# Leibniz Legible — https://leibnizlegible.com
# Work: https://leibnizlegible.com/work/797937889
# Title: A Defence Of The Essay Of Human Understanding, Written by Mr. Lock (shelfmarks Leibn. Marg. 3; ZEN Leibn. Marg. 3)
# Original at the GWLB: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/resolve?id=797937889
# Lines: 3,787 recognised on 96 of 97 pages, mean confidence 0.83
# 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, page by page: a "## Folio <label> — <page id>" line ("## Canvas <n>" where no folio label is recorded), "# " lines naming its source image and model, then its recognised lines in reading order, one per line.

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0001
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000001.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 120 lines, status machine
tem    e
.
e
B
. l
Ca
de (8
e
1
on
is ac
(
v
 
ti
d a
li
it
o d
l
et
t
ad
Leibon.
Maeru.
e
l
 
id u
H i
e
 s
s
e
pin
.
u
e
  
ise
ls
e
qu(
C
ad.
C
on
e
u   
e
et 
deis   .
as
a
P
2
be ati e
 e
sti
e
me 
etie
e
 
ae
n
a
t
2
s
ees
netet
  cet
vel
a
 e
 CC a
e
e
C 
sa
et 
ne
e
leteled
d
 si
  s
i 
de
ase 
e
d
a
bi
5
e ta
e
do d
e
 
e
 
a
enesi
ito
di e
eit
si
ledia
e g
opedioti
e
ad
at
od. sis se   
a
3
Mitrotim-System-Vertrieo
a

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0002
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000002.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 2 lines, status machine
on. Mutoq
3

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0003
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000003.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 5 lines, status machine
1
.
1
n
V51182

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0004
# No recognised text on this page (skipped: no_lines).

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0005
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000005.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 19 lines, status machine
u 
nt Cortibur OF THIF
 nuneque
ui
minm .
 uL
OF
st
Iluman Ondertcanding,
Written by NII. Lock.
Wherein its Principles rith reference to
Moralici, Reveal d Religion; and che
Immorialitu of tlic Sonb are Consi
der d arid juctisud: In Antiver to
Sorie
REMARRS on thatFiN
London, Printed ForWilI. Turner ac LlC Angel
at Lincolns. Inn BaCk- CdFC, and 30l. n Nust
neor Scationers- Fall. 1702.

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0006
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000006.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 31 lines, status machine
 
- + + +
HIBL IOLLIC. CA
R H FIA
i
 s
L2ICVEel.
aitu
 e en t
Ca
BNCO
IHIC
AIe
a Rd
dys
Reale
Jeavi
and
His
FOI
Ata
ne
100
AB
Dre
doul
due
deal
tene
Hum
OE H

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0007
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000007.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 33 lines, status machine
Ene
ent
V. a
a L.n
Donot prelume to address thele Papers to
rou as a Champion in vour Caule, but 25
an Ofender, to make the best Avolney
Jcan for a Bold unlicenc d Ondertakins; thac
Excellence oF the ElTar ot Fluman Inderstandins
rrhich care me Courase in encountrins a Ca.
viller asainst it, Arikces me with Chame and
Aire, Wrhon I think ot comine betore vou; like
a Rath Lover, that tiehis in Detence oF a L.a-
dys Honour, the julter his Cause is, the more
Reaton hehas to tear her Relentment, For not
leavins it to alsert it Celt by its oun Fvidence,
and the more it secures him ot Succels asainst
his Adverlary, ihe lels Pretence he has to her
Forsirenels: But, Sir, The FPar oE Duman
Onderstandins is a Publick Concern, which everi
one has a Righe and Interest to détend; It came
t00 late into the World to be receir d without.
Opposition, as it mishe have been in tho first
ASes OE Philosophy, betore Mens Heads vere
prepossest rith inasinary science; at least, vo
doubt, if (0 Porfeet a Work con d hare Been pro-
ducd s0 Farly, it rou d have prevented a sreat
deal oF that unintellisible Parson, and vain Prc-
tence to Knomledse ot thines out ot the reachiof
Tluman Vnderstandins, Which matre a ereat part
oF the School. Learnins, and dituse the Mind t0
Plain andsolid Truth.
ut

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0008
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000008.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
But the CTrCat MIr. Lock was retervd FOr a
Curious ard Learned Asc, to break in upon this
Sanctuari of anity and lenorance, aud by Cettinz
Men on considerins first the Bounas of Fluman
Onderstandins, tohelp them in a close Purluit ot
True and VTetul Rnorledse: And is it possible
FOr a LOver oF Pruthtobeummor d, or silent
Jy Cutter ary injurious insinuatiors ot (0 Lxcel-
dent a Delign.
Tour Time, Sir, is t00 precious to be employ d
in tatine notice of them, rou ltill eo on in tar-
thier deliens For our advantase and improve
iment; and irhisst rou labour in that Cireat Enc
+0 irtich rou vvere Destind, The 500d of Man-
kind tis every ones Duty to be watehtul For
rou, and zealous to lecure the Benetits ron have
alreadr done us.
Lis contels d, the vast disproportion betreen
de
one ot (o mean Abilities as the Author ot this
Detence; and the Incomvarablo Mr. Lock, mixht
Writh Realon have deter d From the Attempt. But
I did not prelume to contider my selt in anx
kind ot Comparison rith him, l only observ d
the Adrelaries Strensth and Thoneht (with Rea
son and Justice on my side) I necd not be dil
couraxd to enter the Lists with him; AndIam
Dextiraded, Wrtiat I have done will learehim no
cause ot Triumph, how much loerer it iS un
rorthy ot rou: l istr, Sir, rou may outy tind
It enouph vorth jour notico, to incite ron to lheu
the World, hou Far it FallsMrort ot doine justice to
vour Principles, Which rou may do ithout in
terruptine the Great Bulinels ot vour Lite, DY 2
Work that will be an Dnivertal Benetit, and
prhich rou hrave sirp the Worta tome Rixt. to
exac

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0009
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000009.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 61 lines, status machine
For a
Luman
CuIF Ot
oslible
Silent.
L. XCet
lord
In Far.
Drore.
Man.
id For.
have
reen
E this
mete
But
aMY
erv d
IRea
e dit.
IL aM
M M
1S UM
 Fiu
OIII
icer
Out I
13 s
tus aM
eht. I
exde
exact ot rou; Who is there (o capable oF pur-
Juine to a Demonstration thole Reflections on rhe
Crounds oF Moralitr irtrich ron have already
made: Which on the Elines rou have sivn, is
impatientr expected trom rou by mans utio
lament the Ctreat Need there is ot ic in this Age.
ThatConsideration, no doubt, Wwill animate one Wwho
has ever Memn a caretul Lcal For the Adrance.
ment of Practical Religion; and I cannot but
think a Man (0 freatly quality d For luch an VIn.
dertatcins; mas sivn in Mercy to an A∞O in
irhich it is more than ever rrantine, tor never
any ase abounded like this rrith open Advo.
cates ot Prrelision, upon pretended Rational
Crounds, T0 lilence these untrapor Realoners,
by a Demonstration ot che Oblisations their Na-
ture lars uxon them, is a Wr’orke vorthy ot the
Fxcellent Mr. Lock; And perhaps the ireatenets
oF this Detence inay Mher vou, that thole wrho
mean vell to Relision, have no little need ot
vour Instruction; in hopes ot ihich, I have
ventur d to Publitr these Papers, not without
much Apprehension and Aire ot rour Displeature;
But Sir, in my Oftence rou mult perceire ny
Leal, and tho I have not the Hlappinels to be
nourt ce vou, veliere me with the Protound.
est Respectis
Tour most Fumble
And most Obedient Ser vant.
PRF

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0010
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000010.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 29 lines, status machine
ASthe Science of true Morality, 25 of the most Om-
L versal and hishest Concernment to Mantind, no
dubt, those Writers who establis, it unon the
clearest, most obvious, and the most solid Crronnas, do
ehe Best Service to Relision, Which has recero d
no little prejudice, By. the attempts of some mel
meanins Men to support it uvon Metaphysical Notions,
pon false or abstruse Reasominss: And as there ap-
pears ahearty Leal for settins Menr
isht in thatsreat
Concern in al the.  ritines of the l’xcellent Author
ac
of the lissay of Hluman Vndorleandine, llnon no
Philosopher before him that has fix d Morality upon
so solid a F’oundation, as he sives many Clints of
in that SPay, ubere ever the Subject nill vermit: A
Foundation strons enough. to satisfie the Wisest, and
plain enouch to b. conceio dby the meakest C’apacities.
And vet there have not heen mantins some, who have
tax d that admirable P ssay mith Principles prejudicial,
or not suffcient ro ihose Crreat Fnds, Wrhich are evi-
dently the main Scop of all that Authors Wortes;
So hard it is for M.n Who have been Ws d to receive
T.nih in a particulur Dress, to hnom her nhen stript
of those false Colours and borror d Ornaments, mith
rohich se 25 t00 efren disguisd; at least, this is the
inst  moud thinke of. such Cavillers, the most fa-
vourable fudement that ean be made os them, is that
they

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0011
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000011.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
mi
MC
.
PRF F A C F.
tbey have erther mistaken Mr. LockS Principles, lor
the true Crounds of Morality, ond vrite oit of 1eo
sreat a Fondness of their omn Hy Pothesis, or len-
rance of his.
But es there are no Reflections so weak or ill prouna
ed that fome or other may not be decerd d by, l have
met mith tuo or three, uho upon readins some Re-
martes on the Fissay of Fluman Onderstandins (Which
fel but lately into my FTanas) concluded it contain d
very danserons Principles, and vithout farther Fxa-
mination, condenn d the FPay, havins never read;
or as they onnd very little consider d it; on which
account, several nhohave a great respect for Mr. Lock,
have mist a hehad leisure to onsiver the Difficulties
objected acainst his Principles by the Remarker; But
as Idid not think theni strons enouch to need so great
a Fland toremove them, I persivaded my self Imight
do somethirs tomaras it, which at first I design d only
for my con satisfaction; and those fem Friends nho
hod spote to me of them, Put in examinins their
Force I found them so much grourded on Mistates,
not onty of the Principles the duthor contendsagainst
But of the Fonndation of those Grand Points he
contends for, that it fell unavoidably in my, may to
mate some Refections upon the True Grounds et
Morality, and the danger of establisbins a Point os
se ereat Concern as that, and the Immertality of the
Soul, upon false or uncertain Hy pothesis, which ha-
vns heen frequently altempted, and by vell desiznine
Men made me think it misht not be unusesul to pub:
Dis these Papers; And Phope, whatever may tend
to removing any Prejudices acainst a Bock of
so preat use as the FPsay of Fluma Vnderstand.
IT

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0012
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000012.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 14 lines, status machine
P R F F A C F.
ins, willbe thouche of some Consequence to the Pub-
lick; and tho I am far from pretendins to have set
the Principles I defend in al the Lustre they are ca-
pable of, F doubt not, that Y have sufficient ly Bemn
the Weaeness of the Objections asainst them, and
that al impartial Readers will casily perceive, that
hatever is defective in this Defence, can onty
be imputed to mant of Fudement in the Ondertater,
squal to the Truth and fustice of the C ause.
L a L aE A.
e 21. 1. 32. dete Cdc. P. 23. 1. 12. r. TC
bo lb) Ct
cheiro P. 34.  7. T. E0 MF.

## Folio 1 — 797937889:0013
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000013.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 30 lines, status machine
ib.
64.
vi
aud
hat
ms
ret,
CATIC
S ast
Concernine
Tuman Onderstandine.
prame
AIS hapor For Marikind, When
Men ot an elerated GTenIus,
and uncommon Penctration,
hare tooa truly Hoble and
Beneticent Nature, abore anr loir par-
ticular Ends; and Resolute enouehto en
counter all the Oppositions ther must
meet in an urbrals d search oF Pruth,
from those irho hravine rith muctr
vains Tribib d the Opinions of RC-
rerenced Authors, arcunwiling to unlearn
aII their Former Knomledse, to examino
irtrat ther hrave been targhu tor first Prin-
ciples notto be question d, are lay aside
their Sacred ipse dixit. HIc Who dares
attempt acainst this establistid Monar-
ety over Nens Judsiments; nust be
doot a

## Folio 2 — 797937889:0014
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000014.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 58 lines, status machine
a
J0okd on as a troublesome and dange
rousinnorater, and necds a misher Force
of Realon and generous Courase, t0
breale throuxh allthePrejudices ot Nen,
and tree them trom a villine Slavery:
Tothat united Force, re oire theexcet
lent Fssar on Human Vnderllancinsi
and to thele Prejudicoe, alithe Cavils a
Bainst it.
When the Lixht OF Prath Shines t00
clear and Arone to be directt F’acd
the. orily Shelter For thole irtio would
not Feclits Force, is to leck For Far fetchd
danserous Consequences, uppos d Incon-
Tltencies, With Rerealed Truchs, and My
x
setes ot Faithi, deduc dby a lons Train
ot Arsuuments, Which ensasins in an in
tricate Dilpute, Phadles them wich lome
pretence, for not Contessins the Splen
dorot that Truth, ther cannot Encoun
ter, Inconsistencies rith Rereald Pruths.
ertren the real necessary Conlequence et
auy Principles beins susticient Proots a
sanse them, hor Plaulibe Poever they
appear; But NIT. Lock tas (0 well Vin-
dicated his Flar From thole imputed to
u, by che mole considerable of his Op.
volers, chatthe rest cou d onlyhoveto Pri
umph in his Nesleet ot their Actempto
Wrhro bythehelpof lome Suppositions, and
mans Miltakies, have endeavour d 10
drar an Odium on that excellent lllar.
The Remarker, Whom l have nou un
der Contideration, in his Airst Letter.
delires to be informd hou Far aIl the
Prim.
Prim
that
E
I
n
ten
3
siar
the
IBE
the
be
JUd.
Patiss
Pri
thint
and
Cle
Ill 
it.

## Folio 3 — 797937889:0015
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000015.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
M
Principles oF thae ingenious Fsay, ta
ken tosether, will sive us a lure Foun-
dation For Morality, Reveard Religion
and a futuro Lifo, Which he doesnot find
that ther do; What his Realons, ox ra-
ther Difticulties (a5 he terms them) are,
is my desion to consider, and endearoue
eo latistr. In his second Remarks, he
imentions an Antirer OF MIT. LockS, Wtrictr
Phave not Read, but suppole, by eetrat
tre quotes out ot it, that it vas rather
desiend to Beir the Weatnels of his OB.
jections, than to sire a fuil Ansiver 10
them, NIr. Lock, Perhaps, thinscine it sucti.
sient to Cher they required none; but I
tindthei are silI oF Weiehe rith the Re:
martier, his Second and Third Remarks;
beine onli Enlarements uxon the Pame
Fleads.
TMalI theretore Fixamine them in their
Order; tatrins on each Hlead the. Sub.
cance ot irhat I find relatine to ic in all
he three Remartes, that the aisiver Iri
Stocether, mar be thenore clear, and
hebetter Consider d; Wrhich; Phope, will
de done by the Remarker without Pre.
udice, a5 it vas Writ, rith a delion to
atistr him; and in a lincere Lore ot
Pruth, to do Justice to a BookWhich, I
hink; remores the Obstacles to it,
nd thers the Method oF atrainine ic
learer and more effectualty, and is WVrit
n an exacter Method than any betore
E to vindicate. It From a Defect. in the
a
cundation oE Cetlainc, i rhole Finss
itrictu

## Folio 4 — 797937889:0016
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000016.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
A
ertich are oE greatest Concern ID uS,
Wvhich Idorbe not to do, it beine clear
to me, that Wrhaterer re can kno at all
usE DC discoverable bY Mr. LockS Prin
ciples; For l cannot find any other ras
tolnorledse, or that re have anr one
Idea not derired From Senlation and Re.
Aection. But let us sec hou thole points
inar De establistid on them, For wtrich
the Remarter doubts their Force; and
Airst oF Noralier, or Natural Religi
On ot wrtrich, he thus Degins:
. 4. Asto Moraliey, me thint the sreat Foun-
dation of il is the distinction of C0od and
Fivil. Viriue and Vice. And I de
not find that my Fres, Fars. Nostrils or
any other ontward senses, mate any distinction
of thesethines, as they do ofColours, Sounds,
8cc.- Nor from any Ideas tahen in from
them, or fromtheir Reports, am I Conscions
that Id., or can conclude that there 25 such
a distinction in che Nature of things. Tr
2. X. p. 8. Wvhrich WOrds, he Pays, he thouett he hact
tatien in cnoueh to comprehend both
MIr. LocteS Principles ot Knowlecee, sen
Parion and Reftection, Wrhich I Bould not
have thouptit, but since he omns hre de-
siend them to do s0, re will suxpolo
boch exprest, and proceed rith hun.
allom that me may infer from Observation
arid Reason that such a distinction 25 use
ful to Scciety, but both Philosophers and Di
vines, vou lnom mate a more immutable
and intrinsicl. Distinction, Wohich is that 
ccint malee out from pour Principles

