow higher than the tree that supports it, often even trailing back down once it reaches the top; it seems to me that they also lower themselves, or in other words, become less wise than they could be if they stopped studying, because they’re not satisfied with just knowing everything clearly explained by their source. They also want to find solutions to many issues that their source doesn’t mention, and probably never even thought of. Their way of thinking, however, suits people whose abilities are below average; the complexity of the distinctions and principles they rely on allows them to talk confidently about everything as if they truly understand it, and they can defend whatever they say against the most clever and skilled without anyone managing to prove them wrong. To me, they resemble a blind man who tries to compete on equal footing with someone who can see by making him descend into a pitch-black cave. I can say that these people have a vested interest in me not publishing the principles of the philosophy I use, because since they are the simplest and most obvious, I would essentially be opening windows and letting daylight into the cave where the fighters have gone. However, even those who are more capable shouldn’t feel too anxious about knowing these principles, because if they want to discuss everything and gain a reputation for knowledge, they can achieve that more easily by settling for the appearance of truth, which can be found without much trouble in all sorts of topics, than by searching for the truth itself, which is revealed slowly and only in certain fields, while it forces us to admit our ignorance when it comes to others. If, however, they’d rather have the knowledge of a few truths than the vanity of appearing to know them all—such knowledge being far more valuable—and they wish to follow a path similar to mine, they don’t need me to say anything more than I have already shared in this discourse. If they are capable of making greater progress than I have, they will certainly be able to discover on their own everything I believe I’ve found; since I've only examined things in sequence, what remains to be discovered is more challenging and obscure than what I’ve already found, and it’s likely more satisfying for them to find it out themselves than to learn it from me. Furthermore, the habit they develop by initially seeking what is easy and then gradually moving on to the more difficult will serve them better than all my teachings. Thus, I believe that if I had been taught all the truths I've since sought out just from a young age, and had learned them effortlessly, I probably wouldn’t have gone beyond that; at the very least, I wouldn’t have developed the habit and skill I think I have in consistently discovering new truths in proportion to my dedication to the search. In short, if there’s any work in the world that can’t be done as well by someone else as by the one who started it, it’s the work I’m engaged in.

It is true, indeed, as regards the experiments which may conduce to this end, that one man is not equal to the task of making them all; but yet he can advantageously avail himself, in this work, of no hands besides his own, unless those of artisans, or parties of the same kind, whom he could pay, and whom the hope of gain (a means of great efficacy) might stimulate to accuracy in the performance of what was prescribed to them. For as to those who, through curiosity or a desire of learning, of their own accord, perhaps, offer him their services, besides that in general their promises exceed their performance, and that they sketch out fine designs of which not one is ever realized, they will, without doubt, expect to be compensated for their trouble by the explication of some difficulties, or, at least, by compliments and useless speeches, in which he cannot spend any portion of his time without loss to himself. And as for the experiments that others have already made, even although these parties should be willing of themselves to communicate them to him (which is what those who esteem them secrets will never do), the experiments are, for the most part, accompanied with so many circumstances and superfluous elements, as to make it exceedingly difficult to disentangle the truth from its adjuncts--besides, he will find almost all of them so ill described, or even so false (because those who made them have wished to see in them only such facts as they deemed conformable to their principles), that, if in the entire number there should be some of a nature suited to his purpose, still their value could not compensate for the time what would be necessary to make the selection. So that if there existed any one whom we assuredly knew to be capable of making discoveries of the highest kind, and of the greatest possible utility to the public; and if all other men were therefore eager by all means to assist him in successfully prosecuting his designs, I do not see that they could do aught else for him beyond contributing to defray the expenses of the experiments that might be necessary; and for the rest, prevent his being deprived of his leisure by the unseasonable interruptions of any one. But besides that I neither have so high an opinion of myself as to be willing to make promise of anything extraordinary, nor feed on imaginations so vain as to fancy that the public must be much interested in my designs; I do not, on the other hand, own a soul so mean as to be capable of accepting from any one a favor of which it could be supposed that I was unworthy.

