[ 355 ]

SECT. V.

'The several arguments againjl theimmateriality of the foul , urged- by Lucretius and others , examined ,and Jhewn fallacious , as applyingthe equivocal symptoms of a disor-dered organ in a fate of union tothe foul itself

A ccording to the method proposed, theobjections against the immateriality ofthe foul are next to be considered. Thesehave been all mustered up (or the greatest,part of them at least) by Lucretius neareighteen hundred years ago ; so that nowthey are become common topicks, and akind of clajjical arguments ; and as they falltn with our prejudices, they are easily under-wood, and therefore in every body’s mouth.Lhe wit and elegance of this author, andthe charms of his numbers, recommendthese objections particularly to those who ad-mire politeness in writing, more than accu-r acy in thinking. Hence they have all theA a 2 advan-