## Folio 5 — 797937889:0017
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000017.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 55 lines, status machine
US
ed
al
CIIF
Oe
R
1
U
and
DIII.
ana
nas,
rom
eror
ete
lIa
sat
a
The lam sure of, that the Distinction, sup-
pose of Gratitude and Inoratinde, Fidelity
and Insideliti, Fustice and Injustice, and suet
others, Esas sudden without any Ratiocination
and as sensible and peircins, asthe Differnce
T feet fromthe Scent of a Rose and APa- Fati-
ca. One wouldthinkchorc, he Wvere donbt
ins Whrether uponMr. Lock Sprinciplesrre
can distinguimt Crratitude Fcem Ingratitude,
Fidelity From Insidelity, dcc. that 15: LHOW
that breakrins aTruI IS NOL ITOCTIME a
Trust, Oc. Wrtrich (a5 all ocher Moral. 
Virtues, 25 Mr. Lock has CherM) arc:
Collection ot lurple Ideas, receired from
Sensation and Refection; Dut lirice he
allorr d abore, that me can from Obser-
vation and Reason infer such a Distinctien
to be useful to Socrety, ana by conléguence,
that ve can by them perceive Tuct.
a Dictinction, re wil cuels his neanne
here, to De, that the perception ot thc
Morality and Immorality OF thele FiNGSLIS
a5 Tudden, Ec. asthe differance he fecis fron
the scent of a Pose, and APa Fatida; tho
I do noc sinow Wvbat iE 26, 10 Ferceive
the Morality and Immeraliti et these chinso
mithout any Ratiocination; Fustice and I
justice, L chink, deperd upen the RissitS
OE Men, Wrhether Natural, Os eltabliti.d
by particular Societies, anci theretore to
lnor Whiat they arc, us necellari en
now irhat Rictit 1d, Wtrich lure recuires
Tome Reftection; ut toknou Ehat erjustice is
Fvil, Writhont any Refection, secrus Eome,
nomore chan to Lnois thatthe cerm Irju-
sisce
it

## Folio 6 — 797937889:0018
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000018.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
Rice, Rands For Fomethine that e dont
dnom, irhich is Fvil; untels it will be
Paid that rre may lnow it to be a de-
tamme any omes Rieht, rithout linou-
ins wrhat Richt is, irhich vill bea very
intisniticant Knowledgo: But it the Re-
marker means that as toon a5 he lnorro
wrhat it isto have a Riche to a Thuns, he
perceives, that to detam From a Man Wrhiat
he has such a Rioht to, is Pvil, without
any Farther Reflection, I understand lim,
Dut sec not hor it can be objectedasainst
the Force oF MIr. LochS principles, beine
ouly a perception of the dilaercement
ot thele tro Ideas, ot one Mans hr-
vine a Rishe to a Thine, and anothers
havins a Rieht totakce it aray: But this
oulr by the mar.
Let us nou Consider that For irhich
tus Tudden preception withont Ratio.
cination i5 broushe a5 a PcOOL, VIZ.
Phat the Grounds of the Diltinction ot
Nloral Good and Fvil, is in the Nature
of the Things themselves, abstraet From the
ood oF Societr; Wrhich is that he can-
not inatre ont trom MIr. LocleS Principles.
Fy wetrich Distinction in the Hature ot
Phinss, it he means that withont respect
to Men, or to Societr, tho Mankind
had never Been, or never been desien e,
ustice, Gratitude, Fidelier, 6c. bad
been Crood, and their contraries Pvil:
IContels my selt incapable ot havine
a Notion ot these Vertues abstract From
unu subseet, to conccire. For Frample.
ttia

## Folio 7 — 797937889:0019
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000019.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
V
y
t
thac it rould have been 5o0d to be
l’arthtul to a Trust, tho there had ne-
ver heen any one to Trust, or beTrust
edt: Nor doIfind that the APsertors ot
this Distinction in the Pature et Thinso
hare any real Idea ot them irore ab-
Aracted than Y have, Which will appear
in txammnns their particular Intcariceo;
l ril tare that huch the Rearker 2. R. p 26.
Sres, beins one ot the most incontect
cd Principles in Moralitr, Phat it 25 a
wicked Thins, for a Man maliciousty to Kill
his Friend, or his Father, or any other in-
nocent Person. The Truth of this, he lays,
seems to him as Clear and fternal, as
any Proposition in Mathematicks; and it
seems to me a5 Clear, that IF CaMBOt
volliblr be Concerred at all, cicher Prue
Or False, in it SelF, 2. e. Without an RC-
lation to Man. I desice any one, totry
erhether he ean Conccire it to bC au
Eternal Pruth, That tisa wicked Thine,
For a Mlanto Killhis Facher, or hisFriend,
tho therehadnerer been, or delgnd to
be, Tuch a Thins a5 Friena, Fathex, OF
Man; but Whecher he can or nOc, it Wil
CiII be a Truth as certain and immutable
25 any Proposition in Mathomaticko;
Tro Mathematician that P lnow oF, thinks
it necellary to ectablitm the imnmutabilier
OE this Pruth, That the chree Ansels
ot a Triangle, are equal to tuo Rixht
ones; 20 altirm that it is true, without
any relation to Ansels or Priansles, ei
ther ot these Provositions are lutsictent-
B A

## Folio 8 — 797937889:0020
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000020.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 40 lines, status machine
Iy ectablista EF it 25, and atvars must
betrue, supposins thole thines to Wrhich
ut celatos, to. exit.
But here the Remarkcers Ouection wils
Be maco, EDon What Crounds must il
+
t 0 IF 600d and Fvil, Vertue and
Picez: are not such in their omn Na-
tuxe, thei must be so fromthe Arbitrary W’ill
os God and al Thines are indifferent, till
he declare This. Or That, to be din, accor-
1g
dine te hes lleasure: Phat, 15, he misht if
de hradt so pleasd, have made Vertue,
7
Vice: and. 2cc, V’ertue: Po vrtrich, l an-
Tiver, Thac God havins made Man such
aCrcature a5 ho 25; It is as impollibsothat
Good ard lvil thousd change their se-
Specto ro trum, as that Pleasure can De Poin-
anc Pain Pleasure prhichno oneinhis Senses
vill actim, and vet, e chink, 10 B0.
dy tras sopposd them to b0 real fixi-
Prences, independent ot any Subject:
And if tho Relation Which Moral G00d
and Evil has to Natural Good and F-
vil, Wrere Custicientr observed, there
rould beas little dispute abont the Na-
ture and Realier oF Vertue and Vice:
Ptiose who think ther are onlr HO-
tions in tho Mlind, rould be convinced
ther arc as Real as Natural, Good and
Lvil; all Moral Ci0or consisting in Doino
3
Willins, or Chusiris, For ones SclE OF
Ottrers, rtat ever 15 a Natural 600d:
and ail Morat Fvil, in Doins, Willins.
Ox Chusino ihaterer is a Natural svil,
Eo ones TelE Ox Others. PhIS, I doube
22Ol

## Folio 9 — 797937889:0021
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000021.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 35 lines, status machine
not, will appear a Fuil Definition, Wtien
Trv dby every Instance ot MoralGood and
Fvil, to alluto reflect on it; inless piere
ae anv irbo aonot place the Pertecti-
on and imperfection, the Advantases and
Diladrantases oF te Mina, in their AC.
Count ot Natural 600d Or Fvil: vihich l
beliere no Rational Man irill Oir.
And as thisunaltorable Rolation makes
the Rcal and Imutable Nature ot Vir-
tue and Vice undeniable; s0 allo FrOI
thence it is plain, Phat the Nature of
Man is the Ground or Reason of +he L. a C
Nature; 2. C. OF Mocal G00d arist sivil.
But if the Rcimarkor will rattier have IC
that tho Nature oF these Mhiise, i5 the
Realon ot the Nature oF NEM, Cidai THCY
are FPentia lL in HC RELLO OF CFOC-
irtuich is the Kulo oF his Wil, aud ac
cordline to rtrich he form d Alau; let
ut be l0, a5 ic is unquestionable char he
cannot will any thine couerasy 10 liii
Nature; Fut horrever ihe vioral Atri.
butes ot God, Goocnels, Tulcico, E c. Quc
in him (Wrhio is infinitetr berond te
reach oF Oux varrOir CaDaCIHICS) Lhis I
Car Cirhich NIT. Lock has obterred et
our idea oF their Intiriey) thatre have
1o Idea ot chem, Dut vihat caeries rrithi
it a Respect to therr Objecis, the natiii al
600d or Lvil of his Creaimres; and WE
could hare no idca of them at aIl irite
out Reflection uvon our Plves; For irtrat.
ever 15 tho Oricir al Standtard OE CoOCl
and Fril; ic 15. Vla, ere har e 10 1O-

## Folio 10 — 797937889:0022
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000022.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
C. 10
zion ot them but by their Conformier
Or Repusnaner to our Realon, and vith
relation to our Nature; and that Wtrae
accordine t0 it e perceire to be soou,
re alcribe to the Suprcam Beins; For
re cannot kenor that the Nature ot God
25 Cood. betoree harea Notionot Crooc;
ut must be then by reftectins upon our
oon Nature, and the Overations ot our
Ninds, thatre come toknon the Nature
Ot Giod; Which theretore cannot be to us
the Rule ot Cood and Fril, unlels we Wis
ardue in a Circle, that by our Ntotion ot
Cood re knon thenature ot God, and by
theNature oF CTod, We know wtrat isCiood.
From whenco it will Follow, that the
Nature oF Man, and the 00d ot Socie.
+r, arc to us the Reaton and Rule oF
Poral Ciood and Pvil; and there is no
danser ot their beins lels immutable
on thisfoundation than any other, vhilst
Man continues a Rational and Sociable
Creature: IF the Law ot Nature
25 the Produet ot JTuman Nature
at TelF (a5 the Crreat Crotrus Spcaks)
ut must subsist as lons as Tluman Nature;
Nor willthis Foundation makie it the less
Sacred, since it cannot be doubred, that
ut is orisinally the WiIl ot God, Whilst
re oun him the Author ot that Nature,
ot erhrich this Lar is a Contequence.
IE then in MT. Locks var wre can
perceire wtrat is Contormable, or not,
10 our oon Nature, Wrhich cannot be
doubted; il by refsectins on our selres,
Wc

## Folio 11 — 797937889:0023
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000023.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 45 lines, status machine
al
aM
tus
bE
ed
NC
C1)
ave con come to know there muse B0 3
Siipream Beine, the Sourcé oF 2IlOtMerS, FBS. B
Wtich hetras admirably Mewn; Wve have c, X.
2 Sacred ard Frumutable Fourdation tor
Natural Relixion on hio Principles; Phis
being a plam and infallible Interence
that the Ruthor ot out Beine docs re-
quire thole things ot us to irtrich hie has
suited our Nature, and visibly annexed
oux Happiness, Which he has macle the
necellary Motire oF alI our Actions;
FOr IF i5 inconsistent wichr that Divine
Wisdom, irtich ire lec has AIed ali
other thines to their proper and cerc
find. to have FOrir d 15 a
manner, that il We CssIOz: LOld La
culties erhicm he has sirort 1s, WC Cap
not but judee tat Lich ThinES ure fit
to be done, and ochers to be aroidea.
and this tO nO end at aII; MVCH ICIS
can re suppore he has desierid us l0
aet contrary to the necellar Wiotires
oF our Actions, and fuceirent OE OUx
Mtinds, it beins 2 dat Contradiaion
that Infinite Wildom and Porrer, Mhou i
ex
form any oF his nortis (0 disprovoi-
tionate to their Pna.
IE Will not De nuch from the DUr-
pose here totatre notice of the Fol ot
chose Mer, irho chinte to vcalcen ene
Authorier oF Relision By calline it a
Politick Contrivance, establithr d tor the
Eoodot Covermment or Societr: Wtrich
15 as much a5 to Car, it is the lels Obli
5
aory becaule it is necellary; Whiereas
hat

## Folio 12 — 797937889:0024
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000024.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
C
T2
that very thine Mors it to be our in-
dispentable Duty, and of Divine Autho.
rier, ithout any Revelation, since ele
Divine Wortemanctuip. Fluman Nature
cond not subsist withour it; IF they
coud prove it unpolitick or diltsuctivo
to Socictr, it voud be much moie For
their purpole; for Tuch a Relision musE
necessarilr be talse; nothins con De à
am t0 Nature, Which ol dixect Conse-
quence non d destroy Nature.
But if anr one thinks it beiter olta
blith d on the Nature ot Cod, I have
Bheun hou re come to the lnomlodse
OF it in HIr. LockS Wrar, by alcribirs
to hum irtraterer by its Contormity to
Our Nature re perceire to De GoOd;
because re sec that re cannot admit
auy imperfection in the Supream. BC.
inE, Without a Contradiction (Which
I nali Inem in UIT. Locks Way, wrtien
i core to the next Hlead) and havine
by the Lffect Found out the C’ause, e
nay then conclude the Nature ot G0d
to be the Arch. Irpe ot ours, because
re carinot suppole the most Pertect
Beins can will aur thins contrarr to his
ovn Nature; For il he coud, the Rule
Ot that Will must De Comethins lels Per-
Fect than himselE, (For erhaterer is molt
Perfect is God) and therctore to will
ans thins contrary to his omn. Na
ture; roud be an imperfection in tum,
erhich to admit in the most perteet
Beins, is a Contradiction. Fhus (When

## Folio 13 — 797937889:0025
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000025.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
.2
I have more fuity Teun hou re come
by the Idea of Perfection in the Su-
pream Beins) the Remarker mar per-
ceire, that Wre can in NIT. LockS way,
arrire to the Orismal Notion oF in-
trinsick FTolinels, into which tis ulti.
matelr relolvd. Wtrich he is l0 much
concernd to find and that I hope wili
reconcile him to MC. Locks Princi-
Ples.
And iE he rill attentively examine
his omn without Prepossession, il ne
Will traco his Idea ot God, and ot
Moral Good and Fvil, to their first
Source, I beliere he Will find he has
no ottier Principle of lnowledee than
NIT. Lock; and that the Mistake lies, in
that beins taushit Truths alter they arc
discoverd, and findine them agrecable
to our Realon, re immediatetr alsent
to them, without sellectine hou they
ivere first found out, and are apt t0
conclude those thines wtich ure find
First in our Rnowledse, tobo the Airst
Principles ot Rnomledse; tho ther vere
proceeded to Dy many Steps and De-
B. R. P.
Srees, aud vere the last oltablisti a in
the Ditcorerr.
But the Remarker Wrill obicet that
MIr. Lock does noc ectabli Moralitr
uxon the Nlature ot Man, and the Na
ture OF Cod, but seems 10 ground Bis De- 2. R. p.
monstration upon P’uture Punisbments and
Revaras and upon the debitrary Will of
the Lan. Civer; and he does not think these
the

## Folio 14 — 797937889:0026
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000026.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 45 lines, status machine
2. P. 4
C14
the first Crounds of. G00d and Fvil.
10
Wrhich L ansiver, Pirst, supposins it vere
10, the question is not What MI. Lock
thints, but ihat may be provd trom
his Principles. But Sccondly, ICay that
MF. Lock dOe5
sround his Deinonstra
tion uvon the. Natire of God and Man-
a5 will plamly appear by his, expreso
a. vords, irtrich are thele. Ibe Idea of a
3. S. 8. Supream Berns, infinite in Pomer, Croodness
un
and Widom, Whose Wortmanssim me are
and on nhom ve depend; and the Idea of
our selves, as understandins Rational Crea-
Tures, bern
in
e
 Such as are clear In uS, woud,
suppose, is duly consider d and pursu d
afford such Foundations of our Duty and
Rules of Aetion, as mishe place Morality
amons the derences capable of Demonstra-
tion. Nothins ean be clearer than this,
and in aIl those places wrhich, the Re
maxkex quotes out OF NIr. Lock, Where
he Peems 20 establimr Moraliti uxon the
7.0
Will of Cod, and Remards and Punistiments:
he is Speakins oE it as ic has the Force
OE a Lar; and the Remarter cannot de
nr; Wrtraterer he thinks, the first Croundi
of. Crood and Lvil; Or horrever clearly re
ina sec the Prature of these thinss, We
may approre or condemm them, bue
itrey can otlr have the Force Ot à
Lam I0us, consider d as the W ill of the
Supream Beins, Whio cam, and certaint,
WWill Rerard the Comeliance with, anee
Punistr itre Deriation From ihac Rule
vrtiictu
B

## Folio 15 — 797937889:0027
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000027.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
Which he has made Hnorable to us b
the L Ieht ot Nature.
But that we can ontr lnow thele
thines to be his Will Dr their Contor-
mity to our Nature, and that theretore
ther cannot be Arbitrarr, Ihare betore
Teun; and that he will Punitt or Re-
ard us accordins to our Obedience or
Dilobedience to it; is a consequence oF
his Nature; Cothat, tho MIT. Lock Cays
that the Wriil ot God, Rervards and Pu-
nittiments, can ontr sive Moraliey the
Force Ot a LaW, that does not malre
them the first Croinds ot Good and F-
vil, since br his Principles, to unor
irtiat the Will oF God is (antecedentir
to Revelation) we must Unoir wtrat is
Co0d by the Contormitr it has to oux
pature Dy vtrich re come to noir the
Nature ot God, Which theretore mar De
to him the firstCround or Rule of Cood;
on
tho the Will of God, 8c. can orty en-
Force it a5 a Lav.
Tcannot here omit to takre notice ot
2 Ouestion the Remarteer askes on this
Subject; Flor, Pray vou, upon thelc2. R. P. 28.
Principles, do rou prelerre the Distin-
etion (that good old Diltinction, Wrhicti
it mar be rou despise) ot Bonum etile
and Hlonectum: In rour var, cithes the
Parts are Coincident, or Bonum Otile, ls
Superiour to Bonum Jonestum. Pm a-
Fraid the Kemarker will have hard
Chouehes of me, il i Mould Cay I do
BBCdt