It’s true that when it comes to the experiments needed to achieve this goal, no one person is capable of doing them all. However, he can effectively rely on no one but himself, unless he hires skilled workers or similar groups, whom he can pay, and whose desire for profit (a powerful motivator) might encourage them to accurately carry out the tasks assigned to them. As for those who might offer their help out of curiosity or a desire to learn, apart from the fact that their promises often exceed their actual contributions, and they tend to propose grand ideas that never come to fruition, they will likely expect some sort of reward for their efforts, whether it be through explanations of difficult concepts or, at the very least, through compliments and meaningless chatter, which he cannot afford to spend his time on without detriment to himself. Furthermore, regarding the experiments others have conducted, even if they were willing to share (which those who view them as secrets would never do), the experiments usually come with so many extra details that it becomes extremely challenging to separate the truth from the superfluous information. Additionally, he will find that most of them are poorly documented or even misleading (because those who conducted them wanted to see only what aligned with their own beliefs), so even if some of them were suitable for his purpose, their worth wouldn’t make up for the time needed to sift through them. So, if there were someone we definitely knew could make groundbreaking discoveries that would greatly benefit the public, and if everyone else was eager to assist him in achieving his goals, I don’t think they could do anything for him beyond helping to cover the costs of necessary experiments, and ensuring he wasn’t disturbed by any unnecessary interruptions. But aside from the fact that I don’t think highly enough of myself to promise anything extraordinary or entertain foolish notions that the public would be particularly invested in my ideas, I also don’t possess a character so low that I could accept a favor from anyone when it could be seen as me being unworthy.

These considerations taken together were the reason why, for the last three years, I have been unwilling to publish the treatise I had on hand, and why I even resolved to give publicity during my life to no other that was so general, or by which the principles of my physics might be understood. But since then, two other reasons have come into operation that have determined me here to subjoin some particular specimens, and give the public some account of my doings and designs. Of these considerations, the first is, that if I failed to do so, many who were cognizant of my previous intention to publish some writings, might have imagined that the reasons which induced me to refrain from so doing, were less to my credit than they really are; for although I am not immoderately desirous of glory, or even, if I may venture so to say, although I am averse from it in so far as I deem it hostile to repose which I hold in greater account than aught else, yet, at the same time, I have never sought to conceal my actions as if they were crimes, nor made use of many precautions that I might remain unknown; and this partly because I should have thought such a course of conduct a wrong against myself, and partly because it would have occasioned me some sort of uneasiness which would again have been contrary to the perfect mental tranquillity which I court. And forasmuch as, while thus indifferent to the thought alike of fame or of forgetfulness, I have yet been unable to prevent myself from acquiring some sort of reputation, I have thought it incumbent on me to do my best to save myself at least from being ill-spoken of. The other reason that has determined me to commit to writing these specimens of philosophy is, that I am becoming daily more and more alive to the delay which my design of self-instruction suffers, for want of the infinity of experiments I require, and which it is impossible for me to make without the assistance of others: and, without flattering myself so much as to expect the public to take a large share in my interests, I am yet unwilling to be found so far wanting in the duty I owe to myself, as to give occasion to those who shall survive me to make it matter of reproach against me some day, that I might have left them many things in a much more perfect state than I have done, had I not too much neglected to make them aware of the ways in which they could have promoted the accomplishment of my designs.

These thoughts combined are why, for the past three years, I’ve been reluctant to publish the work I had ready, and why I even decided not to publicly share any other general pieces during my life that might help people understand the principles of my physics. However, since then, two additional reasons have come into play that have led me to include some specific examples and provide the public with some insight into my work and intentions. The first reason is that if I didn’t do this, many who knew about my prior intention to publish some writings might think that the reasons for my hesitation were less honorable than they really are. Although I'm not overly eager for fame, or, if I may say so, I actually shy away from it because I consider it a threat to the peace I value more than anything else, I've never tried to hide my actions as if they were wrongdoings, nor have I taken many precautions to remain anonymous. This is partly because I would consider such a choice to be a disservice to myself, and partly because it would create a kind of discomfort that would go against the absolute mental calm I seek. Even though I’ve been indifferent to thoughts of fame or being forgotten, I've still found it difficult to avoid gaining some level of reputation, so I feel it’s important to at least try to avoid being spoken of negatively. The other reason motivating me to write these examples of philosophy is that I’m increasingly aware of the delay my goal of self-learning is facing due to the countless experiments I need, which I can't conduct without help from others. While I don't want to naïvely assume that the public will invest heavily in my interests, I also don’t want to neglect my duty to myself so much that, someday, those who outlive me could blame me for not leaving them with much more polished ideas, had I not been too careless in making them aware of the ways they could have helped me achieve my goals.

