vonsunt,

"Non bone conve Metaphysics, & Mothe

And I must confess that the perno al of this trad hath no morasid id any respect for the reasoning powers of these bobler Con Memen. It is probable that Mare is enlind,

a precnagent; gether inseparable from that of a rational Being: But this purser, who wond, ndertake the proof, anusthandlet is Tools in a

breux thridiaappears atto

any different way from this Author. His wither clearly, clearly, nor correctly, laid down; neither are his deditions mad.

Principles

in Xight lines. It is saying very bitti

to the pumpor, that a man word cean to act. entirely, if he seriously beleived himselferden the in Elmer of Necessity, & that his homly landed. gives the Lie to any such supposition. The truth is; that, in infinite majority of the

to

actions of his life, he is as little-under the influence of teason as the Aest optics followbrutis or vorething very lihail; Sympathy; Sensation, in Indling the Appetitis; Curiosity, operating with all the power of a Pasion; Stabit MC & compor the fronds Shings which post him monation; & Prom

musthe considered rather as a

sa tequilating, impelling, principle; & hon fore -vious drasine, have little, off any, influme.

15

agh, or as he presings, our condition in affueline

"

His attempts to reason concerning the actrial terms of our existon a hne in this world from what on aybe), or as he to say men the State is afimidly a new mode of Indration; And it is equally one, that, supposery a mom to have indulged a speculation. error in th, measan cefileery concrring the Divinextlind, humest of mees -sily follow up that arrow by forming viiden stions concerning the free down of this own: P: 26 & that for no better reason then bescansite, the author," mistrupon it". The Corollary 100. which he time didorers is oqnally look. of God be self-deterrimed " and (if) it may as easily be conceived that "From is so ; ( in his mode of forming the sentince he omite this latter of, but it is ob -riom that he means to take full credit. firits admission, dutions asites; it may r with the same cestarity hecendiided that "Mom is free! making the certainly of the conclusion to depend upon the cafe. with which a conception on ay buformed. The Author cisternly sots off with saying that he donor offer what he has to say as "" demonstrative" "proof: Now, I cool helf. thinking he will be padigled to find aghady Proof of any

malined to accept this as

description.

It is conclusive triumph, as ilshandfem. he cinciis, oil to le, in having shewn the incompatibility of the tro o pro-ipal argu -monts of this adonfonin, Or the puratio. afes olives in man & the divne prescrince one of the enost singular Simons of rationination which I lon Nide. 6:24

is allogether

a promptive proof against the value. "of lither" — See also F0 DJ

Ports & Pott Wine make a mod abominable mistine. I have taken " some pams to prove the worklessness of the former; & throne, thefee, I have strong suspic

The lathe is a vill honap

2.2.D.

Mr Dawson of Silbergiramach

able Mathematician: Hc has als

been dabbling in Metaphysics. Now, Metaphysics do not admits of de. monstrative Roof; Eyon Itis Ergoan Ther

Inathematics are

އ

APPENDIX.

A REPLY to the Criticism upon the Pamphlet, called " Philosophical Necessity briefly Invalidated," inserted in the Monthly Review, for July 1781.

་

In the argument p. 6 and 7, of the pamphlet, the Reviewer asserts, there is an obvious fallacy. He says, the author confounds" the belief of the doctrine of ne

cessity, as a general principle, with the "certain foresight of a particular event.” I would ask here, in the first place, if in a general doctrine every particular case be not included? If every event be absolutely determined, as to time, place, &c. &c. with all their connected circumstances (which I take to be what is meant by the doctrine of necessity,) and the belief of this be so strongly impressed upon the mind, as to become a practical principle, or to act as intuitive truth, the same may certainly be

1