## Folio 16 — 797937889:0028
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000028.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
TC
not litro his sood old Diltinction, and
that I think the Parts are Coincident;
P. lino not irhether hewilt hare a bet
ter Opinion oF me, Wwhren P tcIl him I
do not mean it in the war Whrich he in
jurioullr insiniates to be Mr. LockS, but
that nothine can De truly Protitable,
that is not Hlonest. Flovever, not to
caril about Words, this I am ture of,
that thore is no Ground For the Re-
Inartors Rofection in thole Principles
Wrhich hre is dislatistr d With, viz. That.
morally G00d and Lvil, is the Conformity:
or Disagreement of our Actions tothe Diviné.
Lam 3 Wrtich Mr. Lock Cays is the ontu
true Touchstone of Moral Rectitude, and
that by comparins them to this Law, Men
judse of the most considerable Moral G00d
or sevil of their Actions; that is, mhether
as Dutres or Sins; they are like to pros
cure them Tappiness or Misery from the
Fands of. ihe Aimichty. Vpon thete Prin-
cirles Bonum Otile, can never De Supe.
rior to Bonum Fonestum, In NIF. Locks
Way, till ehie Remarker ean Per him
Fome Moral Fvil, that is not contrarr
1o the Dirine Lar, Or a Wav t0 el.
Cape the Fands oF the Alimieher, wrten
ve dilober hiim.
Wrhrat has been laid, will be Cutticient.
1o antirer all that the Remarkrer has
said directlr on this Point, but what
Fuxther concerris it, os Natural Consci-
ence, and the Proots oF the Morat Attri
hutes
V. 8. =
02
8

## Folio 17 — 797937889:0029
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000029.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 44 lines, status machine
ICM
lent
AaS
Ma
ise
H
hitB.
butes of God Will be consider d in their
ordor, erhich leadsus to thesecond Head,
Ot wtich theRemarter.
As to Reveat d Relision, my Difficulty i5 1A. R. p. PC.
only this, hon it can be prov d from jour
Principles, that the Author of the, Revela-
tion is veracious; and P. 7. t0 establist the
certainty of Reveal d Relision, me must hnom
the Moral Actributes of the Divine Nature
such as Goodness, fustice, Foliness, and
particulariu Veracity. Non these l am not
able to deduce from vour Principles. Tou
have provd very well un Pternal aPomer-
ful and M. Knomins Berns: but, Ec: The
Remarker, it lecms, does not find
rrtiat MIT. Lock lars, alter he has very
ell provd an Eternal, most Povertul,
aud mostKnomine Beins; That from this Es. B, 4.
Idea duly considerd, will easils be deduc  C. 10. 5. 6
al those other Attributes me oueht to as-
eribe to this Fternal Beins; the Remarkcer
15 not able to do it, tho to help him,
NIT. Lock Cays, he may be asam d to have
rais a such a doubt as this, viz. hether an
Infinitely Poverful and Wise Beins be vera-
cious, or no antess he concludes Lying to he
no Mark of Weabness, and Folly. ASIFel 2d. R. P. 30
in his Words repeated by the Remarker,
ertrich he complains ot, acmisrepresentins.
qu
5)
and pervertins his Sense; Lhe Question 25
not (Cars he) nhether Crod be veracious, but
mhether, accordins to jour Principles, hecan
be provd to be so. Antw. But the Oue-
Rion is, whether an Infinitely Pomerful, and
NI

## Folio 18 — 797937889:0030
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000030.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 35 lines, status machine
Wise Berns, Es veracions or non For JuCH a
Beins, MIT. Lock has very well provd, 25
the Remarker omns, lo that theDoube
ust Be, Wrhether, a5 (uch, he must be ve.
racious; For il the Remarker allors Ve-
racity to be a Consequence oF Insinite
Pover and Wisdom, the Veracitr ot G0d
is peora by MP. Locks Principles; and
this is an ablurd Ouestion, Whether the
Veracitr ot Aod ean be provd tron his
Principles it Falsbood is allow d +o De
a Mark of Weatness and Folly, For then it
cannot possiblr be admitted in a Beine
ou
ertricti ne has provd. OE Infinite W 2)dom
and Pover: and l Lno no Becter ray
oF provins any thins, chan. by provine
Principles uxon irtrich it cannot be de-
ny d withont a Contr
MIT. Lock has not perverted tne Remmar
KorS hense, tor he cannot avoid this Di-
lemina Ficher he concludes Falthood,
to be a Mark of Weakness and Folly or
tie does noc; il nor, then MIT. Lock has
xI5
docs, then this is an absurd Ouestion.
erhrether ore who has provd an Inti.
niteli Povertul and Wile Beins, can
Prore he is not Falso.
Pue this is not Pulticient tor che Re
marker, he is not able to deduce one At.
tribute From another; L et us leo then
wrtrat is his ray to bnor the Moral
Aetributes oF God, Wrhich he tells is this,
tre ascribes Veracitr to Crod, becouse it is

## Folio 19 — 797937889:0031
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000031.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 51 lines, status machine
M
3 du
Oubt
ere
finit
GO1
aH
eire
sa
C
II
O
a Perfection. But trom what Grounds
does he concluae, that Wvhracever is a
pexinq
Perfection must be in God: Wuil he lar,
that it is a Principle imprinted On thC.
Minc, rithout any Reflection; that 15,
re cleariy sec that Ciod must be Pertect,
re donr lnoir utiy; or Will he not
rather Cay, That the vant ot anr P’er-
fection, roud implu cither that he does
net linor irhat is Belt, or cannot at-
taim it, and theretore is inconsistent rith
infinite Wisdom, and Pover: Or thatto
suppolethere mar be a Beine ol Crcater
Perfection than the Supream Source ot
alI Beins, is a Erols Contradiction: 1
beliere, il he reflects altentivelr on the
Prosrels ol the Wind in the Rnoirleds
ot God, he rill find Perfection i5 not
tirst in our Notion ot him (a5 an in Norris
senious Author has hewn) but that ha- de sin and
e
vins discorer d a Tirst Beins, the Sourcc Heti,im
q
ot a others, and irtrat atlsibutes, We
rust neceslaritr alcribe to him a5 luctu
re perceire char to adme ans Emper
fection in hum, vould be a Contradi-
ction to oux first necellarr Conceptioni
oF him; wrtich MIr. Lock has establistid
in his War, and tells us that troin
qno
chena, all tus other Atilibutes will casily
be deducd.
But this wrill not latistre the Remar-
ker, unless Mr. Lock tellS us What 25 +0 ist. R. p. 8.
f.Cs
be understood b Perfetion in his n cy
hon it 25 derv d from ihe Seples, and hor

## Folio 20 — 797937889:0032
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000032.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
Et includes Veraciry. The Remarter ie
very apt to Forset, that MF. Lock
has another Principle oF Knowledee.
ertrich he calis Reflectim, or he thinks
ut insieniticant; perhaps it maj be l0 a5
to his purpole, but happenine to be
serviceable in the present Enguirr, L
tatre leave to remind him ot it, that
re may consider hor tar it will help
as to the Idea ot Perfection.
But first, I observe chat we have no
adequate idea ot Perfection: but per-
ceivine in our selres Tome Povers and
7
Faculties, a5 ot Rnomins, Wiluns, Mo-
vins, ecc. and ot particular AciOns, and
C
Cieneral Abstract Ideas, that lome are
congruous; and others repusnant to cach
Other, and to our Realon; ve Hnor that
Lome thingsareBetterthanothers; and from
everr thine about us, and within us, ve
may learn thacthe rasly greater part ot
them escape the extent oF OUT POWeE,
Hnowledso and Coodnels, From Wtence
re conclude these thines may be far
more extentire, evn to all that can ex
ist. And the hiphest possible Degreeot
theso thines; Wrhich re find it better to
trave, than to bewithout, that we cal
Perfection; Which to have an adlequate
Idea oF, ve must comprehend the fxi
Cence ot an Infinite Spirit. But ire can.
not add anr thins to matie up this Idea
ertrich re do noc find in our SclVes, On
ly rheDcerces, utrich ve perceive must

## Folio 21 — 797937889:0033
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000033.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 60 lines, status machine
E
d
20
eF
ne
10
2d
ITe
CM
at
DI
Ne
et
e
DCb
(d
ex
O
Etb
_t
B
a
C
De alcribed Far Berond Our Meatures, 10
that Being From Which e receiv d alt
our Porrers and P’aculties, and by Wrtrole
Wisdom, Porer ard Goodnels, all things
exist; for Perfection is only He hixhese
Dogree, or the best Manner oF possible
Fristence, and that the Eternal Source
oF all Beine, must exist in the most Per-
fect Manner possible, cannot De doubted,
for there canirot be a freater Absurditr
chan to suppose there mar be a more
Perfect Beins, than the Fternal Source
oF aIl Being. Thus re see hor the Idea
(
Cion, Tuch as re have, nar De
derivd from sensarion and Reflection, anc
arr one who considers it, will find,
that ne has no positire Idca ol it,
and that there is nothing in that Idea
wrtrich ne has, but utrat the Objects
without him,, or the l’aculties he per-
ceires in himsele, have furnistrd him
avith; and that therctore it is necdlels
to Peck For any other Original oE it.
Havine nor got the Idca ot Porte.
etion, in MF. LockS Way, and Fonnd
that it irultnecessarily be alcrib d to the
Eternal source ot all Beine, ve must
next consider the other part ot the Ke-
artcers Ouection, Hon il includes V e-
raciti, wtich he is the more concerned
to dnor, because he lays, not ontr the
Truth of the Revelation, hut aiso of our ist. R. p8.
Facultres in other thines, depenas upon the
Veracity of their Anthor. And here he
t
ETI

## Folio 22 — 797937889:0034
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000034.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
e
must sive me leare to ask him, upon
uhat crounds et 3c
fection. Ile ill not lar because God
is veracious, (tho the Nature oE Cod,
is to hum the Rulo oF 6004) for he al
cribes Veracutr to Cod, Because 1F15 a
Perfection, and he does not approve ot
arcune in a Circle. Ilemust then lino
that Veracitr is a Perfection trom fome
Other Rule, and here l am atraid he will
C
be involvd in a a ereat Duticultr, tor
the Truth of our Facultres, ne Tars, de-
vends upon the Veracity of their Author
bue betore he can tuor the Veracitr
ot their Author, he must De lure thac
Veracutr is a Pertection, since tis ority
25 Tuch he does, or it can be alcrib d
totum; nou by whatloerer means e
perccires it to bc l0, hour can he be cer-
cam that the laculer by irtuch he re-
cerres that intormation, does not decoire
huim: For urless heis certain, that Ve
racity is a Perfection. he cannot be cer
tan that God is veracious, nor theretore
oE the Truth ot his Paculties; He must
then remain in doubt, Whether Cod 15
veracious, untess he can hnor it with.
out the help ot his Faculties, that 15,
Without the Porer or Capacitr ot bnor.
ins it; or he must suppose the Fruth ot
tus Faculties rithout any Prodt. II
thac 15 not a tirst Principle noc to be
dorbted oF, I sec no detence acanst an
ipcurable dexticrm, We cantot aicue
TOI.

## Folio 23 — 797937889:0035
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000035.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
DIe
For. Sr axainst an thine, and the Re;
arker cantor bnor that his Postion.
I5 true, viz. That the Truth ot oux Pa
culties depends rpon the Veracies ot
threir Author, since he must tatre it uxon
The Credit oE thole Faculties. Let him
doube the Fruth ot his Faculties as muctr
a5 he will, it he aftirms ary one thins.
in that one he must beliere them upon
their orn Fridenco; and since he cousd
not trust them in ocher thines, tilthe iras
certain ot their Veracitr ot the AuttOr;
irhaterer Principlo he establictres that
Certaintr uxon, he must relu upon the
Avidenco oF Bis Faculties FOr te TrutH
oF that Principle trhich he telIs us is tis,
That Veracity 25 a Perfection, and conse- ist. R. p. 7.
guentiu must belons to the Nature of God. 2d R p. 18.
For irhich Propositions tre may there.
Fore conclude, he Wras contented to sux.
Pole the Pruth oF his P’aculties; and he
Cannot dens HIr. Lockthe lame Priviledee.
tilt he can Mour him Fome ras to Rnou-
dedse rithout their help.
In the mean time there can De But tvo
arsof Anoirins that Veracier iS a Por
fection, cither ic is an innare Principle
originallr Iinprintedonthe eind; (Wrtrick
PMail not endearour to contuite, MIT.Loce
havins done it Cultcientlr, nor is it ncod-
tut tomy Purpose.) Lec that be MhoRe-
markcers W’ar ol Knomledse il he plea-
(C5,) Tince he must no lols relr uxon the
Truth oF his Faculties, in chatras chan
anus

## Folio 24 — 797937889:0036
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000036.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
E. 29
any otter, (it beins impossible For Cod
himsele to matre anr impreltion on us-
ithout sirins us a l’aculey wrherebr to
recerre It.) But let us lee whether it i8
discorerable in theotherwiy, Wtchmust
DC NIr. Locks et sensation and Reftection.
I suppose the Remartier does not doubt,
that in thisvar re can distinguistr Pruth
trom F’alchood, 2. e. dinor that thinss are
25 therarc, appear, as ther appear, and
that dons a thins, disters trom not do-
isit thatan Apple, tor Frample 15BOt
2 Horse, thac Pain, is net eleature, and
chat pertormins our Promile, isnot breal
nE iC; Or that reprelentins chinss asthey
are, Ox 26 They appeax +O US, and Der-
tormme our Promile, 2. e. Veracur, 25
more acrecable to our Nature, and Bene-
Ficial to Mantcind, etian the contrary
Wrtich hoir tar to us tho Rule ot Gooc
and evil, Pharebetore Therrn, and Cail
ortr add here, that it in MIT. LockS
Nay re can lnow, thac what is Bencf.
cial to Manikiind, is becter than irtiat is
destructire to it; that Hlappinets is bet-
ter than DTilerr, that Pover and Rno
ledse is better than impotence and Igno-
rance; il re may trust our l’aculties in
discernins Pruths, 25 sensible tous aS Our
ovn Exiltence; it cannot be doubted, that
in his ’ay re can be altur d that Vera
citr is a Pertection, till Pome other RCa
Ton ot Fialihood can be imasina, than
lsnorance, imporence, orrillins evil tor
It

## Folio 25 — 797937889:0037
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000037.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 42 lines, status machine
its ovn lake, ihich cannor be conceiv d possible
to chule or preter Fril, as Fvil, beins no lels a
Contradiction thon 10 judge that to bc best,
Which we knonto be Worst.
And the Remaiker could not have beenat a
loss tor to deduce chis, and oll the orter Mo-
ral Actribures ot Cod, From MI. LockS Prinei-
ples, it he had caretulsy considerea his Dil-
course eFour Idea et Cod, Where he Phers that
it is made up of the simple Ideas me have received
from sensation and Reflection, by putrine tosether B. 2: c. 23
all the dvalicies and l’orvers which me experiment s. 33,34.
inour selves, and find it better tohave, than tobe
irhont, and enlarsine every one of them mith our
Idea of Infinity; eo whrich place lreter the RC-
marter, anc if he can by Restection, And Vera-
cier, Justice, and Goodnels, amone the thines
thac it is better to have thanto be without. I nove
rith wtrar Ihave Paid) ic ill help him to de-
duce those Atrribures et Giod FrOm NII. LorkS
Principles; irhich will Catisty him that ther
sive us a lure Foundation For Natural and Re-
vealed Relision; by wrhich ve have a FuII actu-
rance oF a Future State. The Remarkers Third
Ficad oE singuiries, Wrhich We arenexEtO COn-
Tidei.
Phac the Immortaliey oF the Soul. is on
Iy hiehly probable by the lighe ot Nature,
none can dens who belieres chat Apoltle
by nhiori ire arc rold, itiat Lise and
Immorrality
is broneheto lighe by Telus
Christ chrouxh ehe Gospel, Why then is iE
Obiccced asainst AIP. Locks Principles, chac chey
Eire us no cerrainey ot ehe Immorrality oF thC
Soul withoue Revelation: By whac ortier vay
can e be certain ot ans chine char is only
hichls probable by ehe Lieheot Natures Which
is all ehat can be piovd by any Principles, anct
IOFar Mr. Locks WriII 80, 25 Ldoubenoctomatie
axpesi. Bue tarther LMull Aie, charrherEi5
Bertis E

## Folio 26 — 797937889:0038
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000038.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 42 lines, status machine
est
nochine in his Principles, Wrhich at allweattens
themain Proots oF a luture state, (o that if
they are thorehe ro amoune to Demonstration,
ther hare no lels Porce and Pvidence upon his
Principles, wrhich rill leave no pretence on this
acconne asainst enem; as ilt plainly appear in
examinins the RemaikcersObjections.
Ton suppose (LaySne) that the Soul maybe some-
times absolulely vithont Thonches, of one lind or
otber: and also, that C0d may, if he pleases (for
any thine me enor bythe Lichi of Nature) sive or
have sivn, to some Systems ofMlatter aP over tocon
ceive and thint.  ponchese emo Suppositions. Icould
not male ont any cerranineroof of the Immortalitu
of the soul, and am apt to thine it cannot bedone.
A5EO thc ArIt oF chele Objections, Icontels
I do noc sec oF irhrac Consequence ie IS aE
all to the Proots ot che imiiorealier ot the
Soul; do thes devend uvon che contrary
Supolition, chat che soul alvays thintes : IF chey
do, proots upon à Suxpolition have a very un-
Ture Foundation; buc ler ic be granted, that il
is ever (0 clcarly provd chac chinteins is necel
Caer to the souls Fxistonce, that can no more
prove chat it Call alivasstxilt, chan it proves
thacic has alvass Fxisted; ic beins as Dostible
For chat Omnivorence which trom nochine
are the soul a Beins, to deprire it oF chat Be.
ins in themidst oEis mostrisorousReAections,
a5 in an utcer sulpention oF al Thouehe. IF then
ehis Propolition, That the sont alvays thines,
doesnecprore chacie is Immortal, che contrary
Supolition ealces not arras ans proot oF ic, for
it is no lels caly ro conceire chac a Beine irhich
has cheP over ot Thinkins rich lome interrals
oF Cellarion trom Thouehe, chachas Lixisted
here Forlome cime in a Capaciey ot Ilapviness
Or Milerr, moy be continued in, or restoredro
thelame stace, in a Fucure Lite, chan chat a
Beins wrhich alivass hins, may be continuel
n

