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.

'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,

propensities, sentiments, and intellectual faculties of man and animals.

Want, in this signification, certainly excites the internal faculties, but it is not true that it produces them; or else the same external wants ought to create the same faculties in animals and in man: yet we observe that not merely every kind of animal, but even every individual, acts differently under like impressions from without. The partridge dies of hunger and cold during sharp winters, and the sparrow falls benumbed from the housetop, while the nightingale and quail take wing to temperate climes before the season of want arrives. The cuckoo requires a nest to lay its eggs in as well as the wagtail or the redbreast, and yet builds none. The idiot makes no effort to defend himself from the inclemencies of the weather, while the reasonable man covers himself with clothing. Moreover, the faculties of animals and man are active, without any necessity from external circumstances. The beaver, though shut up and protected against the weather, builds its hut; and the weaver bird, though in a cage, makes its tissue. It consequently follows, that external wants excite the activity of the internal faculties, but do not produce them; and in this respect their influence is important. The faculties of the poor, for instance, are more active than those of the affluent; when the faculties, however, have not been given by nature, external wants cannot excite them.

On the other hand, misery exercises innate benevolence and improves the softer feelings, whilst riches are prone to excite and encourage lower passions, and in this sense it may be said that the Lord inflicts pain upon those he likes, that is, they grow better; and Jesus Christ condemned riches, yet it remains certain that misery does not produce benevolence.

I have already shown that the expression Want, taken as synonymous with inclination or desire, is the effect and not the cause of the internal faculties; that there are as many wants as different faculties; and that wants are proportionate to the activity of these.

Climate and mode of Living.

Several philosophers have supposed that climate, mode of living, and even the nurse's milk, might be the cause of man's faculties.

In this manner of thinking, the modifications are confounded with the origin of our faculties. The opinion, however, must be considered. The arguments adduced in support of it only prove that manifestation of the faculties depends on the organization; for climate, eating, drinking, &c. have a powerful influence upon the body. Instead, therefore, of denying the influence of climate, food, air, light, &c. I consider it as of great importance, in as far as the activity of the faculties is concerned. The milk of nurses certainly contributes to the growth and organic constitution of children, and consequently to the manifestation of the affective and intellectual faculties, inasmuch as the body is necessary to this. All these external influences, however, cannot, it is evident, produce any faculty. If parents were right in attributing the inferior propensities of their children to the nourishment they had received, why should not grown-up people, who live on beef, veal, mutton, pork, &c., accuse the ox, calf, sheep, and pig, for their want of intelligence, and their peculiar character? The activity of our faculties varies with the modifications of our organization, just as the milk and butter of cows vary according to the food they live on; or as the flesh and fat of animals are modified according to the articles with which they are fattened. The activity of men fed on game differs much from the activity of men living upon potatoes and other vegetables; and it seems possible to show the influence of different aliments upon certain systems in the healthy state, just as

it

may be shown that some medicines act more upon one than upon another. From the same reason we may also conceive the utility of certain rules of fasting in subduing sensual appetites. Particular degrees of excitement suppress the activity of certain faculties, while they increase that of others.

Climate certainly exerts a great influence upon the organization,