And I thought that it was easy for me to select some matters which should neither be obnoxious to much controversy, nor should compel me to expound more of my principles than I desired, and which should yet be sufficient clearly to exhibit what I can or cannot accomplish in the sciences. Whether or not I have succeeded in this it is not for me to say; and I do not wish to forestall the judgments of others by speaking myself of my writings; but it will gratify me if they be examined, and, to afford the greater inducement to this I request all who may have any objections to make to them, to take the trouble of forwarding these to my publisher, who will give me notice of them, that I may endeavor to subjoin at the same time my reply; and in this way readers seeing both at once will more easily determine where the truth lies; for I do not engage in any case to make prolix replies, but only with perfect frankness to avow my errors if I am convinced of them, or if I cannot perceive them, simply to state what I think is required for defense of the matters I have written, adding thereto no explication of any new matte that it may not be necessary to pass without end from one thing to another.

And I thought it would be easy for me to choose topics that wouldn’t spark too much controversy or force me to explain my principles more than I wanted, while still clearly showing what I can or can't achieve in the sciences. Whether or not I’ve succeeded in this isn’t for me to say; I don’t want to influence others’ opinions about my work by discussing it myself. However, it would make me happy if my writings were examined. To encourage this, I ask anyone with objections to send them to my publisher, who will notify me so I can respond. This way, readers can see both the concerns and my replies at the same time, making it easier to figure out where the truth lies. I won’t make lengthy responses; I’ll just honestly admit my mistakes if I’m convinced of them, or if I can’t see them, I’ll simply state what I believe is necessary to defend what I’ve written, without introducing any new topics that might lead to endless tangents.

If some of the matters of which I have spoken in the beginning of the “Dioptrics” and “Meteorics” should offend at first sight, because I call them hypotheses and seem indifferent about giving proof of them, I request a patient and attentive reading of the whole, from which I hope those hesitating will derive satisfaction; for it appears to me that the reasonings are so mutually connected in these treatises, that, as the last are demonstrated by the first which are their causes, the first are in their turn demonstrated by the last which are their effects. Nor must it be imagined that I here commit the fallacy which the logicians call a circle; for since experience renders the majority of these effects most certain, the causes from which I deduce them do not serve so much to establish their reality as to explain their existence; but on the contrary, the reality of the causes is established by the reality of the effects. Nor have I called them hypotheses with any other end in view except that it may be known that I think I am able to deduce them from those first truths which I have already expounded; and yet that I have expressly determined not to do so, to prevent a certain class of minds from thence taking occasion to build some extravagant philosophy upon what they may take to be my principles, and my being blamed for it. I refer to those who imagine that they can master in a day all that another has taken twenty years to think out, as soon as he has spoken two or three words to them on the subject; or who are the more liable to error and the less capable of perceiving truth in very proportion as they are more subtle and lively. As to the opinions which are truly and wholly mine, I offer no apology for them as new,--persuaded as I am that if their reasons be well considered they will be found to be so simple and so conformed, to common sense as to appear less extraordinary and less paradoxical than any others which can be held on the same subjects; nor do I even boast of being the earliest discoverer of any of them, but only of having adopted them, neither because they had nor because they had not been held by others, but solely because reason has convinced me of their truth.