## Folio 27 — 797937889:0039
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000039.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 61 lines, status machine
e
eta
ua
AE.
inthe lame state, but to do tho Remarker aII
che Justice, and sire him aI the saristaction d
can, LBall exanine the Subltance ot Whae he
has Objected againte Mr. Loces AMercion, Wich.
Out entring Farcher inro ihe Dispuce chan may
Terve ro shen Whecher ic is of ary Conlequence
For, Or asainst che lmmorralier ot che Sors.
Mr. Lock CaYS, Men do not thinte in soundStee
andhiskealon is, becaule chey are norC onscionsot
Ic, and eis a Coreradlietion eo lay a Man CBIUHS,
bue is noc Conscions ot ic; rhintins consilcine in
char very chins et our beinsconscious ot il. sp.
On which Suppolition, che Remartiei cannot mate
ont any certain Proofof the Immortality of the Soul.
I(uppole Mr. Lock did noc delisn it a Proot
otche Immorraliey ot chesoul, bur lec us see
Whecher ic weakrens any Proot oF ic, wtich
the Remarker Phouid have Mewn, buc instead
et chat provoles Disticulties, Which that Surpo-
Ccion involres him in, and begins with chisNo
table onc, l monder hon vou can observe tbat jour
Soul sometimes does not thine, for when yon do ob-
serve it, son thinte If a Man conla chine, and not
thint. at the same time, he miehe be able 10 mato
this Observation. This revers d, may bc an Ar-
ument oF lome Force indecd. bur to conclude
chac my Soul doconor aluarsthint, tis luffici-
ene tobnow that chere has lome rime palt in
which I Was not Conscious chat Ithovoht; un-
dess we will allor chac thesont may chinkc, nhen
the Mon does not, irhich is plainly eo matce
Ehem to Persons, a5 MIr. Lock has Pewn F P
44, and 45. in which che Remarker Cays he umanrno
does nor understand irhat that discourse abont the
denity, ornon Ldenity of the same Main, Nsepine  Ist. R.
and matir
and about Cactor and POiux, aims at, P. Lc.
and tends r0. A Dilcuurse aboue ehe non- Ide.
nitys of the same Man, world. L contels, be ve-
ry hard eo undericand; but I Ind no Tuch in
that vlace, or any ocher oFMT. LockS L HaY;
De does nor eriste aE chaerace, as t0 cal OF the
arC
t
II
AC
AI
CC
0
OVe
hit
IOI
the
ine
dine
2
 F(5. 0)

## Folio 28 — 797937889:0040
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000040.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 41 lines, status machine
Came Mansnot beine the same Mlan. Ile lay
indeed, thatif the soul can nhilst the Body is
Rccpine, have its thineine and enjoyments apari
ihicb che Man is not at all Conscions of, his Soul
When hesteeps, and the Man consistins oF Bodi
and Soul, when he is maline, are tvo Fertons.
And he Farther illustrates che lame ching in his
Discouese oF Castor and Polux, Which it it be
thouohe ablurd to altert, eis not hard to
find what that Discourse aims ac, v. 8. 1o
Them that Cuch an ablurditr will follon From
this suxpolition, That the soul chintes when
the Man is noc Conscious oF it. BUE
ertacever that Discourse aiins aC, oF Wvtat
Conequence can it be coche Immortaliey ot
chesout, supposins it does not alvays chink:Thae
ehe Remarteer Cays nochins oF. Buc it Wwils noc
De iniprover here to takre notice ot an Interence
he drans trom it in his second Remartess That
NIr. Lock does nor think che soul a Permanent
Substance distinct From the BOdy. This (CayShe)
(cems to be the Supposition non eo upon, rohen jout
question whether a Man mahine and scepine rich-
DuE Thonches be the fame Man. IF there bestilt
thesame Sonl, the Came permanent Substance, I see
noroom for shat Duestion, or Doubr, which pou
make. Elere ehe Queltior is again curnd, not
onty Erom the same Person eo the Tame Man,
Dut to Rcevine mithont Thoushes, trom Acep.
ins mith Thouches, that he is not conscions of,
wrhich are very ditterent Cales as to this Oue
Ation, tho much che lame indecd, a5 to the
ehins ir Celt, bue that che Remarkeer non t al
lor. But perhapshe cakes thesoul, Man and
Person, ro henitre the Came chins, aud s0 ther
mas tohim; everrManhastheliberey tomalie
his onn Wordsstand For what Idca he plealesi
Duc when he argues ao2inst cheOpinion ot an-
ocher, he mule conlider in irhat sense chole
Perms are us d by chat orher, and in chaesente
oppol

## Folio 29 — 797937889:0041
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000041.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 50 lines, status machine
et
BUII
a
Ia
10
D
Bd
ne
Ia
aprose him, otherrise he Rehes rrith his own
Norions, and noc his irtiom he scemsto dispure
Wich. And ris impossible t0 read MI. L0ckS
Fllay rich the least Actention, and not knon
that he doesnot ule chose threc Terms in one
and the lame significarion; ihich is the Re-
martrer had consider d, he cond not have (0
uch mistaken NII. Lock, or Found Tuch Dissi-
culcies in his Dilcourse. IFMr. Lock had under-
Atood by the sont, Man and Person che lame
thino, he won d never have mado such a Oue-
Aion, Whecher the sont chintrins apare, Whrae
ihc Man is not at aIl conseoins OF, IVerC nOC a
distinct Per(on, lrom the Man; Wrhich nou d be
just ehe same thing as to ask, Whether the SouI
chinkins apare, wrhat che soul is nor conscious
Ot, be noc a distinet Soul Fiom the Soul: BUE
understandine by Person as he does Self. Con (ei-
onsness, and by Man che Soul and Body united
he may question hecher ehe same Sont, the
same permanent Substance, chirkine apart from
the Body; in Connd Slecp, Wrhac che walcine Man
is not conscious oF, irhecher that incommunica
ble Conscionsness does not make the Sont, and ehc
an consistinq oF Body and Soul, truo distinct
Pertons; Personal Identity, consiktins in the
Came Conscionsness and noc in che tame Substance,
For Whaterer Substance there is, Withont Con-
Scionlness chere isn Person; Conscionsness there-
Fore and not substance, meline a Person, ine
Tme Consciousness ust inalce the Pame Per
Ton, Wrhecher in che lamse, or in differentSuBstan-
ces; and no Farther than chelame conscious-
nels extends, can there be the lame Perlon-
but whereerer there istro distinct incommuni-
cable Conscionsnesses, there is euro distivet Per-
sons, tho in che tame Suostance.
Dut Farther, nOL OnIy NII. LockS OneRion
mas be made. Suxxolins eha soul a distinet per-
manen Sustance, buc he cou d not malie it uvon
a33

## Folio 30 — 797937889:0042
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000042.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 41 lines, status machine
ans other suppolition with the least Sense, t0
his purpole, erhich is co contute chis Orinion,
thac he sont thintes, in Cound Sleco, When cho
Aln is noc conscious oF ic; non ihac manner
Ot Arsument I pray noud this malze:
IE ehesoul chintes wrhen cheManis noc consci-
ous oF it, the sout and the Man arc tvo Porsonss
Buc che Soul noc beins a vermanent sub-
Ptance, may make ruo Perlons, Ergo, Thesoul
cannot chinss wrhen che Man does nor, becaule
chacmakres chemtuo Persons, thesum oF irhich
15, che Soul cannor chink avare, becaule it can.
Buc if ehis ANerrion, chat the Soul and the
Man are erro Perlons, implies, chat it is noc à
vermanene Substance, let chole iook 20 it who
Cay, thac the Soul chintes when the Nan iS nOE
conscious ot ir lnce ris onr a Consequrne ol
char Suppolicion, but can no mas concern Mr.
Lock; Who denies thac suppolirion. Bue cha
Remarker is co be excus d formatiins an inter
rence (o inconsittent wich the detion ot chac
Discourle, lince he contesles he does nocunt
derstand rrhac ic tends ro, and perhaps only
ventur d at a Phrew d guelsto provoke aclear-
ex AccOunE: And indced, the best Constructi
on I canmakie oF che Remarteersurritins against
HIr. Locks FMay, is, that he understands verr
litrle oFic, Io grouncless arc che Disticultieshe
malces, and his Consequences (o wiono. This
Lam Cure, no Man chac means vell, it heun
derttands any rhins ot erhar Mr. Loci Cays ux-
on this Subiect, that alen thinte not alvays, can
From chence inter, that he does noc thinke the
Soul a permanene Subltance, tor it is plain, all
the Difficulties he Ands in Suppolins the soul
does alvays chinte, arise only trom ies beins in
a Acepins, and alcins Mtan, ehe lame perma-
nene Subltance. Why else doeshe tind it (0 v0-
f. p. 45. ry hardtobe conceir d, that the Soul in a scepins
Man, sou d ehis moment be busie a thintine, and
thc

## Folio 31 — 797937889:0043
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000043.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 43 lines, status machine
the nexet moment in a mabine Mlan, not remember
nor be able to recolleet one jot of allthose Thouchts=
Wrty, does he chink ic Aranse, if the Sonl has
Ideas ofits omn, that it derio d not from sensa-
tion or reflection, that it son d never in its pri-
vare thineine, retain any of them, the verymoment
it males ont of them, and thenmate the Man slad
mithnem Discoveries: Orwhy does he calt ic an
absurdiry, to make che sont and the Man tuo
Persons: There is nochine Aranse or absurd in
al this, it the soul in a Acexine and matine Man
Be not che lame perrmanent Subltance.
Thope nhac has been laid, is sufficient 10
help che Remarkersunderkandine in that Di-
(course oF Mr. Locks irtrich (0 much puzled
him; and then I am certain he cannot appre-
hend ic ot ans consequence to the Immorralier
OF thesoul, luxpoline it dees not thine, nhen
the Man is not C’onscions of it. I no proceed
cohis second Difticuley:
Tdo not understand (CayShe) hom the Sont if IA. R. P. 35
Be be at angtime utterly rithont Thouchts, what
it is that produces the first Thonshe acain, at the
end of that unthineins Incerval And wtiat chens
Must re cheretore conclude il cannor De donc :
IFchar bc a 500d Arsumene, e must deny
the most common and visible Operations in
Nature Do vou understand hom jour soul
chintes at alI: PTom it passes From one Thoughe
to anocher. FTor it preserves ies Preature ot
Ideas, 1o produce them at pleature on Occali-
ons: And recollects those it hac nor in a lone
time Rehected on Por it moves youi Body,
Or is affected by ic 3 Theseare Operarions vinich
l suppole rou are not lo Sceptical as to
doubeot, nor vec pretend ro understand hor
they arc donc: And lince we are certain cliat
the soul is aftected wich aii che considerable
Chanses oFthe Body, thac it is Sick, and in
Pain, and unable to vertorm ies tunctions, ac-
COrOIDES
l. 47.
P. 46.

## Folio 32 — 797937889:0044
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000044.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 41 lines, status machine
cordine as ehe Body is dilorder d, since ire (0
sensibly perceive ic to become Dronsy when
ehe Body islo; (o mans cecrees abated ol its
action; eren eo very near noc chintrins ac all
trom chat intentenels and virour ot Thouche
it had, and recorers wrhen che Body is retreth-
ed wich sicep; whacever is che Cause ot chese
F. HFects, Whether lome immediareConnexion be-
erween ehem, or an Aibitrary L an oEtheir U-
nioi, erhere is che disticules ro conceire that
ehe Pame Caule wtrich lulis it almole, soud
lay ic quice to rektane datren ic acain wich
che Bodr 3
2. . P Duc upon this Supposition (Cays che Remorker)
that al our Thonches perilh in sonnd Slccp, mescens
tohave a nem sont every Mornine. ThacS a
preter Conceit indeed, but hon does this scem.
Thus, ashre explains himselt; IF a Body cease
tomeve, and come to perfect Rest, the motion et
had cannot be restored, but a nem Mocion may be
produc d. IF al Corirarion be extinct, all our -
deas are extinet, so far as they are Cocitarions,
and seated in the sont: So me must have them nem
imprest, me are, asit vere, nem Born, and becip
the Woria acain. The Force oE wrtrich Areu-
mene lies thus, Cocirarion in the sout antvei-
iitEs to Norion in Body, 25 che lane Mori-
on cannor De reltor d, buc a nem Notion may
be produced; (o the Paine Cogirations cannorbe
relcor d. bue new Cocirations must ba producd.
Frco, ve seem eo have a new Sonl every MOrn-
ins. Thismay De a e00d Consequence, When
the Remarkrer has proved chac every nem MIo.
tion ialEes, Or Ccems eo makre a nem Body: In
ehe mean time, ali Lcan inter trom chis Par-
allei, i5, Thac my PhouehES tO DaY, are nOE
ehe Care numericat Phouohes I had Velterdar,
irhrich. Ibeliere, no body suppoles cher arc,
ehio chos did noc suspect rhey had à nem sont
ie crery nem Thoneht.
u

## Folio 33 — 797937889:0045
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000045.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
BuFiE the Remarker ThinkS, that iF aII
our thoustusceate in Tound SlecD, aIl oux
Ideas are extinct, and must Be ner im-
prest; l delire him to consider, wten a
Slcepins or Wakins Manthinks, what De-
comes of ail thole Ideas irhich he does
nOt actu olY perceire in his oun minc
For themind is capapable ot takcine norice
BuEOi very ler ac Once: M SF nOF aII thC
rest by thi: Areument be extinet: And 10
We inust hare tnem nem imprett; and arc
a5 it vere, Neir Born When ever we havo
any Ideas rhich we hare not alvays
actually perceir d, i. e. erery time we pass
From one thonont to anorher. This is a
fure Contequence, it when aIl our
thoushes cealo, ail our Idcas must DC nem
imprest, unless a Man con d actually per-
cerre aIthe Ideas he erer had at Once; FOr
hris havins only one chouohe in his mind
Can AO more Kecp anv otner therC, OF CX-
cite ans other that it hias no connerion
with, than il he had no thoushe et all:
e
am thinkins for ExampIe, in my Steo
OF a Htorse; his Beaurr, Strensth, and
Usetulness: Does this thoushe preserre
in my mind, the Idca oF a Church, Ot
Hlappinels or Misery: Or can it help me
to ans of them, wrhen lhare occation For
them  IE nOL, Ehen Fhese IdeaS uA DC
new imprest when l’aweke; but it they
remain in che sonl wrhen l Was ouly thist-
insot a: Forse, Whercever they are De-
Aon d, it mar be prelum d, chere is v00in
For chatone Idea more rithont chrustins
OUE

## Folio 34 — 797937889:0046
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000046.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
34
out another io sire it place; and wten
That onc is amono thom, I sec no morerer.
Con irtr ther must De aIlnem imprest,
than that the others must have Been nem
imprest wrten l’only chousheot that onc;
unlels iE D5. SuppO5d, chor the Soul Ha5 aI.
Waro, just onc ldlea mor thauchereis place
for in the repolitory ot its Idc25; and il
chat happen eo croud in, betore anottier
h25 GoF out, ther ill all be sised to.
Scther. Or AY aray for RII.
But here the Remarker interpoles,
L
von sar the Ideas remain in the sont, and
necdonty a new Fxcitation; rohy then, (ay l
may not Infants have Innate Ideas (which von
so much oppose) that vant onty Objects and
Occasions to excite and actuate them, with a
sit Disposition of the, Brain: BY wrtrat hath
been Caid, it will appear, That this Argu-
ment sainsnotorce trom MT. LockSOpi-
nIOn, That the Sout doesnot alvays think;
Sincc iF the Soul docs alvars think, iE Can
perceire but verr term Idcas aE OncC; (0
that the tame Consequence riil follon
From a Mansharins onlr one thoughL, a5
Froin his havins no thought at aIl; whe-
cher ali his other Ideas must De nerr im-
prelt, or remain in thesoul, and nccd onls
a nem Frcitation: This Objection there.
Fore moud hare been as much to the Duir-
pose in ans other place, The Remarker
mioht hare. askd, IF wten a Man thinks
ontr upon onc Obicet, there remain Ideas
in theSoul, Wrhich he does not perceire to
hethere; WVhy masnoc Intants hare In.
BaFC
Ebid.

