£ R 13
£ R tj
pable of prudence, which is only a great pitch of experience, but not of fapience, which can only be the fruit of evidence x . [ w Pardies, ap. Philof. Tranfa£t. N° 82. p. 4054, and 4071.
- Hobb. lib. cit. c. 6. §. 4. p. 64.]
The chief operation of a rational foul is judgment, by which we diftinguiflh true from falfe ; to which the memory and ima- gination are fubfervient. But this cannot be afcribed tobrutes, lince they do not make proportions. Wale, ubi fupra. Hobb. lib cit. c. 5. §■ 13. p- 55*
As for fpeech or enunciative reafon, to many it docs not feem fo neceflary, fince many of the philofophers condemn it as a vice, and enjoin abfolute filence : in reality, fuppofing a man naturally dumb, does it follow, that he is void of reafon ? Is it any objection then to the reafoning of brutes-, that they have not the ufe of fpeech, tho', as a late author exprefles it, they have all the organs neceflary for that purpofe ? Budd. Anal. Hift. Philof. p. 102, feq.
Plato feems to allow, that, in the reign of Saturn, brutes con- verfed ; and St, Bafil himfelf reckons it as one of the beauties of the terreftrial paradife, that brutes fpoke. Some have pretended, that they ftill have a jargon intelligible to one another ; and Porphyry relates, that Tirefias and Apol- lonius Tyanseus understood their language. There is at leaft a fimilitude of fpeech in brutes., for they know each other by their voices, and have their figns whereby they exprefs anger, joy, and other paffions : thus a dog afiaults in one {train, fawns in another, howls in another, and cries when beaten in an- other. 'Tis true, their fpeech to us appears rude and inarticu- late ; but perhaps ours is the fame in their ears ?. And if the voice of brutes be unintelligible to us, does not the fame hold of the language of our own kind, till we have been inftructed in it ? The language of foreigners, what does it appear to us, but a confufed unmeaning heap of founds z . In fine, if laugh- ter be peculiar to man, we fee the image of it in brutes, figni- fied by the motion of their ears, eyes, mouth, tongue, &c. Laftly, what is fo peculiar to man as forefight of futurity, but have not beafts this, which lay upftoreswith great care in their cells, as the ant, bee, &c a — [ * Chauv. Lex. p. /y. z Sext. Empir. Pyrrhon. Hypot. p. 781. Trev. Did loc. cit. Pitifc. Lex. Ant. T. t. p. 279. a Chauv. Lex. p. 79 ] 'Tis known, the antients allowed birds not only the know- ledge of things prefent, but of futurity likewife, which they were fuppofed to difcover, among other ways, by their voice. Sext. loc. cit. Mem. Acad. Infcrip. T. 2. p. 376. See the ar- ticles Augury, Bird, &c. Cycl. and Suppl. Divers moderns have aflerted, that brutes were created immor- tal, and that they would not have died if Adam had not finned ; that they will ftill rife again at the laft day, and be taken up with man to heaven. Thomaf. lib. cit. p. 185. The generality of the antient philofophers thought that brutes reafoned : this, among the heathens, was the opinion of Ana- Kagoras, Plato, Porphyry, Celfus, Galen, Plutarch, and others. Amon<r chriftians, Lactantius, and the whole body of Mani- chees and Gnoftics b . Among the moderns, Valla, Sonner- tus, Arriaga c , Tho. Campanella d , Gafendus % F. Daniel, and others", afiert the fame. Plutarch has a dialogue un- der this title, that brutes ufe reafon. All the fed of Pythago- ras fhould be of the fame fentimenr, becaufe the metempfy- chofis imports that human fouls pals into the bodies of brutes. Can any perfon, fays Lactantius, deny that brutes have reafon, when they often outwit man himfelf ? Potcji aliquis negare bru- tis ineffs rationem, quum hcminein ipfu?n fape deludant P f . — [ b Maurit. Specim. de Princip. Jur. Publ. p. 53. Thomaf. lib. cit. p. 186. ' Difput. Phyf. 7. feet. 6. fubf. 2. J De Senfu Rerum, 1. 2. c. 23. * Phyf. feci. 3. Membr. Pofter. I. 8. c. 4. p. 409. f LaBant. Inft. Divin. 1. 3. c. 10.] The Stoics, holding that the Divine Being is diffufed through all creatures, were neceflitated to maintain the fouls of brutes to be divine, and confequently that they had reafon. Wale. loc. cit.
The Sceptics paralleled brutes with men. Sextus, more parti- cularly, yfives acomparifon between dogs and thehumankind. The former excels the latter as to fenfe ; it has a quicker fcent, whereby to purfue beafts unfeen ; it difcovers them fooner by the eye, and is more acute of hearing. Sext. Empir. Pyrrhon. Hypotyp. 1. i- c. 13. Stanl. Hift. Philof. P. 12. p. 780. A do<* is not deftitute of logic, as appears from Chryfippus's famous inftance, who obferved, that a hound coming into a road which divides into three, makes choice of the third by virtue of an induftion or fylloglfm : for that having fcentcd the two ways by which the beaft did not pafs, he runs ftraight upon the third without fcent'mg it: where the reafoning is obvious : the beaft palTed either that way, or that way, or this way; but he neither pafted that way, nor that way, and there- fore this way. Stanley, lib. cit. p. 780. Hierom Rorarius has attempted to fhew, that the brutes reafon better than men, *%uod animalia bruta rations melius utantur he* mine. Par. 1645. Amft. 1666.