If some of the things I've mentioned at the beginning of the "Dioptrics" and "Meteorics" seem offensive at first because I refer to them as hypotheses and appear indifferent to providing evidence for them, I kindly ask for a patient and careful reading of the entire work, from which I hope those who are hesitant will find satisfaction. It seems to me that the arguments in these treatises are so interconnected that the latter are proven by the former, which are their causes, while the former are, in turn, proven by the latter, which are their effects. It shouldn’t be assumed that I am falling into the fallacy known as circular reasoning; since experience confirms the majority of these effects with certainty, the causes from which I infer them don’t mainly serve to prove their reality but to explain their existence. On the contrary, the reality of the causes is supported by the reality of the effects. I only called them hypotheses to indicate that I believe I can deduce them from the fundamental truths I’ve already discussed. However, I chose not to do so to prevent certain types of minds from using it as a basis to create some fanciful philosophy from what they might consider my principles, which may lead to me being blamed for it. I'm referring to those who think they can grasp in a day what someone else has spent twenty years contemplating, just because he has shared a few words on the topic; or those who are more prone to error and less able to recognize truth as they become more subtle and lively in their thinking. As for the views that are truly and entirely my own, I don't apologize for them as being new—I'm convinced that if their reasons are properly examined, they will be found to be so simple and aligned with common sense that they seem less extraordinary and less paradoxical than any other views on the same subjects. I don't even claim to be the first to discover any of them; I simply acknowledge that I have accepted them, not because they had or hadn't been acknowledged by others, but solely because reason has led me to believe in their truth.

Though artisans may not be able at once to execute the invention which is explained in the “Dioptrics,” I do not think that any one on that account is entitled to condemn it; for since address and practice are required in order so to make and adjust the machines described by me as not to overlook the smallest particular, I should not be less astonished if they succeeded on the first attempt than if a person were in one day to become an accomplished performer on the guitar, by merely having excellent sheets of music set up before him. And if I write in French, which is the language of my country, in preference to Latin, which is that of my preceptors, it is because I expect that those who make use of their unprejudiced natural reason will be better judges of my opinions than those who give heed to the writings of the ancients only; and as for those who unite good sense with habits of study, whom alone I desire for judges, they will not, I feel assured, be so partial to Latin as to refuse to listen to my reasonings merely because I expound them in the vulgar tongue.

Although artisans might not be able to immediately create the invention explained in the “Dioptrics,” I don’t think anyone should condemn it for that reason. Since skill and practice are necessary to make and adjust the machines I’ve described without missing any detail, I would be just as surprised if they succeeded on the first try as I would be if someone became a skilled guitarist in just one day by only having great sheet music in front of them. Also, I write in French, my native language, rather than in Latin, the language of my teachers, because I believe that those who use their unbiased natural reasoning will judge my ideas better than those who only pay attention to ancient writings. And for those who combine good sense with a love for study, who are the judges I truly seek, I am confident they won’t be so attached to Latin that they refuse to consider my reasoning simply because it’s presented in the common tongue.

In conclusion, I am unwilling here to say anything very specific of the progress which I expect to make for the future in the sciences, or to bind myself to the public by any promise which I am not certain of being able to fulfill; but this only will I say, that I have resolved to devote what time I may still have to live to no other occupation than that of endeavoring to acquire some knowledge of Nature, which shall be of such a kind as to enable us therefrom to deduce rules in medicine of greater certainty than those at present in use; and that my inclination is so much opposed to all other pursuits, especially to such as cannot be useful to some without being hurtful to others, that if, by any circumstances, I had been constrained to engage in such, I do not believe that I should have been able to succeed. Of this I here make a public declaration, though well aware that it cannot serve to procure for me any consideration in the world, which, however, I do not in the least affect; and I shall always hold myself more obliged to those through whose favor I am permitted to enjoy my retirement without interruption than to any who might offer me the highest earthly preferments.

In conclusion, I don't want to commit to anything specific about the progress I expect to make in the sciences moving forward, nor do I want to make any promises to the public that I can't be sure I can keep. However, I will say that I've decided to dedicate whatever time I have left to only the pursuit of gaining knowledge about Nature, which will help us create more reliable medical rules than those currently in use. I'm so opposed to any other pursuits, especially those that benefit some people while harming others, that I don’t think I would have succeeded if I had been forced into them. I’m making this declaration publicly, even though I know it won’t bring me any recognition, which I don’t care about anyway. I will always feel more grateful to those who allow me to enjoy my peaceful retirement than to anyone who might offer me the highest positions in the world.


Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!