## Folio 35 — 797937889:0047
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000047.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
le
D
C
3.
nate Ideas, that mant ontr Occations tofix-
cite them. This then, havine no parti-
cular Relation to the Onestion in dilpute,
requires no antiver here; but that the
Remarker mar not think hehas entansled
MT. Lock michhis orn Principles; I de-
sirehim to consider it these arc Parallet
Cales: Hon comes it, That erten Objects
Or Occations, Fxcite these Ideas in Chil-
dren, ther donot perceire thac they vere
in their minds Detore; but consider them
25 thines Ne, and till chen ab solutely un-
knomn to them: But wtien Ideas are Ex-
cited in a Man, Which he has BCTOTO TC-
ccir d by sensation er Reflection, hecon-
liders them a5 thinss he is acquainted
WWich, and cleariy perceires ther have
becu in his mind betore. WVhy docs nOL
erery thins appear equalls Ner 10 a
Mam Which he has, or has not knonn DC-
Forc, a5 every Idca docs, ihe hri time II
15 Fxcited inhim Buc lince, it is certalu,
Lhat the mind does perceire nhen ary
Ideas are Fxcited in it, that vere there
betore; and that erery ldca apDCArS nEW
toit the hrst timeit is Excited; this can
beno Arsument, that becaule the soul is
capable et retainino the Ideas it has re-
ceir d by sensation or Refection; chat
it can Record them for its UsC, and RO-
colleet them at Pleature; theretore, IE
mas hare innato Ideas, tho it never per-
ecires that it hac them, not eren rehen
ther are Lxcited in ic; for this makreo
che Cases (o tar trom beins the TanE, ehat

## Folio 36 — 797937889:0048
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000048.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
itis onc of the greatest Arguments against
Innare Ideas, Ehat ihe mind does alvayo
perceire, irtien che Idcas Whieh arc EK
cited in it, ere there betore: Besides;
hor can it De conceirdu thac Innate Ideas
oud nced any Objects toExcite them;
and that che mind Mouldnevor KxCIte any
et ehem in iE CclE withoue those Objects:
a5 it oiren does Fircire in it selF, the Idcas
it reccir d br Sculacion, cor Kctiection,
rithout the presence os choto OBiccto by
Wrhich it Erit reccird them; WV hy then
arc arc such Objects necectars 10 Excite
Innare Iacas, ince the inind has a Porrer ot
Fxcirins Ideas in ic P.IE rithout chepre-
sencc oF an) Obicct: W hen the Remarker
has Pheurr The realon ot this considerable
disterenee, and prord thac it docoinot
hinder them trem beino parallel cales,
ehen me may conclude asainst MP. Lock,
Phat since che Sons cau retain the Idcas ic
hasreceirdu and excice ehem at pleature,
tho it do not alvays perceire chem,
theretore ic may hare ldeas which I never
did perceire, sior can Excite in it scI,
nor Wrhen therare Excired perccire chiar
it ever had ehem Betore; anel then he can
tare soehing. 20 Pay Forhiinsels, DuE MuA
let vs enior our imperce vable Ideas, and DC
25 nuch the beccer, and wiler For chem, a5
NVC CaI.
But RiIl. ehe Soul may be fometimes
withone any thousnt, and yec (For any
chins re hare heard) noc endanser its
Emmortaliey. Let us consider the Re-
markers next difficults. ... . . ..
Besides

## Folio 37 — 797937889:0049
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000049.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
Besides (P. 175 BC) Y am neterWV at a loss Yst. R. P. 9
hom 1otrame anv Idea of a Dead SoUL, or 2d. R. P. 16
os a Spirit mithout Zise or Thonchrs. FTOW a
Fead Soul comes in here, ldon FKnON
Can there be no Lite, Where there is no
ThouehE: Icontels that l’have hitherto
thoughe thac Inseets and Planes hare Litc,
tho Idid nor supvose chat chey do alrays
think. HTC gOCS On: What is tise Soul mhen
stre does not thinte: She must be actnally some-
thins is se exist: She must then have some
Proverties, whereby se is distinenisted from
nothino, and frommatier. And asain, In
thesecond RemarK, Tou say the Sout has no P. 24.
Eatension, nor at certain fits any Cocitation:
What ean the sont be then but a certain
Pover actine in the Body, wben the Body is
prepar dfor the exercise of it; and ceasime to
act when the Body is indispos d. Forrhich I
antver, That it is true, re have no Idca
OF the Soul bue by her ODerationS; DUE
that is no moro a tealon to conclude that
se is nothins nhen MC does nOt operate,
than when Medoes, since me are equalsis
ienorant Wrhac the soul is, rheu we do
Fhirk. a5 When irc do not. Iask What is
the Sont wrtien Me does think. IS Me a
real permanent Cubstance: What chen
are her peculiar properties, Whereby Me
is distinouisd From ocher substances : IF
it De Caid the porrer oE chinkins, I asH
Whether Me has ans other Properries to
distinguista her trom Nochins, and from
MaLter  IEnOF, Then Nothing, Or Matter;
mashare the Porrer ot thinkins. This is
plaim

## Folio 38 — 797937889:0050
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000050.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
plain, IFthe sout has no Fsential PFOPer.
ties distinet trom Matter, Wherels Me
alone is capable of the Pover ot Thintins
there cau De no reaton ertiy Macter may
noc hare that Pover. It it DC Taic MC has
other Fssentiai Properties, mithout rhich
MC cond nor have the porer oe thinkine,
When the Remarker Bas Found out WhaE
those Proverties arc, hewill then LuOW
Wiat the SouLIs, Wrhen IlIC ClOCONOE LHIMK;
For irtraterer thac Substance is, chathas
theporver ot chinkins, there is no reaton
L donBt thot it remains the lame, erhen
it OEaCOS Trom thaE action, anY more THAM
chere iS t0 doiBE thar a Bod; in motion,
anet aE relt, is the Pare SuDIEONCOZ FOT We
trave no elearer Idea ot the Substance ot
Body, than ve hare ot the SuDItaMCO OF
pirit, a5MT. LockhasBenn Wrhich EX
cellent Discourie alone onc roud hare
choushe sufticient eo prevent the least in-
Tinuatior, inat he doco nor think the Soul
a real perrmanent Substance.
There ismuch more reason to conclude,
That ehose, cio not think the Soul a real
permanent Substance, who make this
mection, IF the Soul has no Fxtension,
nOr at certain tits anY Cocitation, WhaL
can ehe Soui Be Then, but a certain Porver
acins in the Body, Wrhen the Body is pro-
Dar d e0. For From Wrtrat other Reason
can ther make it? IF thesoul Dc realy
Tomethins else thon a cercain Porver actine
in the Bodr, irhat can hinder it From De-
ins che same chins nhen it does nat aet e
Ot
EIaY B. 2
0027

## Folio 39 — 797937889:0051
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000051.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
Dut il it must be notlins wrhen it is not
in action, W hac then can the Soul be, but a
certain Pover actine in the Body; When the
Body is prepar d for the exercise of it, and
ceasino 10 Be When the Body is indispos de
But (tO retort che Remarkers Words)
Whether that be a Superiour Divine Pover di-
stinit from Mlatier, as a vis mOVeNS, Or a
Porror fastned L tenor not hom to the Body,
or nnon such and such Systems of Matter
whether TCay of these tro Suppositions better
acrees with this Doctrine, Lcannot certainly
tell; but either of them descroys the Immor-
tality os the Soul, upon the Dissolution of the
Body. Llezic the Reader 1o judse whieh
is mosc concernd in this conseguence,
Mr. Lock, Wh0. (2YO that it is notnecessar
totheEristence oErhe Soul chatit Mou d
De alrors in action; hichroud DC ab-
TUrd tO CaY, iE it De not a distinet permanent
Substance: Or the Remarkeer, hothinks
the Soul cannor Fxist, when it is nOL IM
aetion; vrhich chereisno groundto thintu
it it Dc areal permanent Substance.
Jhe Vanier ot Mon seciris to DC tho
Sreat Rcason irhy ches have so readily
Tupposd, nithout ans proot, thacthesoul
does alirars think; For havins no ldca ot
IE, DuE Dy its operacions, e arcunilline
to perccire our oren ignorance, and loach
to part ith the onlr Idea me hare ot
thac deur chins rrhich we call selt; on
this Acconnt che Remarker sccms oftended
WitHMT. Lock. Why (TaYS HC) do vor af-
firm or introdnce a nem and nnintellisiole ? R. P. 16.
FAt6

## Folio 40 — 797937889:0052
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000052.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
C4e
State ofthe Soul, whereof neither vou nor o-
ehers, can have any conception: And wny
is this complaind ot, but that Men are
willins to beliere ther bnor more than
therdo. Or hon elle condther thinte a
State OE thinkino, mithout beino conscioni, of
it more intellisible than a State ot nOr
thinkins at all? Or hon cond they con-
clude chinkins, wrhich is the action of thc
SonI, neceslary to the fixistence oF thc SouI
it sCIt, iF ther did not make our RnOW-
lese the meature ot things, and our not
harins an Idea ot a thins, sufficient to
exclude it From Bcins: I procced non L
theRemarker Slast disticuler.
Then aster au (PaYS he) eshat securier can
ne have upon this supposition that me strall not
fall into this Steep at Death, and so continue
virhout Lise or Thonohe: NharL hare Paid
in ete besinnins ot my Discorrie upon
ehis STead, mighE TOEre IOT du ANFIVET EO
thiiCbicecion; but the Remarteer cy re-
veatins it, Paze 12. Sccmius E lay a
reac reise on it, l Mnail consider it more
varticularl).
ABa FIrs (45 PoBserVd BCTOTC) IF OUT
Securitr oF a Future seato depends upon
this, ih at the Soul alvays chintes, IE l125 a
very inture Foundetiou, tor there is nO
pretence oF a proot rhat the Soul docs al.
ars chink; and cheic arc great probabi-
lities chat it docs nor think in Tound Stecp,
(25 MV. Lock has BeivH.) But il tte proOts
ot a Future State, do nor depend upon the
Souls alrass chintins, the contrars sup-
POsITIOE
Z R. D. 9.

## Folio 41 — 797937889:0053
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000053.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
CAF
postion cannot lessen our securitr ot it
and that thes do nor depend uxon it, L
think necds not Deprovd, no Body that I
Hno ot did erer otter this Proposition;
Thatthe Soul does alvays thinte, 25 a proot
et its immortalier; and the Reatons we
hare to expect a Future state, are ot such
a Nature, chacthes can reccire HO Force
trom it, nor lose anr by the contrary
Supposition: Jhe Remarker on another
Occasion, Tells Mr. Lock, the srounds ot
Revards arc, thatrhere is a presace of them
from Natural Conscience; and chot they are
deducible fromthe Wature of Cod is ve alloro
him Moral Aerributes. Nor it is erident
thai neither ot these tro gronnds can lose
ans ottheir force upon this suppolition,
Phat the sout docs not chink in sound
Slecp, and will not ther secureus tlat me
Mallnot continue in thisstcep atter Dcach:
IE not, Why docsthe Remarker mention
them as Proots ot a Future state: But it
they do prore it, why docs he lay he
cond mate ont no certain Proof of the Im-
morrality of ihe Soul upon ihis Supposition,
that it is somerimes witbont thonebes? Since
those Proots he mentions remain in their
Fullforce, normithscandins chis supposition.
Lhus havins Mern, chat all theConsequon
ces the Remarkeer dranstrom MI. LockS
Supposition are mithout grounds, l may
With alturance conclude, thar ic is oF no
consequence to the Immortaliey of thc
Soul, nor does at all mealen an proot
Ot ib
Can
BR. P. 13.

## Folio 42 — 797937889:0054
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000054.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
( 42
4.
I cannot here forbear lakins notice,
hor little serrico thes do to Relision,
Wrho ectablim the main Principles ot it
upon fuch an uncertain foundation, as the
Nature ot a thins, oE which we arc 10
very ionorant, a5 we certainly arc, et
What the Sont is. ITer Operations re hare
Clear Ideas ot, and theretore trom our ca-
pacits ot discernins and chusine cood or
Fril; and trom thePorver, Wildom, aud
Coodnels oFCiod, whichme mascertanli
Hnor to bclons to his Nature; we hare
very sood Arsuments, and great proba
Dilities ot a Future state ot Punimments,
aud Rerards; luch as no considerins Man
can deur, and rrithin crery ones Under-
ctandins. But rhieu thesouls Immorta-
lity is laid to depend upon such Supnosi-
tions aS This, That the Sout alvays thintes, Or
ThaE IEiS Immaterial, What can thc con:
lequence De, bue, tomakre Men think they
hare very licele alturance ot a Future Lite,
ertien cher Aind chemselres so much in the
dark as co those Principles upon which it
is Cllablid, that tho srcateit Proots ot
them are dranu trom our lgnorance: AS
thac We cannor conceive hon Matrer Mould
De capablo oF Tuch and Tuch POrers as ve
perccire in the Soul; or (as the Remarker
Obicets) nhat che Soul 15, Wrhen MC 15
rithout chouehts.
But con d cheImmaterialitr oF the Soul
beprordtoDeascertain, a5 it is highir
probable, ic cannerer be ot sood conse-
GueMLCC, and mas DedanserOUS, IO IaL C
tha

## Folio 43 — 797937889:0055
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000055.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
that the main proot oE its immortality
For thisis an areument of no usc to the
Generalier otMankind, wrho mant cither
leiture, or capacier, for such nice SDC.
culations; aud it thez are conrined on
Other grounds that the soulis Immortal,
it is nd sreat macter Whether they chink
iE Immaterial, Or 1O: Bur iF they arc Per
Traded that ic cannot De lmmortal, iE ic
is not Immaterial, tis calie to see of hon
ill consequence that must b0, it the Proots
Of the souls lmmaterialies on d not hID-
Den to conrince them; as it otcen tails
Out Dy the disterent cast otMenS HICacS,
Thac che TamO ArSUmenES Th2L arC Ver
Arons, and persirasire tooncMian, hare
notorce at aIl mich another, especially in
Abstract ReRections. Those theretoic
Whoare Zeasousfor Truth, on d endea-
vour to cstabli it upon the plaineit, aud
clearest Principses, and Fuch aS arC IOS
adapted to common apprehentions. This
is nOt the onls instance in Which I Bare
ObTerr d, that Trueh does not sutter lels
From thole irhro voula maincain it upon
false or uncertain grounds, chan trom
those whio openly oppose it. Pharetenomn
Tereral who hare been caretully enough In-
scrueced in their Dutr, Who vet FOr viant
ot beins causht ac Arst, or applsins chem-
Petres to consider the true grounasot iE,
hare been catits areud ouc ot their so0d
Notions, tho Tome ot them PerIons oF no
mean Capacity; For il the Foundation
Edil, the best supestrueture will tall, eto
ETODE

## Folio 44 — 797937889:0056
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000056.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
c 44
srons and immoreable, rhen establistid
upon IEs prover grounds: And this does
not only haxpen nhenthe Foundation is
In IE SelE eak or uncertain, but when
agu
Truchs are taushrupon Principles, irhich
tho true, and solid in themselres, arenot
etie sround or reason ot thole Truths;
Wrtrich ome hare done out ot a go0d DC.
sisn ot rendrins che Truthsther ceach the
more Sacred; but evers thins stands Arm-
est on itsomn Foundation; and Ibeliere,
iFic wererishels contider d, it ou d ap-
es
pear, that the reasons oF aI Moral Truchs.
arc plain and clear, and nithin che reach
Ot the lorest apprehentions. These things
erhichl, haveouli hincedat, are ofsreat
consequence to De throushis consider d Dy
al irho have the Inscruction ot others
under their Care, chatthes mas not think
Etey SufficiemI acquit themsetres oftheir
Ducy by inculcatios soodMaxims, Wrhen
their Neslisence, or Mistalien Zeal In
Eeactin che Crounes oi inem, may at
Legst gire 100 sredt adrantase to those
vtio make it their bulisels to corrupe tho
Principles, a5 Wrell asthe Practice ot their
Companions, Wrhich are buc t00 mans In
this Libertine ASC.
ThIS DeInS a Matter of (0 Univer(at
Concorn, I hope I MaH BC excus d it Thare
Led che Reader a little out ot thie war for
it. WVc non recurn to the Remarker,
Wrho atcor hehas repeated his last Difficul.
L7, 2. e. Ifthe Sonl he sometimes mithont
chouebrs, hy may sre not be sen ihoueheless
ana

## Folio 45 — 797937889:0057
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000057.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
de
C
45
100
and senseless, aster Death: HC addS, 2Tis
some comfort indeed that me ptal at lenech
return to Tise at the Resurrection: But L
tnom not hoer von explain thac; nor hou far
von allom usto be the same Men, and the same
Personsthen that ve are nov. This is a
sreat comfort indced, and I tuppose the RC-
marker here deliend to make ME. Lock a-
mendsfor ali the taules he has imputedto
his Principles, by omnins that ther at-
Ford usthis comtort; Dut l cannor suelo
irhat That is wrhich he Knons not hom
MT. Lock explains: MT. Lock never at
tempred that I knon ot, to explain eTow
we allreturn toLite, Wrhic That SCCIS
toreter to, nor hom tar We MaIl then BC
the same Men; and he necded not hare
Eold him that he knows not how he ex-
plainsa thins, vrhich hehas not explaind
at aII: BuF Mr. Lock has verY clearis ex-
Plain dhorr Car hie allonsus to be the tame
Persons, Conscionsness accordins 10 hIm,
as far as it is extended, makes the same Fs. B. 2.
Person, in wrhich he Pays is founded al the C. 27.
Rieht, and fustice, of Revard, and Punisti-
ment, Tappiness, and Misery; and thus he
CaYS, ve may withont any diffculty conceive at
the Resurrection, the same Perton, tho in a Ibid. 5. 15.
Body not exactly in mahe or Parts the same
he badhere, che same Conscioutnels roine
alone with the sont that inhabits it; Wh c
mas be sufficient to Cacistie the Remarker
how SC. Peter at the Resurrection will be. the
same; and hoi MT. Lock Conceires he Vid. 2 R.
Returre- P. 15.