J. And. Schmidius has a difcourfe exprefs on the logic of brutes. De Logica Brutorum.
That a dog is pofteffed of what they call internal reafon, ap- pears from his chufing things convenient, flying the hurtful; purfuing his food, and running away from the whip: add. ithat, when wounded, he feeks for a remedy s by continually
licking the part j if a fpliriter be got into his foot, he ftrivek to pull it out with his teeth 5 ftrictly obferving Hippocrates's rule, to keep the part affected, as much as may be, at reft; and therefore holding it up in walking. "When fick, or, troubled withill humours, he eats grafs, which makes him puke s. Of how many medicines, how many arts do we owe the inven- tion to brutes h f It was from the fpidcr, that man learned the art of weaving ; from ihe fwallow we borrowed architecture j from the goofe fwimming, from fifties navigation, from filk- worms fowing ; to omit many other in fiances of the like kind alleged by Plutarch j , Vofiius k , and others '. — .[} Stanl. loc. cit. h Vid. Fabric. Bibl. Grajc. 1. 4. c. 29. T. 4. p. 334, feq. * Vid. Plui. de Solert, Animal, p. 974. k Voff. de Orig. Idolat. 1. 3. c. 67. 1 Wolf. Not. ad Cafaubon p. 262.] How many actions are obferved of brutes, not to be accounted for without reafon and argumentation? As that commonly noted of a dog, which, running before his mafter, will flop at a divarication of the way, till he fee which hand his mafter takes. Or that when having got a prey, which they fear will be taken from them, they run away and hide it, and afterwards return to it. What account can be given, why a dog, being to leap on a table, which he fees too high for him to reach, if a frool or chair happen to ftand in the way, firft: mounts up that, and from thence the table ? If he were a machine, or piece of clock-work, and this motion caufed by the ftriking of a fpring, there is no reafon imaginable, why the fpringj being fet on work, fhould not carry the machine in a right line to- ward the object that put it in motion, as well when the table is high as when it is low ; whereas the firft leap the creature takes up the ftool, is frequently not directly toward the tabic, but in a line oblique, and much declining from the object that moved it m . Who can but admire the fagacity and cunning of a hound, in purfuing a hare through all her windings and doublings ; of a hare in flying the hounds, with, al] her fhifts and devices ; of beafts that lay mares for others, as foxes, or cats for mice ? What numerous arts and ftratagems do fpiders practice in watching flies n ? Nor is this addrefs only found iri beafts which live by prey, but in the more timorous kind, as deer, fquirrels, and the like. That all thefe are owing to in- ftinct or machinery, without any knowledge or fenfe, is fcarce conceivable. Tho' a dog, a fox, or a wolf, may be driven to hunt by inftinct, or a blind impulfe of nature, yet unlefs there were alfo docility in him, would he, on fmelling or fpying the partridge, give notice to his mafter by wagging his tail ? You fay, that dogs, by long habit, and by force of rewards and pu- nifhments, may be taught many things : but do not this teach- ing, docility, and remembrance of blows, argue memory, fear and defire, which cannot fubfift without knowledge, fenfe, plea- fure and pain ? But if brutes have knowledge, 'tis allowed they muft alfo have judgment, and reafon, and a fcience of uni- verfals ; fince a beaft that hunts, efpecially the firft time, can only have a general idea or perception of the prey or enemy it is to purfue ; that is, a fox or a cat, in hunting the firft time for a bird or a moufe, and, on the contrary, the bird or the rnoufe which are hunted for the firft time, do not the one per- ceive the prey, or the other the enemy,, in this, very place or time, and with thefe particular cireumftances, but only perceive prey or enemy in the general ? Elephants, when they have once cfcaped the trap, become extremely diftruiiful ever after ; they will not budge afoot without a great bough ofatree,with which they examine every ftep before they fet down their feet,tp try whether there be any hole in the way. When they march in troops, if any of them perceives an herb whereon a man has trod, he plucks it up, and delivers it to the next, who, having fmelled it, tranfmits it to a third, and fo on to the laft ; who hereupon raifing a huge noife, they all betake themfelves to flight ; retiring to the hills, woods and other places, not fre- quented by men °.-— [ m Ray, Wifdom of Creat, P. 1. p. 54. n Chauv. Lex. Phil. p. 377. voc. Machina. ° Tavern. Trav, Ind. ap. Phil. Tranfaa."N° 326. p. 65.] Further, whatever imagines or opines, muft neCefTarily judge, fince opinion itfelf is only a fort of judgment ; fo that a fheep, which fears a wolf that Ihe never faw,muftnecefiarily judge a wolf in the general an enemy to her ; add, that the arts which foxes or dogs make ufe of to catch hens or partridges, and thole arts which the latter make ufe of to efcape their hunters, cannot be grounded on any knowledge, excepting that general knowledge' which is derived from particular tilings, whereby, from fingu- lars perceived, we infer others not perceived; which is direct reafoning. Chauv. Lex. p. 378.
Now admitting this knowledge of brutes, muft we not alfo ad- mit, that they have thought or confeioufnefs, and liberty,' which are attributes peculiar to fpiritual beings ? Thought muft be allowed them, fince all knowledge, even that called fenfe in man, and confequently in brutes, is thought. Nor can any reafon be alleged, whereby anian fhould be judged confeious of what he perceives by fenfe, and a beaft not confeious j If both have knowledge of what they feel, we muft alfo allow them li- berty, both of contrariety and contradiction ; fince otherwife howfhould the hope of reward, or fear of punifhment, Work on them ? Was not the cat at full liberty either to hunt or not hunt ? efpecially in fuch cafes, where ihe takes the purfuit without any neceflity either of preferring her life, or propa- gating her kind. And 'tis known that thofe beafts are then
ID oft
