212 An EJsay on the

The objects of fense, to speak only of thesso

leave an impression upon the organ by actwA-

th^

mechanism which I have given,this difficult, abstruse subject.

it quite alone, I did not certainly go out of my roadfind it, but had it placed directly in my way, by stJAuthors who had treated of it before. It is objecteda reproach on the rational nature of the foul, insistedby Materialists , and pompously accounted for as a n stfeSl of matter and mechanism. All this being ist co11 ^sistent with the inertia of matter, and the account .

i, forced me to engag e ,

And if what I have 3vanced .concerning it be just, there can be no h 3f)done; only men will be obliged to alter their opin* 0a little, and that to the right side.; but if it shouldwrong, I am not quite so foolish as to imagine itpass. Nor is it to be supposed that a subject of £ ^hind will be let quite alone ; whoever thinks he ^make any advantage of it, will bring it into his sid ethe controversy. It was this way probably that P er> ’critus brought it first into the controversy, obse sVlI1 jjHomer’s authority so prevalent on the other side; th oU£ ^Homer spoke of it as nature pointed out, without b el11 ®of any party. But ever since, these Men have alv^brought it into their side of the controversy. ^

But after all, do not those who are least willing t0 3mit (A enchantment and Rosicrucian-work amongpearances of nature , find themselves so enchanted, dd u ^imposed upon every night? Have they not experieNdd^the force and efficacy of this art! If they have not e*P^