## Folio 46 — 797937889:0058
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000058.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 46 lines, status machine
ehe iso
of uc
CL -3
C
Returrection, a5 far as is rereald or
it. and to all its ends and purposes, rrhich
iS Our Lappiness, or Misery; Further chan
Ehis he daes not pretend, nOr arC We COn
cernd EOknOW; ance Y think in a MaLEer
irhich can onty be known hy Rerelation
Ho Han ousht to determine, or enquire
Rep 4 10
Carther chan the PToly Spirit has thought
sie to rereal. MIT. Lock Hnos 100 Weil
the Vanits and Presumprion ot such an
4
Atcompe, L0 OAer at Il.
d
Li enoueh ((2YS
hez chat every one pail appear before the
Fudement Seat of Christ, to receive accora-
ing to what he had done in his former Lise
but in what Cort of Body he sall appear, or
of mhat Particles made up, the Scripture ha-
vine faid nothine, but that it pal be a Spi-
rituat Body rais d in incorruptien, it is not
for me eo determine. THE KCIaTKEF USE
2R. P. 2g. De contented ro malte in the dark 25 to thele
thingo, tho he Pays he docs not loreit,
tince thero is no way cotare tarther lighe
ien them than the Scripture has siven;
ad iF he thinks MI. LockS Doctrineof tHe
Soutobicure, hecanse he does not pretend
E De cerrain by his Macural Faculcies, of
chinso rrhich they cannor certainty dis-
corer, (a way co Rnomledse which some
aTC VerY FOnd OF,) LBeliereMIT. Lock Wwill
De COnteAE NOL EO DC inderstood By HII,
racher chaui vrrite what he docs not un-
erctand himselt, eo appear intellisiole ta
ottero.
Ehe RCMATKer nexE procecas +O che
ccond Supposition, whuch he chinko
W CakCUS
A  
 1010

## Folio 47 — 797937889:0059
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000059.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
eakens the Proots ot the immortalitu et
TheSOul, viz. That Cod may sive, or have
siven, for any chine ve lnom, to some Sistems
ef Matrer, a Porver to perceive, and thinte:
and hereone mon d expeet he Mou d have
Memn hor this Supposition weakens the
Proots oEthe Souls Immortaliy; but aII
his Objections arc asainst the probabilier
olthe Supposition, and to Mew the diffi-
culties ot conceirins hon Matcer Mou d
hare such a Porrer; rrhich he entarges
upon in his 3d Remark, and has leveral
Pases to that purpose, For nhat realon I
knom not, sinco Mr. Lock allos it to De
hiehls probable that the soulis Immate
rial, but rrhere heis speakins ot Demon-
Stration, onlr Cays that ris noc impossible,
for any thins me hnom, that Cod maz. sire.
Ox hare siren, to lomeSystems os Matter,
disposdas he seco At, a Porver to perccire
and think. But my Delion beins onty to
vindicate MIT. LockS Principles trom the
danserous Conteguences imputedto them
Dy the Remarker, LMaIl not enter into
that Disputo; and I think MT. Lock haS
Paid enough in his lase AdditiOMS, t0 L-
lence the Trinmph ot such Portot Argu
ments, drann trom the unconceiveableness
of somethino in one Typochesis, Wrhich cannOt
De a proot ot the contrury Ovinion, in
Wrhich there arc things altocether a5 incx-
Plicable, and as tar remotetrom our com-
prehension. AII the Demonstration we
ean hare trom uch disticulties, is of the
reatnels and scantinels oE our Knom ledse
erhicl

## Folio 48 — 797937889:0060
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000060.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
erhich Mouid not makce us formard in de
terminins politirely on cither side, much
Tess to ectabli the Immortalier oF the
Soul on touncerrain a Foundation, rhich
is a Consideration I have betore insisted
Ou, and I eannot Dut think MI. LOck haS
done much more serrice to Relision in
thar DiscourIe, B. 3. C. 4. trhere atter he
had Paid ehat ne sees no contradiction in il
that Omniporency phould oive ro certain Sy-
stems of Marter, a Porver to perceive and
thinte tho it be most hichly probable that the
Sont is Immarerial; he adtas, that if our Fa-
culties cannot arrive to Demonstrative cer-
rainey abont il, ve need not thipte it stranse
althe oreat Ends of Morality and Relicion
are vell enonch secur du withont Philosophical
Proofs of the Souls Immateriality; since it is
evident that he roho made us at first becin 10
subsist here, sensible, intellieent Beines, and
for several years continu dus in such a State,
can and vil restore us to the like State in a-
VId. Thenother Worid, and mate us capable there to
Fourrh F. receive the Retribution hehas desiend1o Men
accordina to their doines in this Zise; and
thereforeris not of such miohtu necessity to
determine one may or l’other, as forme over
zealous for or asainst the Immateriality of
the Soul have been formard ro make the morid
believe. These are MT. LockS Words, and
Pappeal to ail unbiass d Men, Wrhether he
does not becter secure the Deliet ot a Fu-
cure State, by cstabliins it on such
srounds as gire an equal alturance of it
prhecher chc soul is immaterial, orno;
thar
dirion.

## Folio 49 — 797937889:0061
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000061.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
C
49
than those irtio tatce pains to persmace
Nen chat a Future State is lelscertain, it
the Soul is not Iimmaterial.
But belides the uncertaints and danger
otthis Argument which I hare Betore ta-
kennotice ot, Theuseletoneis oF ic to the
gencralies oE Mankind, Pussiciently MCMS-
that it cannor De the Toundation oF the
Delietot a Futuro State; That it iS nOL SO
to the Castern Pasans at this daz, re have
the Fridence oF a + Judicious AUCHOF, Toubere
Doch, From che information of the Missio- duRoyaume
naries rho hare been longest amone them-
and hisoon Conrerlation mith chem, Who
telIs us chac ther Deliere the Immortalicy
OF the Soul, but hare no notion et its
Immaterialiry; and that ther onli surpole
IE OE a Marrer SuDEil CnOnGH EO CELaBO
Deins seen or handled. ANd tBaL LInaI
OF the OId Philolophers who expeciec a
Future Seace, had no thouohts ot ilie
SouIs Deins Immaterial, any one MuSE 0d-
Terre; irtio has read them mich atcention.
And IDeliere, it well cramind, ic il
uppear that chose amons them who had a
Notion ot the SouIs beins Imiaterial,
did not Deliere its linniortaliey upon ThaE
Founcation, but only TousHE au expli-
cation hor the Soul by ies omn Plauire
miehe De capable ot thac Immorraiits.
Which ther tound sreat Rcaton t0 hopC
For, on other Crounas muich inore trmI
and pertiralire.
de Siairo
ell

## Folio 50 — 797937889:0062
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000062.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 46 lines, status machine
BUE Wtat is rers more considerable
vere this proot ot the souls Immortalier
a5 certain and as univertalsr seceir d ad
anY selt-crident Provontion, it non d noc
2F 2II serre To Ehc Chiet end Ot DUE aIIO-
rance ot the souls Immortalitr, viz. The
expectation oE Rerards and Punimments
in a Future State accordins in our doinso
in ehis Lite; withovcwhich Ein nO matter
erhether re think chesoul Immmoreat Or
O; aldthis re cond nerer hare by the
oH dttentire consideration, and the
clearest knomledse ot what kind ot sub-
sance thc So. I is; IE must Be establistd
On tar ditterent Crounds, tuch a5 the con-
Sidleration ot our selres as Rational and
Frcecreatures, ot wrhich rre have an In-
cuitire, Intallible vercextion; and oE an
Omsipotent Beins, trom irhom We arc,
and on ertom re depend, ot irhich ne
hare a Demonstratire bnomledse mithin
erers ones understandins tonhom it is
proposd; andit the Consequences dramn
From them are not susticiene to alture Men
ot a Future state ot Rerards and Punis-
TCnES, a5the clearest proots oE the Sout
Imiiortalies can Bgnitie nothins without
ehem, so neither can ther add ans force
to them, and cherctore are ot no ule tO
ehc Great Enas oF Moralitr and Religion:
For suppoleto conrince an intellisent Hlca-
Then, wrho thoughe the SoulMaterial, and
doiiteed OE a Future StareoE Remards and
PunilA.TenES, ArguIneNES ere uSd to
prore the Soul in itsomn Nature undissol.
rable
A
th
Bl
Ot E
DF
AD
bu
Aita
1BI
lo

## Folio 51 — 797937889:0063
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000063.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 60 lines, status machine
DI
lity
 
AOE
2AV
entS
l
ul
Ct
Lat
the
Ub.
O
an
1
Nd
aA
arC,
WNC
BLI
V
let
Di
5
vable, and that theretore it must remain
alter Death; hemighe ehen realonably
enquire in rrhat state it remains, hon he
maz De turo that it is in a STate oF RC-
wards and Punistiments, and thac it docs
noc return to thenirertas soul ot irhich
It may De an EAluence; or intorm the next
parcet ot Matter it finds Auted For IE, 25
Tome Philosophers hare chousht. Ihis ic
I5 plaim must be siIl in douDe tonim, nOE-
withstandins those Proos oF the Souls
immortalier; and Arguments of anocher
nature ust be usd eo Paristie him in this
Poine, Whaterer mas De most proper to
Work on his Understandine. Suppolechole
I have betorehinced at; Fhat tis reaton-
able to chink thac enc WVise and fust AU-
thor ot our Beins harins made us capa-
Dlc ot Flappiness and Misery, and siven
us Faculties ot discernine aud chulins 000d
or Fvil, delignd we Mould De accountable
For our Actions, and Lsappy, Or Miserable,
accordins 25 thes are contormable, Or BOL,
to that Lar whici hie has establis d in
our very Natures, that his WViIl miglit Dc
certainss knora tous; and sinco it is ri-
Sibly not (0, in che ordinary courie otnis
Proridence, but all chines happen alike
totheRishceous, and che Wicked, in chis
NVorid, tis imost consonant eo Reaion
Eothin this is onlr a Scaceot Probatiou,
and ehat thc dispentation ot Remards and
Punisiments, is reserrdFor a Future Lite:
there beins no other way to reconcile thC
partial distribution of chinsshere, eo thae
Ordo

## Folio 52 — 797937889:0064
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000064.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
order irhich e knom is agrecable tothe
Dirine Will, br thecontormits it has to
our Reaton, which 15 a Ray ot his onn
Wisdom. Wemiil suppose the HIcathen
conrincd by chele Arouments, or Others
1o che Tame purpole, that he oAS IE 15
hishly reaionable to conclude there musti
DCa Future State ot Renards and Punis.
eHES; BuF he docs not (0 WeII disest the
Sous beins immaterial, he has no nO-
tion ot a Substance micliout any Fixton-
Sion. Suovole then the Remarter Mould
FeIl him, a5 h0 dOcsNIr. LoCK, IF the SOUI
IS BOF Immaterial, There can DCnO CertaIn
proot that it is Immortal. And I delire
him to talie this Dilemma For the flea-
thens Antver: Ficher the Arsuments by
eehich I hare Dcen conrincd chat there
iIl De Punihinenes and Rerards in a
Future Statoare Proots ofit, or thes arc
HOE; IF not, then tho the Soul Bould be
Immiortal, Lhare no aturance chat ic will
bc in a cate ot Rewards or Pummments:
and il ther arc Proots ot a Future State,
then a Future State IS equalls certain,
tho the Soul be not Immaterial, since
That does nor moke it less consonant to
the justice and Wisdom ot God, nor less
ithin his Pover. IBeliere the Remarker
Wiil Aird he has no ray to solve this Di
Terma, Duc must cither sire up the cer.
tainty et Revards and Punisments, Or
the necessity ot chinkins ehc coulis Imma-
ceriul, to prove a Future State; and l de-
sic him to establisa the Belict ot Renards
aue

## Folio 53 — 797937889:0065
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000065.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 57 lines, status machine
Othe
25 ID
ONA
athen
CherS
IE 15
must,
niM.
 the
1D.
e
en.
Oule
SOU1
elire
led
A E
l
sIn
IMM.
6
and Punistiments in a Future State, on any
Arsuments that mill not De equalls con-
clusire, hether the soulis immaterial or
nOt.
This then is crident, that MP. LockS
Suppolition that God mas hare siven (For
any thins We Kno) 1o some Sysems OI
Macter, aPoner to perceire, and think:
doesnot at all weakren ans proot ot the
Souls Immortalier, that can be oF usc
to the Great Ends ot Religion, For nhich
alone re are concernd to Rnor that the
Soulis Immortal. And perhops the in-
gHISCanCY, a5 to thole linds, ot our
uorrins what kind oi substance the soul
15, maz De the reason we are letcso much
in the dark about it. Our Wise Maker
has proportion dour Faculties only tooue
Necessities, and has made his W’ill knonn
tous DY a Lislic of Nature clear cnoust
torender anz one inexculable Who doco
not follou it; tho the tuil atturance ot an
Eternal Retribution, 15 onls siven us By
Fesus Christ, oho has bronobt Tise, and Im-
mortalitu, to Ziohe, thronoh the Gospel
Wrhieh Lhare alreads Mern that MT LockS
Principles sire us a Ture foundation FOr,
bothof Natural, and Rereald Relision:
50 that I thins no more remains to clear
theRemarkers difticulties, his doubts ot
Naturat Conscience, (ertrich is the chiet
Subject oFhis 3d Remark) beins calily re-
solrd from what has been alreadi Caid.
But the Remarter Deins a little unlucky aF
crarins interences trom MV. Lock S PrIN-
Ciplesus

## Folio 54 — 797937889:0066
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000066.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
54
ciples, Pill sire him some help in his
enquirr nhat Natural Conschence IS, aC-
cordins to Them.
R. P. 5. But ArIC, I must take norice ot a Caril
he Degins nich ac AT. LockS detinine
Conscience to De nothins else DuE our
oun Opinion of our oun Actions, Without ex-
pressins itat fort ot Actions are the Sub.
jects of it. NToir anr onc whoreads that
Dart ot his Essay, will find that Dilcour-
fins OF Innate Practical Principles, he aII
alons mentions orls tuch Actions aS are
to Dc reterd toMoral Rules, and that ne
hac no reaton to appretiend beins misun-
derstood, or that it couid De supposd he
included any other sort ot Actions, no
Ocher beins at all to the purvose in thac
Dcestion.
Betoro I procced to speak oF What I
chink the true Nocion ot Nacural Con-
Science, ot irhat Authorier, and of nrhat
eise it i5; it wiil be Ar to consider nhae
the Remarker Cays he understands DY IE,
Wrhich he next procecdsto tellus, but de
fines it more particularis in another place
thus: A Nacural Sacacity to distingnistr
Mlorat Vood and Fvil; or a different per-
ception and sense of them, with a different
affection of the Mind arisine from it
and this (o immediate as to prevent and an-
ticipate au External Laros, and al Ratioci-
nation. This he Cars he takes to De the
Foundation of Natural Relision withont
Which he does not tenom hor it can subsist:
tho he approres otMT. LockS ACcOunEOF
Nlaturat
P. 7.

## Folio 55 — 797937889:0067
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000067.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
Natural Relision (0 Far 25 it gOC5. X0n
place Natural Relioion ((aYS he) L thinte in
the beliet of the Beins of a Cod, and of O-
bedience due to bim. This is esod so far as
it soes, and is well supported. Bui the ne-
stron is, rhat Laos those are that me ourht to
obey, or how ve can knom them withont Re-
velation, unless yon cahe in Natural Consci-
ence for a distinction of O00d and Pvil, or
another Idea of Cod than what von have
sivenus. Flarins alreads anticipated chis
DouE, bY Mermine horr the MOraL AE-
tribuces ot God arc deduciblo trom
Mr. LockS Principles, and hon re tnom
irhat his Will is, by the contormity or
repugnanes ot chinss ioour Reaton, and
rith respect to Humane Nature, of irhich
heis the Auchor, I necd not sire a par-
ticular ansiver to this Ouestion: But lince
the Remarber lars I0grent a srels upon
his Principle of Natural Conscience in that
Sense and Notion vrhich he has siren ot
P. 50
it, thac he takes it to be the Foundation of e. 4 e 5
Natural Relision, and chinks the distinction
of C0od and Fvil, is manifested, and sup-
porred by it: let us tarther consider IE.
IE woildbc t0o tedious to repeat ai
thacthe Kemarker lays on this Subieet, From
the beginnins of his Third Letter to etie
15th Pase; Lneedonls hint at lome OB.
berrations, hy rrhich it willappear, that
he has nor secled in his omn Mind a de
terminate Idca of his Principle of Nacurat
Conscience, but arsues for it lometimes in
onesense, and sometimes in anocher; thaL
MP. Lock

## Folio 56 — 797937889:0068
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000068.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
NIT. Zock iS AOE at ail concernd in the
reatest Dart ot his Argument; and Dy
erhich theweatness ot the rrhole miil De
Obrious to ererr Reader.
Atcer his Detinition, he sires us a no-
cable illustration ot his Principle in the
Soui ot distinguimins moraliy 600d and
Fvil, Wichout Ratiocination, by the Porrer
re hrare ot distinguitins sensible qualities
erichout Refection, or Ratiocivation. IT0
misHE ererY rhit as Well hare told us,
that since re hare a Porer ot distinguiin.
IBS Moral Rclations, ichout matsine ule
Ot our Fye-Sight, e mar distinguim Rca,
and Tellor, rithout Ryes; thes BCinE
nO more the proper and oulr inlets ot
our Ideas ot Colours, than reflection is ot
moral distinctions; itich the Remarker
Pa7S e May hare withont Rofection,
since irc can distinsuit Colours, and o
cher Tensible qualicies michout Reflection.
But it this ere (0, MT. Lock MaY Ver
Wel Cay What che Lemarker belieres he
Wril AOE, Thac then Children wouid De
able to distioguim Moral Cood and Pril
for thes very clearls distinsuim aII the
Objeces oF sentation thae come in their
avas; oud ehis Principse coud nerer DC
improvede Or corrupted, a5 HO One CaA DC
pertraded ihac ans Sensation He HaS is
more or lcss agrecable, or that a dila-
et
srecable sensation is an agreoablc onc;
Wrhich is recoud, it is erident that our
SenTES wond noc De Susticient. to thcir
End, to sireus norice oF What iS COnre.
HIenE,
P. 8.
id

## Folio 57 — 797937889:0069
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000069.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
niene, or inconreniene to the Bodr. And IE
is reatonable to think il theremere such an
inrard sensation desiond, as the Remarker
Tars, to direct us as to ihrat is sood or hurr-
Ful cothesoul, it mond operateas constant.
Iy as tholcothersdo; no Man cou d preter
Viceto Vertue, any more than he can Pain
to Pleature; othermise it wond noE
ansrer theend ic ias design dFOr.
Another thins to be observd is, that
most ot the RemarKers ArgUmenLS Were
anticipated by MF. Lock, tho he takes
nonoriceot the Ansiver tO heIm, 25 10
thelame purvose re vere nom upon, MF.
Lock harins omnd ehat there are naturat
Tendances imprinced on the minds of Mlen,
and that from the first instances of sense, and
Perception, there are some thines gratesul,
and others unerareful to them; the Remarker
eakes occasion trom thence, to desire he
will erant sech alike impression on the Soul,
nith reference tomoral Good and Fvil, as a
Rule or direction to our actions; tho
NIT. Lock there (qy., that those imprestions
V. B. 10
hespeaks ot, are 10 tar trom contirmin8 C. 3. S. 20
the like, rith relation to moral vo0d
and ErIl, that this is an dreument acainst
them, since it their vere any Tuch impres
NIOnS, ne couldnot but perceive them constant.
ly operate in us; and instuence our enomledée
asve de those others on the will and appetite
the desire of Tappiness, and aversion for Mia
sery continuino (as innate Practical princi-
ples oneht) to instuence all our actions vithont
ceasne, andare in ai Persons, and al A0 es
stead
P. 5.

