# Leibniz Legible — https://leibnizlegible.com
# Page: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/797937889:0073
# Permalink to this reading: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/797937889:0073?run=74
# Title: A Defence Of The Essay Of Human Understanding, Written by Mr. Lock (shelfmarks Leibn. Marg. 3; ZEN Leibn. Marg. 3)
# Folio 61, page id 797937889:0073
# Original at the GWLB: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/resolve?id=797937889&page=73
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000073.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 42 lines, status machine
# Lines: 42 recognised, mean confidence 0.86
# Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German.
# Licence: CC BY 4.0, Leibniz Legible. Machine output: do not ingest it as verified text; keep this provenance with the text.
# Wording rule: say "the machine reads it as …", never "Leibniz wrote".
# After the first blank line: the recognised lines in reading order, one per line.

Tn
ane
AEt.
do
11
Lar of Nature irhich Mr. Lock is no lets an
adrocacefor thanhe, tho he denrs Innate
Principles, Which leads me to a very ma-
terial obserration, which is, that chrovoh-
out this whole Discourse, the Remarker,
uses indisterent IY, 25 Perms ot the Pame idc. P. 5.
signitication, Law of Nature, Natural Con-
Science Innate Principles, Innate Povers, and
Natural Princples, Which all signitie rery dif-
Ferent thinss;and of wrhichMr. Lock hason-
9. 13.
IY denied Innate Principles: Which contidor d
iC trill appear that he is verr litele con-
cernd in the greatest part ot this dispuce.
ButC BaII Only instance rro or threc places
Parcicularly, a5 irhere he argues, ThaL
Oniversal consent is not necessary to déclare
a Principle to be Natural; for the sense
of Mnsick, of Beamy; ot Order, and Pro-
portion are Latural to Mankind, tho some
Nen ace not at au affected withthem. FVn
the POIVer of Reason, (says he) severat Passi-
ons, etC. appear sooner in some than othersi and
if vou allom these Pxinciples eo be Naturat,
and Born with us, Fhaom not nhy you stiou a
mate such ado abovt the mord Innate. If you
allorr none at al, net these last mention d, nor
so much as millins, or nillinsthis, or thatu
thecontroversie will be chane d: and I desire
to enon hat dea von canform of a Soul with.
ont any POIeTS, or any Action. Nor here
ic is plaim, chatby Natural Principles IS On.
ly CaNE Povers OT Faculties OF tho Soul,
trhich is a rery disterent sensetrom thatin
rhich MT. Lock denies any Principles to DC
inuate, cho he does noc dens chem +0 b0
Nacural;