His design in this was singular; for he is any thing but a Spinozist. But as his object is to explode the ex istence of matter, independent of the perceptions of mind, he seems to wish to terrify his readers into his doctrine, by stating the dangerous consequences which result from admitting the independent existence of matter. The experiment is a little dangerous ; for were there no medium between Spinozism and idealism, a good part of mankind might be puzzled how to form a decision. But there is a medium ; and whatever difficulties may attend the conception of matter as existing independent of our perceptions, it certainly involves no impossi bility.
II our readers find any difficulty in forming a concep tion of matter abstracted from all its qualities, they shall have the benefit of Mr. Harris's illustration: " \Ve gain a glimpse of it by abstraction, when we say that the first matter is not the lineaments and complexion which make the beautiful face ; nor yet the flesh and blood which make those lineaments and that complexion ; nor yet the liquid and solid aliments which make that flesh and blood; nor yet the simple bodies of earth and water which make those various aliments ; but something which, being be low all these, and supporting them all, is yet different from them all, and essential to their existence." But our elegant author is not content with giving us a glimpse of this subtilc and evanescent substance : \Ve obtain a sight of it, he observes, when we say, that as is the brass to the statue, the marble to the pillar, the timber to the ship, or any one secondary menet to any one pe culiar form, so is the first and original matter to all forms in general." This certainly seems to be pushing matter to the very verge of existence ; and, therefore, Sir William Drum mond, a keen immaterialist, observes, that we had better pause before we break the bubble of the ideal philoso phy, lest it be all that is left to save us from utter annihi lation.
The metaphysics of Aristotle formed the text book on these subjects to Europe and the world, for many centuries. The Arabians were as great adepts as the monks of the dark ages. To be able to comprehend and to wield the Organum of Aristotle, was considered as the highest attainment in knowledge, and the most desirable accomplishment in literature. It was reckon ed presumptuous, and almost heretical, to call his au thority in question. Of this we have a remarkable
proof in the fate of Peter Ramus, an intrepid impugner of the Aristotelian philosophy. Ills bold attacks on a system which had been admired for so many ages, gave great offence. His antagonists, however, attacked him at first only with arguments. But finding him refrac tory, or rather too strong for them, they proceeded to harsher measures. He was accused of an attempt to subvert both religion and philosophy ; and though he challenged his opponents to a public disputation, lie could not obtain an impartial hearing ; and was pro hibited by Francis I. from writing or teaching philo sophy. This sentence was afterwards reversed by Ilen ry II. and Remus was appointed regius professor of eloquence and philosophy, and afterwards of mathe matics. His enemies, however, became more virulent than ever, when it was found that Ramus favoured the principles of the Reformation. Ile was obliged to leave France ; and after travelling three years in Germany, to visit the principal universities, he unfortunately re solved to return to Paris, where he lost his life by the hand of a hired assassin in the infamous massacre of St. Bartholomew's eve.
But it was the reformation in religion which com pleted the overthrow of the Atistotelian philosophy. Luther had been early instructed in the Peripatetic doc trines, and in all the subtleties of the scholastic sophy as taught by Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and others; and had attached himself to the party of the Nominalists in the dispute about universals. When, however, his eyes were opened to see the errors of the Bomish doctrines, he began to question the validity of the principles on which these errors had chiefly rested for support. The result was a thorough conviction of the inutility of the Aristotelian method, and an indig nant and contumelious contempt of its quibbles and false refinements. " What does it condibme, says he, towards the knowledge of things, to be perpetually trifling and cavilling in language conceived*and pre scribed by Aristotle concerning matter, form, motion, and time i" In Luther's ardent temperament, the heat of controversy might easily carry him unwarranted lengths in expressing his contempt for Aristotle's doc trines. He was no enemy to sound philosophy, but he was anxious to free the world from the yoke of authori ty, both in philosophy and religion.