## Folio 58 — 797937889:0070
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000070.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 44 lines, status machine
Ready and Eniversal. Butthis tha Remarkox
aR. p. IP. Cakes no norice oI. In onorher pirci he
aegues that exorbitant practices avainst
Natural Conscience, arc no proot chat
Es. B. 1. c. Mereis no uch Principle; which Mr. L ock
o
xdHtS, Aor doeshe concend asainst a Wa
trrat RuLc. But the seneraltr allond
breach ot a Rule ansirtere, he (ay5, IS a
proot chacit is nor INNATE, which he
had siren iastances ot in sererat NVationS.
This objection nor beins crils antwered,
the Remarker chuses rather eo oppose an
Arsumene Whieh MT. Lock docsnot use, buE
On the contras omns that IE IS NONC. BUE
any onc wrho considers Wrtat MF. Lock Ob.
jects, ill casils sec eo hor licele purpose
che Remarker cakes o much vains to Mer
LhatChe lame Arsumones vhich he brinss
gainst Innaro Principles, moy De usd t0
prove that the La ot Chrictianits, is
noc knomn amons Christians; For besides
the sreat dilierence ot an Innate Law,
Wrtrica Men must alais carry abouc ich
them, From an; ocher chat cher mas avoid
+.
rehlectins on, or mifunderiland; the case
et Christians actins against a knomn LaW,
Connot De the Tame mich chac nhich
MII. Lock represents, unlels the Remarker
can Be an Christians, uho constantly, with.
out the least remorse, or pame, offend acainst
that Law Whichthes believe; and that all the
by-standers, even Lam-malers, andGovern-
ersu silently connive at it, nay affirm that il
istheir Dury todo so: For chis is che Cale
oE chose Narions which MT. Losk menti-
OASo
EdR P. 14.
1d
ATC
tet
aMC
the

## Folio 59 — 797937889:0071
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000071.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 57 lines, status machine
Her
C
inAt
hat
Lock
Van
2
5 d
He
AS.
ed
aul
uE
BUE
D.
ole
eN
10
e
Ons. But the Demart er has a hren dob- P. 10
section
aint LLIS AY
MenE; They are
Barbarons Poepio, he (275, 25. L HC CXCCPES
agriase ehem FOr v: =neSeS, 25 Persona In-
fames. IAnd, iE NEr. Lockvoud conrince
him thacthere acc no Innate Principles, hC
musc em him some police Nation nhere
thc People hare dilisentis. and rixtuls
implord their Laculties, and vet are 1g-
nOxaHEOF the La oF Nature; this mighe
De requird. IF MT. Lock denyd a LaW ot
Nlature, Rnorable by our Nlatural Facul-
tics; but to prore what he attirms, that this
La Is iOE Knorable toMen, bue by their
makins arighr use ot cheir Paculties, tis
Fusticient to sem chat there areMen, Who
are abfoluels ignorant ot the clearest Prin-
ciples oF thac Larr. No, Cays the Remar-
ker, thes are Barbarous ignorant People;
and theretore, arc no co0d Witneses, thar
chere oro no Innare Principles. But arc
ches noc Men Ipray: What isit then that
makes them more Barbarous, or LenOranE
thanothers, buccheir nor havins made a
rient usc ot their Natural Faculties: this
IS MT. LockS argument, thac their arc nO
lnnare Principles, since lome NationS, FOr
vantot makins a ristruse oF their Facul-
cles, are (0 Barbarous, or Tornorant, 25 t0
have no Notion ot the clearest ot those
Principles irhich, are esteem d Innate.
Forrhich the RemarkerS obicetion, ThAE
thes are a Barharous People, voc At +o DC
admitted for mitnesses, is indeed verr ex-
raordinars. IF he pleales to consider
orhat

## Folio 60 — 797937889:0072
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000072.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
60
Wrhat he meons by Borbarons, and irhat is
the cause chat chese People arc FO; 1b0
liere he wil Becrer sec the force et
MT. LockeS Argument, and altor them to
be very g00d Witnesses in this cale, tho
perhaps hemistie ith reaton CXCCPE 3
Fainst ehem at the Bar: AII he iS delir d
eo take upon cheir Credit is, that Men do
not kno their Duey ichoue makine a
rishruse ot their Natural Faculties; and
that cheretore there are no Innare Princi-
ples, Or none to any purpose, lince they do
noc operate riI Men br Reflection discover
chat Lar irhich is tobe the Rule ot their
actions. T0 prove this MI. Lock menti-
ons fome ritious practiles apprord in se-
veral Nations; Whichthe Remarter Calss
rakino up cheir durt and filth; to throneh in
the Face of tlumane Nature. IE Pews Men-
indecd chat ther Mond nor idly, or rasls.
take up mith che Airst Nocions ther meet
vich, but employ their Faculcies in the
Best manner they can, irtrich God has
siru them to actain the Knowledee ot
cheir Duer, Wtrichther can ontr De igno-
ranE OF By Their omn FauIE. Dut What
indieniti this can De thouehe upen Mantind,
Or nhat pieceof Tneratitude to our Maker, l
veliereno Bod) huc cheRmarker can ap-
prehend.
Tlenext procceds to mention some Ver-
tuous actions ot Hlcathen Staces, contra-
ry cocheir interest, and set done ith ge.
neral applause, 25 a Proot ot Nlatural
Contcience. They are indecd proots ot a
Lan
ibid.
P. TT.

## Folio 61 — 797937889:0073
# 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
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;

## Folio 62 — 797937889:0074
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000074.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
C
62
Naturat; But in ehis sense oF them he ilt
make no a-do about themord innate; IE the
Ouection De thether chere arc Innate
Povers Or Faculties in theSoul, the con-
troverlie rill nor De chaned, For there
Wil Be no controrersie at aIl; MT. Lock
ontr contends against thole nho lay there
are Principles oF MetaphisicaI Or HOral
Prucho Orisinally imprinted on the mind:
by rrhich, it thes onls mean chat chere is
an Innate POIer Or Capacier in the Soulot
norins those Truths, thCy ean nOTHINE
disterent trom MT. Lock, erho denies innase
Principles; for he docs Hor denr chat
Ehere iS a POrer IN EHC SouI ot percei-
vins; and assentins to rhose TrutHS, OZ OF
distinsuiins crood and Fril; tho he is
noclo ready ac it as the Remarker, Without
emplorins his Faculties aboutit, or with
out Ratiocination: S0 thereis no occation
Forhim to form an Ldea of the Soul mithont
any Povers, nor for that supposition Wrhich
rith a Ccomine charitable wittr, thC RC-
marker mon d s0 sronndlesy Fasten on
MF. Lock.
Thenext place IMall mention, Wrhere
Innate Principles; aud Natural Principles,
areusd in the Pame sense, and Both only
FOr Povers Or. Faculties oF the Soul, is Pase
eheFifteenth, Where he pretends to antiver
a Dillemma Wrhich Mr. Lock proposes con-
concernins fInnate Principles. But any
one irtio takes the pains to consider nhat
hethere Pars, will find that heules thole
Terms in a quite disterent sense trom that
irhich
P. 23.

## Folio 63 — 797937889:0075
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000075.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
ertrich MT. Lock understands by Innate
Principles; and chat cheretore MT. Lock 18
HOE AF alI concernd In ThaE APSUMENES
Acicher iS IE ony chins to che Remarkers
purpole oE establichins Natural Conscience
in his omn sense and notion ot it, if We
mas tatre it trom his Detinition, Pase7.
Dut, indced, his uncertain usc ot chese, and
choleother Terms Lhare mention d, makes
IE very difficule eo knom irtrat he means
br his Principle of Natural Conscience; For P. 16.
thole Principles Wrhich hehere astirms to DC
Innate, are Porvers of the Soul, the Ex-
ercise oF wrhich, he(275, I5 Conditional, and
depends upon the disposition of the Body
Culture, and other Circumstances; Which
25 thes are verr different trem thole Prin-
ciples rrhich MT. Lock deries to Dc Innate
1o arether also trom the Remarkers Prin-
ciple of distinonistins in Moral Cases withont
Raciocination, sufficient for a seneral di- P. 8, 8, 30
rection of our Lives, and the foundation of
Narural Relicion. For hor can it De sut-
fcient for those Fuds, if ic depend upon
continsent Circumstances: Or ho can the
Exercise oFa Porrer ot distinsuiins chings
wirhont Ratiocination, depend upon any
Culeure, Or be hindred DY contrary Princi- P. 1
ples, 25, he FayS, this Porver mar
 For by
Culrure here MUSt. DC MeanE a Richt In-
struction, or Righe Refection; and DY con-
trary Principles, False Maxims, Or Opinions,
(tho in che tame place he uses that Perm
in a quite disserene (ense, For Povers oF the
Sont) rhich are all acts et Pariocination.
ANC

## Folio 64 — 797937889:0076
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000076.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 41 lines, status machine
ibid
64
Aud cherotore t0 Cay Chac the Fxercise et
ehis Porer dependsupon them, is the lame
ehins as 2o Pay, ttiat the Porer ot distin-
Suimins ehinso withoui Rariocination, de
Dends upon Rariocination. Wvhich, it the
Remarker understands, I Beliere he ill
hardIy. make ic intellisible to aus bods
eIsC.
From all these Obscrrations compar du
ind righeli applsd, it rii plainls ap
Dear that Mr. Lockis very lictle concernd
in ehis Discourse, Wrhich, the Remarker
TarS, i5 in detence ot Natural Conscience,
aeainst Whom Iknon not, thCMOLE DaLE
ot it beine arguments for chingo irhrich
MC. Lock no lels afirms than He; Io he
appear eo oppolehim, byusins ME. LockS
Vords in a disterent sense From that
erhich tie understands tnem in; and those
Arsumenes by irtich the Remarker realy
does oppose him, beins anticipated and
Fusy Ansiver d in ME. LocKS F NaY.
And trom ehe inconsistency ot his De-
tinicion et Natural Conscience, wich nis il.
lustracions of it in several places, and his
toose and undetermin d use ot those Perins
irhich’are ot greatest consequence in this
Discourse, I must take leave to conclude,
That he has not Ax d in his omn Mind a
elear Idea ot that Principle irhich he
contends For; tho hethintes he has giren
Rules, and Martes, Dy rhich ic may sut-
Acienely appear eo others vhat he means
Dy it; and theretore by those Marks l
il endearour a licele eo clear his oin
Notion
in
de
b

## Folio 65 — 797937889:0077
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000077.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
Notion tohim; and For nis Patisfaction to
eltabli irhat I think Natural Conscience
15, accordins to Mr. LockS Principles,
and in thetrue Notion oF ic; tho MT. Lock
is without reason broughe into this Dis-
pute, as is crident trom the Remarker
Ornmoras; L de not remember (CayS he)
that in this sense von have once nam d Na - 3R. P. 5.
tural Conscience in jour Book: WVhy thenl
pray are (o mans Argumenes usd, a5 ithe
had irrit a Wrhole B00k asainst it. By
irhrat Rule is a Man concluded to deny
erery thins that hehas not aftirm d: But
the Remarker is not the tirst who has
ehioughe this sood Loeick, and fair deal-
ins asainst Mr. Lock; thaterer he nrites
HexE, iF it Mond DC OF Gravitation, Or the
Notions of the Planets, Pchink he mon d do
Wrell to put the Articles of his Religion at
the cnd ot it, For tear he Mou d bC accus d
oF harins nonc, it his B00k Moud nOE
happen to name any.
BuL 25 Eo Nacural Conscience, I detire
the Remarker to examine rrhether that
Principle he Speaks OE, Or (a5Ihad rather
exprels it here, a5 less Equirocal) that
Pover oE distinguittrins in Maral thines
vithout Ratiocination, DC not a consequent
ot a previons Ratiocination, or Instru-
ction; by irhrich, havins sot soie clear or
confus d Idcas ot crooc and Fvil, 2 diE-
serent attec
rileetrom them, and this Poimmediate, a5
that it may De truly Caid Eo DC withour
Ratioeination; Fromirhich, che mistake
MaG

## Folio 66 — 797937889:0078
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000078.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
66
may come, that it prevents, or is before
any Raticionation, tho it is realty dri effect
ot it, ouly operatins without cakine non
Tice ot its cause; as in ocher Cales, the li-
kinss or avertions ot the Mind, 10 ThinZS,
Or Pertons, mar be oblerrdto do, irhich
harins been at Arst produed br fome out-
Ward Caule, fomme Crood, or Fril, re hare
found, or heard, or apprehended et tholo
Thinss, Or Persons, the lame affection
constantir exerts it seIF at their prelence,
Withoue ans reflection on the Caulc, oi
verhapsthe least sense chat it ever hac a
KnOWHCaUSC.
And ehis fucden affection in Moral Cg
ses, is indced ot excellent usc, wrtien it is
once set on more by an enlichined Fudement,
tokreep up the distinction ot Cio0d and
Fris, to incite, or to b0 a check uxon
Mens Actions, in the heac ot a Tempta-
cion, ertien ther hare neither time nor
pover to reaton the Cale, or 1o reffect
upon the Instruetions hare been siren
them; and thus mas be trulr calld the
Suppore of Natural Relision; Or a5 the A:
Dostle PayS, a witness accusino or excusimo
those who have no other Law but that os
Nature DuE must not theretore Be taten
FOr the Law it seltus or as the Remarter
callsit, the Fonndation of Natural Religion
Dut rather Natural Religion for the Founda-
tion of it; and then it mas wieh FaFety De
relyd on. Theretore Philosophers, and
Dirinesu havins mostls wriefor Tuch a5
hare had in Ceme meature a Rnomledse ot
thei

## Folio 67 — 797937889:0079
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000079.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 70 lines, status machine
refore
a
AD.
 I
1185
h
I
Out
raVC
hole
TiOn
nCC,
1
ad a
a
E ic
te
aH
DOI
Pta
AOI
Rec
+B
C A
1
Et
catet
AEHC
18i01
1
II
H d
C0
t
cheir Duty, do rith sood reason sire
SICat Authories to ehis Wiinclo, and fre-
quenels send Men to contule cheir Con-
sciences, as if it vere the Original Rule,
and an Intallible Director; For it is not
calilu perverted, or silenc d, When once
righely Tet on work; and has a sreat in
Auence on Mens Actions, nothins beins
more intupportable, than to cand con-
demnd in our oron sudsments; or more
delishetul, than ene approbation ot our
omn Minds; and cheretore this Monitor
may prerail, wheu our Pastions havemis-
led or silencd Renson; or the hopes ot
escapins Future Punistimenes made us For
a While secure.
BUE Pomertul and Faithtut as this
Witness 15, since it mas by False Opini-
OAS, Or vicious HabiEs, Take a WVrone
BiaIs, Ctrhich the greatest AlTertOrs oF its
Authories contels,) aud is alivars set on
Work Dy the first Pertirasions itich hap-
Den to takre possession ot Mens thouBhIS,
since it does not direet cheir ODinIOnS,
but is insuencd bYthem; this not onty
Mens thac it is not delien d For the Ori-
Binal RuLe, and APSE DirectOr OF OUT A-
etions, Or the Foundation of Natural Reti-
pion, but that it is of danserous Conse-
quence to lay chemhole weisht oF MO-
ralits upon Conscience alone, independent
oE the occasions From nhich it has ealten
the ErSF DeNC. FOr nO douDE therO are
t00 mans wrho by an unhappr caris Fdu-
cation, persue wich che lame BenFo( CD-
cICHCC

## Folio 68 — 797937889:0080
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000080.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 43 lines, status machine
C
68
science, or without che least remorte
Whocothers (irho hare bcen becter taught)
abhor. Nom in this Calc, to bid thele
Ben appcal to their Consciences, 25 an
Innate Cnide, that ill intalliblr direct
them in their DuEs, can onir serve t0
contiem ehem in cheir prejudices, and to
make them 50 on secureiy in their Vici
Ous Flabits, mithont arthei Examina-
tion, when cher find chemlclres acquitted
by chat inivard seule, vrhich ther arc
caushit to Revere as the impression ot
God himselF. Tuat ehis mar be theCaTe
Ot mans is not denv d Dy the Remarker
We do not conceive (CayShe) Natural Con-
science such a Licht as may not be dimnd,
f. 15. Or it may be extinguimd in some Peopte,
and in another ploce appeal with sincerity
10 jour Conscience; if that be obseur d, Per-
verted, or sear du me cannot belp it. These
Principles of Conscience are Secds that may
Die, or may Thrive, eC. they may be meale
in some, and inefectual in ethers, by con-
erary Principles, or other Impediments. This
veins granted, it is cridene chat thole
ecople in nhom thele Principles happen
10 DC extinsnish d, Or perverted, will in
rain appeal mich sincerits to their COn
sciences; there is no vas to set them
risht Dut bs rectitsing their Judsments:
thes are to be marnd noc totrust to 10
danserous a sccuritr, and to Deconvincd
OE cheir Errors, and cheir oblisatiOnS, On
Rational Crounds.
3R. P. 2O
P. 16.
EaPDea
al
eA
De
it

