And, If We Have Any Evidence That

The Laws Of Nature Are The Rules According To Which The Effects Are Produced; But There Must Be A Cause Which Operates According To These Rules. The Laws Of Navigation Never Navigated A Ship. The Rules Of Architecture Never Built A House.

Every Theory In Philosophy, Which Is Built On Pure Conjecture, Is An Elephant; And Every Theory That Is Supported Partly By Fact, And Partly By Conjecture, Is Like Nebuchadnezzar's Image, Whose Feet Were Partly Of Iron, And Partly Of Clay.

A Philosopher Is, No Doubt, Entitled To Examine Even Those Distinctions That Are To Be Found In The Structure Of All Languages... In That Case, Such A Distinction May Be Imputed To A Vulgar Error, Which Ought To Be Corrected In Philosophy.

The Wisdom Of God Exceeds That Of The Wisest Man, More Than His Wisdom Exceeds That Of A Child. If A Child Were To Conjecture How An Army Is To Be Formed In The Day Of Battle--how A City Is To Be Fortified, Or A State Governed--what Chance Has He To Guess Right? As Little Chance Has The Wisest Man When He Pretends To Conjecture How The Planets Move In Their Courses, How The Sea Ebbs And Flows, And How Our Minds Act Upon Our Bodies.

Every Man Feels That Perception Gives Him An Invincible Belief Of The Existence Of That Which He Perceives; And That This Belief Is Not The Effect Of Reasoning, But The Immediate Consequence Of Perception. When Philosophers Have Wearied Themselves And Their Readers With Their Speculations Upon This Subject, They Can Neither Strengthen This Belief, Nor Weaken It; Nor Can They Shew How It Is Produced. It Puts The Philosopher And The Peasant Upon A Level; And Neither Of Them Can Give Any Other Reason For Believing His Senses, Than That He Finds It Impossible For Him To Do Otherwise.