iB

INTRODUCTION.

have feen the contrary. For becaufe this philofophy profelfes.modeftly to keep within the extent of our faculties, and is-ready to confefs its imperfections, rather than to make anyfruitlefs attempts to conceal them, by feeking to cover the de-feats in our knowledge with the vain oftentation of rafh andgroundlels conjectures; hence has been taken an occalion to-inlinuate that we are led to miraculous caufes, and the o'cculfcqualities of the fchools.

17. But the foil of thefe accufations is very extraordina-ry. If by calling thefe caufes miraculous nothing more . is .meant than only, that they often appear to us wonderful anchfurprizing, it is not eafy to fee what difficulty can be.railed;from thence ; for the works of nature difcover every wherefuch proofs of the unbounded power,,, and the confummatewifdom of their author, that the more they are known, the -more they will excite our admiration: and it is too manifeft.to be infilled on, that the common fenfe of the word mira-culous can have no place here, when it implies what is abovethe ordinary courfe of things. The other imputation, thatthefe caufes are occult upon the account of our not perceiving,what produces them, contains in it great ambiguity. Thatfomething relating to them lies hid, the followers of thisphilofophy are ready to acknowledge, nay delire it ffiouldbe carefully remarked, as pointing out proper fubjeCts for fu-ture inquiry. But this is very different from the proceedingof the fchoolmen in the caufes called by them occult. Foras their occult qualities were underftood to operate in a man-ner occult, and not apprehended by us; fo they were ob-r truded