or by his will not being absolute. In the same way man is not degraded by our saying, that he cannot produce the talents and feelings he desires.

CHAPTER III.

Man's Faculties are the result of Education.

The doctrine of innate ideas, of innate moral principles and of predestined actions lost its authority by degrees, and it was easy to combat it, as it is not conformable to nature. That so many

errors on this point should have prevailed during centuries is almost inconceivable; for every day observation belies the principle, How could philosophers maintain that man is every thing from birth, with the fact before them of the difference in so many particulars between the Athenians and Lacedæmonians, occasioned by the dissimilarity of the laws which governed each nation? And is it not obvious too, that several modern nations neglect the arts and sciences only because their religious creeds interdict such pursuits? And further, is not every one of us aware that his notions and his actions are modified by external circumstances, and by the education he has received? The doctrine of universal innateness has been examined and refuted by Locke, Condillac, and others, and I find it superfluous to say more on the subject here. But some of these authors and their followers fell into the opposite extreme, and conceived men and animals born indifferent-tabulæ rasa, or blank sheets, and maintained all the instincts of animals, from the insect to the dog and elephant, to be the consequences of instruction. Helvetius,—the great champion of this opinion—maintains that foxes hunt because they have learnt hunting from their parents; birds sing and build nests in consequence of instruction; and man becomes man by education.

The opinion of Helvetius and his school, being still much ac

credited, and many institutions being founded on it, deserves a particular examination, but the answer to their positions is, that education produces no faculty whatever, either in man or animals, According to their hypothesis, arts and sciences ought to improve in proportion as they are taught, and mankind ought to become perfect under the care of moral and religious preachers. Why then is the progress of the arts and sciences so slow? Why are we forced to allow that men of genius are born? Why has every one of us certain faculties stronger than others? Truth lies at neither of the extremes, but between the two, and this is what I shall endeavor to prove. I shall consider, under three separate heads, the ideas according to which man acquires his affective and intellectual faculties by education. The first concerns the external senses; the second fortuitous circumstances; and the third, instruction and the external circumstances which are voluntarily prepared.

1. Of the external Senses as cause of the mental faculties.

The external senses, it is certain, are indispensable to the acquiring of knowledge of the external world, and to the fulfilment of social duties; it is also certain that they are given by nature. But it is only because they are absolutely necessary to our actions that they have been considered as their cause.

This subject has been particularly examined in the first volume of this work, and I shall only repeat that the internal faculties are not in proportion to the external senses, and that these are mere intermedia. The hands may be used to take food, to write to a friend, to draw, to play on a musical instrument, &c.; but they do not produce hunger, friendship, drawing, music, &c. Let us observe instead of supposing, and we shall find that the internal faculties are only manifested by means of the external senses and of voluntary motion.

9

2. Of fortuitous or accidental Circumstances as the cause of our

faculties.

The following language is very common :-Necessity makes man act and invent; occasions produce talents; revolutions bring forth great men; danger gives courage; society causes the passions, and these are the principal motives of our actions; climate and food beget powers, &c.; in short, circumstances produce the mental faculties.

Whatever has been said of fortuitous circumstances as the cause of faculties, may be reduced to two considerations: they present the faculties with opportunities necessary to the exhibition of their activity; or they excite the faculties, without, however, originating them.

6

Demosthenes,' says Helvetius, 'became eloquent because the eloquence of Callistratus made so deep an impression on his mind that he aspired only to this talent.' According to the same author, 'Vaucanson became famous in mechanics, because, being left alone in the waiting-room of his mother's confessor, when a child, he chanced to find a clock, and after examining its wheels, endeavoring, with a bad knife, to make a similar machine of wood. He succeeded, and therefore constructed his surprising machines, the automatons. Milton would not have written his Paradise Lost, had he not lost his place of secretary to Cromwell. Shakspeare composed his plays because he was an actor; and he became an actor because he was forced to leave his native country on account of some juvenile errors. Corneille fell in love, and made verses to the object of his passion, and therefore became famous in poetry. Newton saw an apple falling, and this revealed to him the law of gravitation, &c.'

In this manner of reasoning the origin of the faculties is confounded either with the opportunity necessary for their manifestation, or with some external excitement. It is evident that external circumstances must permit the internal faculties to act; oppor

tunities, however, do not, therefore, produce faculties. Without food I cannot eat; but I am not hungry because food exists. A dog cannot hunt if it be shut up, but its desire of hunting is not produced by leading it into the fields. Many millions are often placed in the same circumstances, and, perhaps, a single individual alone takes advantage of them. Revolutions make great men, not because they produce faculties, but because they offer opportunities necessary to their display. Circumstances often favor the attainment of distinction and the acquisition of celebrity, but every individual does not reach an eminent place. Buonaparte alone knew how to acquire supremacy over all French generals who rose before and with him. The Revolution of Spain is far from having produced the same results as that of France. It is not certainly enough to be an actor in order to compose such plays as those of Shakspeare. Theatrical performers were almost ranked with slaves, at Rome, yet Esop and Roscius appeared; whilst in Greece, where this profession was esteemed, no actor of renown is on record. France has produced a greater number of eminent actors than England; yet in the former country performers were excommunicated and in the latter honored. How many children are exposed to similar influences without manifesting the same energy of faculties, while, on the contrary, some individuals not only make use of occasions present, but prepare and produce others which permit their faculties a still greater sphere of activity!

On the other hand, it is true that our faculties are often excited by events, and that without external excitement they would remain inactive. Yet however useful, the study of excellent models may be in the arts, I am still convinced that the principles of every science, art, and profession, are readily conceived by those who possess the faculties each requires in a high degree. This is the case with moral principles and religion also, which are easily developed if the innate conditions on which they depend be possessed.

Society.

Many authors treat of the natural state of man in opposition to his social condition, and consider numerous qualities as the result of society. According to their hypothesis, man is made for solitude; the social state is contrary to his nature; and many of his virtues and vices would never have existed, had he not abandoned his state of isolation.

Excepting certain idiots, however, where, and at what time, has man lived a solitary being? History, so far as it goes, shows that he has always lived in society; in families, at least; and families, though scattered through the woods, form communities. As we find man every where united in societies, then, is it not natural to conclude that he is a social being? Animals, it is necessary to recollect, in regard to the instinct of sociability, are divided into two classes: several species are destined to live in society, as sheep, monkeys, crows, &c; others to live solitary, as the fox, hare, magpie, &c. Man belongs to the social class. Now we may easily conceive that the social animals are endowed with faculties destined for society, and that these cannot act without it. And every individual is, in fact, generally calculated for society; all his faculties are in harmony with this aim. Bustards and cranes place sentinels; a flock of wild geese forms a triangle in flying; a herd of chamois is led by a female; bees act in concert, &c.; and all these peculiarities inhere in animals along with the social instinct. Consequently society is itself a natural institution; a law established by creation; and the faculties of social animals are not the result of society. This proposition is also proved by the fact of social animals having different and often opposite faculties; which if society produce any of them could never happen.

Misery.

Want, that is, some disagreeable sensation, misery, poverty, or painful situation, is often considered as the source of the instincts,