## Folio 69 — 797937889:0081
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000081.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 42 lines, status machine
d
e
a)
l
69
lappeal to theRemarker, Whether this
is noc theonis ras ot dealins mith a Man
aeho has been Educated trom his intancy
in false Principles, contirmd by ricious
Habits, and che approbation oE aII hiS
Companions, Whether such a Man maz
notbr Reflection and Reason be correctedus
and convincdoF the Natlral Oblisations
vihich the Creator has laid on him, a5 4
Rational, Sociable, aud Dependent Crea-
ture. This Idoubenor the Remarker nil
allo, his ZCal FOr an Innare Liehr Will
noc transport him (0 far a5 to put out the
Liohe of Reason, That iE may MInC AIOnC,
and leare Men irrecorerabls in the dart,
in rtom this Lishit of Conscience happens
10 DC Exrinouistr d: Tho he CayS he does
not sec by what Ratiocination ve can col=
lect what theWill of G0d ii unless ve take
in Natural Conseience for a distinction of
600d and Fvil. Phope on Farther consi-
deration, and ntrat lhare betore Caid on
that Subject, he will not dens the consi.
Aenes oF our Duey toReaton, and the
Fridence oF it t0 ali iho diligenelr IcE
themselres to hnou it; That mon dindecd
De an indionity to Mantind, and a great
incratitude to our Mlaker: But aII Who Per-
ccire the reatonablenels oF rrhat is requI
red oF us, the necessitr ot it for the pre-
serration or perfection ot our Nature; au
whoread thewill et Cod in his Wisdom,
must acknomledse chac he has not been
chusmantins unto Men, but chat al ihC
crecepis ot Haturat Relieion mas he
clearis
3d. P. 50

## Folio 70 — 797937889:0082
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000082.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
 8
cleariy Hnomn by the Light of ReaIOn, to
ans onc irho sets himselt toscarch. This
Deins Wrhrat I beliere the Remarker will
noc chink FE to deny, Itate for granted,
and delire him to consider, whether a
Man, in irhom the Dictates ot Conscience
(supposins them Innate) hare been carty
obicur d, Or perverted, beins broushe to
a bnorledse ot his Dues bY RCaTON, OX
Reflection, Whether Y P2Y ThisMan has nOL
a Ture foundation for Hatural Relision,
ithoue takins in his Principse ot Con-
Science for a distinction et Good and Lvil +
This he mustgrant, unless he will las chat
General, obscure and indistinet notices (For l0
he describes his lunate Principles) arC a
Decter Foundation for Naturat Relision,
s
than clear and distinet Rnomledse; Whici
iF it DC 1oo abturd to astere, the Remarkei
must omn, notrichstandins his écal for
innate Principles, thac those wtro deny
them mar hare a Pure Foundation for Na-
cural Relision, a5 lons a5 the Prcccpts ot
ic are contistent wich, or Frident eo the
Lisht OF ReaIOn.
And tarcher I suppose the Remarker
Wrils very readils allor, that when a Man
is thus broustit br Rcalon to a true sense
ot his Dues, his Conscience, tho Detore
perverted, will then Be set ristit, and
chencetormard Condeimn, or Acquit him,
accordins as he obers or not that Lan
erhich his Understandins has assented to
and this withont Ratiocination, by an im
mediate affection oE ihe Mind: Buc let

## Folio 71 — 797937889:0083
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000083.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
him consider whether this be the effect ot
an Orisinal impression on theMind, anti-
cipatins all Refection, or Raciocination:
ot Whether ic does not plaintr prore,
chat Conscience is nothing else Dut a
sudement hich e make ot our Actions,
trith reterence to lome Lar, which e
arc persiraded oueht to be the Rule ot
chem. This I beliere wwill, upon an un-
prejudicd Examination, be found toDe the
true Notion ot Nlatural Conscience, and
the Best rith resard to Relision (25
Truth alirars is a Turer suppore tor it
than the most Pious mistatren Notions)
For thisaccount caurions Men not to trust
20. a Pedceot Conscience irhich may pro-
cecd From False Opinions; and lcares aIl
EtsRuthoricy inthose irtio hare had occasi-
ons ofbeins righelr intorm dot theirruer.
Thus I hare donc mith cacti particular
Flcad ot the Remarkers lnquiries, ond I
hope have laid cnourh to conrince him,
that MT. LoceS Principleo et Iumane un-
derstandins, sire a sufticient lecuriey a-
e
SainA Fuch a SyAem a5 he apprehends, a 2. R. p. II
Monichaan Codu a Morcat Soul, an Arbitra- 3. R. P. 16.
ry Lao of C00d and Fvil, and any danger-
ous Inferences trom Mr. LockS Notion of
Cocirant Matter, Viz. hat God maY, for
any thins we hnor, sive the Pover of Cosi-
tation tosome Systems of Matter. FOr Phare
Aevn chat the Proots ot a tuture state ot
Rervards and Punistiments, are equalli con-
elusire without a Demonstratire certaintr
oE the SouIS Immaterialisy. And 2S io ThaL
other

## Folio 72 — 797937889:0084
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000084.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
n0 100
P. 23.
ather Difficuler trith trhich the ArAt Re-
marks conclude, concernins the Nature
ot God and his immaterialiti, upon Ehis
Concession, That Matter may be capable ot
Perception and ThoughE, MT. Lock has 10
Wrel contuted the Materialists on chat
Esay B. 4. Point, Postronsly prord, that Cositation
Cannot De thc Porver ot Matter, Or that
the Supreme Cositant Beins cannot De
Materias, that i cannot immagine to irhat
end che Remarker brinss in those Argu-
menes against the Immaterialiey ot Ciod,
EF he means a5 Well toReligion and NIr
Cock, as he troud Dethought to d0.
But irhateret he chere meant, it
scems he has repented upon Farther
chousnts, or better scen the force ot
NT. LockS Proos thatCod is Immateriat:
erhich he there tears rill rise no higher
than Probabilier, tho he heartily wistres
they may; bur in his Thira Letter, his
judoment is broushe over to his heart
imtr, and he contesses that MF. Lock very
vell refutes the Materialist, ioho vou d have
but one sinole substance in the Worid namely
Marrer. And eo inem his sinceritr and
sood wili the more, he omns this wrhere
one mond seast expeet ic, when he is gi-
vins herorst inlinuations he can oF MT.
LockS Principles; Buc the manner ot his
doine it is am extraordinary mark ot ehc
kind intentions, and respeet to MI. Lock,
irtiich he protesles, and irhich no body
ean doubt of, nho obterves hoi ingeni-
ouslr he endearours to tasten the Principles

## Folio 63 — 797937889:0085
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000085.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 36 lines, status machine
of Deism On MIr. Lock, by Memins chac
fome oF his Notions arc nor inconsilteur
with chem; and that some ot the Ouesti-
ons wrhich he discusses mas berais d uDon
their Principles, tha none ot them done-
cellarily devend upon thole Principles:
and a great part ot his Ellar is directls
contrary to chacnhich the Remarker lays
he cannor bue chink is the Mistery aim d
at all alone, but conceald trom us, viz
That the Sont of Mlan is noc a distinct perma-
nene substance. Let the impartial, judsc
prhecher ehis De to arrue fairly; or whe- Vide 2R
ther ic docs no look like a desire to make p. 12.
use ef Names to no very tair purpose. But
thac I may noc De luspected to haremis-
reprelented the Remarkers may ot impu-
tine the Deists Principles EO MT. Lock, I
will a5 brieAy as postible, run over the
Parciculars which he compares to them.
The erand Principle of Deism (Cayshe) 3R. P. 23
is this, Theres one Infinite, niversal Spirit
that actuates Matter alvays, nithout the Ope-
ration of parricular Spirits: And is the Soul
of Man be nothine but an infux from ano-
ther Principle, not a distinet permanent Sub-
stance, whosoever soes upon this Principle, L
de not monder if he cannot allom Innate Ideas,
or Practicat Principles in the Soul; for there
is no permanent Soul toimprint them upon.
CAnsiv.) But may noc onc rrho doesehinte
the Soul a permanent substance, doube
chat ichas anz Ideas bucrhar ic reccired
trom sentation and Refection; Decause he
iS nOE conscious OF aAY BUE WhaL he CaN
XTaCC

## Folio 64 — 797937889:0086
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000086.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 43 lines, status machine
 aY
C
64
erace co those Originals And the Porer
or Faculties ot receirine Idcas, no lets re
quire a permanent Substanceto Exist in,
than Idcas themselres. Moreover ((27e
he Remarker) upon that Lsypothesis the sont
cannot be said eo be immortal. And Wrhat is
tnat; IpCaY, tO MT. LockE IIaS he auy
votere coldus that the soul cannot be Taid
+o BeImmortar Doeshe not Freguenti
proters a AedFast beliet that thesoul is
d mmortal: IIas he not zcalousy con-
tested that our ignorance ot ihat kind ot
SuBitance the sont is, doco not at aI
eallen the alturances of itsmmortality
Why Then is this, Thot the Soul cannot be
said to be immorial, brought in 2s an opinion
Ot MT. LockS, but at any rate to make
that Posicion, That the sont is not a distinct
substance, De supposd a Principle ot
MIS d
Furthermore (Pays the RerrarKeE) in
conseguence of this Principle of Deilm, and
the Morraliry of the soul, creat difficulties
must needs arise tothem about the Resuirrecti.
on, TTor it can be the same Man, or the
same Perlon, that rises arain, when boththe
Body and the soul are nev and this non d
brins on nice disputes abont the Notions of
Identity, and Diversuy, wbich accordinoly
ve sind discusse d at laree inthe Essay, for their
sarisfaction,  suppose, that eo upon those Princi-
ples. IE may De 10, But the Remarker
must sire me leare to suppose 100; that
thole Notions are not discuss d for cheir
Eatisfaction alone, irto so upon cholePrin.
Ciples
Pe)
LV OccCH
et 5 24
Lbteto

## Folio 65 — 797937889:0087
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000087.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 39 lines, status machine
Pine
l
63
ciples; and the realon why I takre the li-
beres to suppose s0, is, Decause Mr. Lock
determines the Ideas of Pdentiry and Diversi-
cy, upon sereral very diterent Principles:
and Decause thoscrtio do think thesoul a
distinet permanent substance, mar have
fome difficulties abont the Resurrection, ana
about the Notions of Identity ana Diversiy:
For Identity of Substance will not determine
it in aII coses, a5 Personal Identity, and
TTuman identiry, t0 those wto take tho
Body into their Idca oF Man; and FOr
their latistaction ertro place LTumane Iden-
ticy in the Tame Immateriat Spirit, united
to Tuch and such Partieles ot MatteE, in
such a Stapo and FOrmI, ME. Lock BCNS
hor e mar casily conceive the fame Person
at the Resurrection, tho in a Body not exactir
in mate or parts the sare he had here. BuE
supposins irieh che Remarker, that Dis-
course as delion d for the Patistaction ot
those wlo c0 apon the Principles ot Veism,
thac does not sure Intiele Mr. Lock 10 Their
Principles; and indeed these are a TOrt oF
Deists very eil worth sacistyine, nhat-
erer ther chink of the Soul, since they
allor the Resurrection: I supposo they
areot that Party which che Remarker TelIS Pos scripE
us rill omn boch Nacural and Rercald
Relision. And to Patistie such Men hon
consistentlr irich cheir omn Notions, they
mmay conceire the tame Persons at thcRe
furrection accountable for eneir Actions
in ehis Lite, is rorthy of a good Mans
Pains, tho he ditterstrom them in cheir
Opinions

## Folio 66 — 797937889:0088
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000088.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 38 lines, status machine
C 66
opinions oF the sout; and much more ser-
viceable to Relision, than thole can De
(Whacerer zeal ther pretend for ic) intio
Will nor allon that the Returrection, or a
Future Stace, ean bechtablisd upon any
rpochelis buc their omn; for no doubt,
it Men are convincd ot a Future State,
tis oF no consequence uxon hat grounds
ther areso, their mistakes about the sub-
Aance oF the Soul, wil noc endanger their
MOrals, Or their Salration; And iF MI.
LockS Discourse et Identity aud Diversiy.
as desiend to resolre the disticulties that
may arile about the Relurrection, that can
onlu Mem his concernto secure that Fsen
eial point uxon everr Mans Principles,
since he determinies the Ideas et Identity
aud Direrher upon sereral contrary sup
volitions; aid cherctore there can Be nO
realon to conclude ans onc of them t0 Be
his opinion more than anocher untess he
has declard in tavour ot onc, Which he
has doneero or chree times in that Chap.
Ter For Chis, That the Sont is one Individual,
Immaterial Substance, ehe direet contrary
to that whieh the Remarker nou d have
thousht tobehisovinion.
WVe corr: enom 10 thenext and last dis-
rute which the Remarker mentions a5
C. F. 24. erilies from rhac Principle, That the Soul
is not a Subs: ance distinct from l’od and Mat-
ter. Trom this Posirion (he (a75) a uestion
sprines up concernine thc Povers of Matier-
er Wrherher Natter be not capable of Cocita-
sions l Mould rather chink chis vestion
Pre.
3.5. 250

## Folio 67 — 797937889:0089
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000089.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 37 lines, status machine
C
oreceded that Position; it Peems more Ra-
tional, and Natural; in the isporance
Men are oF mhar the Soul is, frA to enquire
Whether thac Porver ot Cogitation which
ther perceire in themlelres may noc De
communicated to Matter; anditcher finc
no contradiction in ic, (and upon thac
chink he to determine ot the nature ot a
chins, Which thes cannot certainly knoi)
thence toconclude, that the soul is not a
Substance distinet From Matter. Buthorr-
soerer that be, it cannot De concluded,
thac chole nho make this Ouection g0 up-
On a Suppolition That thesont is not a distinct
permanant substance, wrhichis the Principle
the Remarker mond hare supposd tobe
MT. Locks; The Ouestion, a5 MT. Lock
makes iC, is nOt Whether our Cocitations are
the operations of Cod, or of Matier: DuE
Whether Cod has siren the Porer ot CO.
sitation to a Material, Or an Immarerial
substance, and wrhich ay foerer this Oue-
Aion is resolred, thesoul must equally Dc
Cupposd a distinct permanent substance; toe
a Material Substance iS nOF lels a Substance
than an Immaterial.
But the Fallacy by which thac suppos
tion, That the Sont is noi a distinet permanent
Substance, i5 imputed to MT. Lock, VPOn
his doubrins whether chesoul may not be
Material, lies in this, thac suppolins the
Soul not to De a Substance distinet trom
Marcer, is taken for the Pane chins, a5
supposins it not to be distinet trom the
Body, rrhicti are rers differene supposi-
EIDHS

## Folio 68 — 797937889:0090
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000090.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 46 lines, status machine
(68
tions; and upon tnis fallocy it is conetu-
ded ehat those wrho think thesoul may
DeMaterial, cannot suppose it to exist alter
thodirolution ot the Bodr. But that one
whothinks Cod may hare firer Percep
rion and Thouehe, 10 lome Spsteins oF Mat-
ter dispos d as he sces tt, mar suppolethis
Sem distinct from thie Body; and t0 Con-
tinue in thic Pame State et Cociration wrhen
the Body is dissolred, re hare for an In-
Stance (nOt to irention manz others) a
o tess eminent Philosopher than civero,
Who in aII his criguiries aboue etie Sub.
stanee of che soul, ent not beyond that
Macter ot Wrhich. eheHcavens are made,
Aristotle Oninta Essentia; tho he finas
reatons Eo Think it mar De immorral and
Turrivorhe Body; aud plainty distinouisses
ic trom Boay, talcen for the sensible, or-
canical parts ot a Men, tho theroiS HO.
china ot Immaterialier in au his contidera.
tions aboue the luBance ot ehe Soul.
This chenis evident, that none ot these
Discourses in ehe Fsay wrhick the Remark
ex mentions, as acrecins mith the nocion of
one Vniver(al Mlind operatine accordine ro
different Systems of. Marter, mithont any par-
ricular Thinkins Beines distinet from the  ni-
versal: Nonc ot Them, l Car, do necesta-
rili depend upon or terminace in chat
Stippolition; and some ot them do necer
Carily suppose the contrarr: Por il the
Soutis not supposd a particolar substance,
distinct trom ene Unirersal spirit, towhat
purpose are ans uections Madeor Resolrd
abOuE
10
(a1
V
0
WC
th
Loc
si
Mo

## Folio 69 — 797937889:0091
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000091.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 51 lines, status machine
el
te
cep.
ODe
lat.
O
re
12l
le
ds
ie
de
D.
(69
about tho Returrectiond. Therei IS, 1O
Sround For Tuch an cexpectation, inrho can
cake account, or be actousitable, tor deti
ons dono here, il thez are all the opera
rions of one Unirertatspinics Andinho
Duc ehe Remarker condsind ans consiston.
er in that supposition, icn a Discourse
to fatissie Men hon ches maz conccire tho
Pame Pertons at thociesurrection, and iust
IV subjeet to Rerdnas and Punitments,
nhaterer Cblancethesoul is; or otirhat
erer Particles the Bod is made up. 2. No
TOrt oF Deists, or Sect. oF Men, that I
Enom ot, did erer reconcile thesc tro
Opinions.
Those Sects trhich theRemarker CaYS 13. P. 22.
ere noted for holdins onls onc Unirersal
Mind, consistentlr with themselres denicd
the Resurrection; and to such Men MT.
LockSDilcourse about dentiry and Diver.
siry, cond sire no Patisfaction in that
Foint, nor cond it be made upon their
Principles. Bnt I leare che Reader 10
judse wrtrat ground there is trom any ot
the Particulars mentiond, For the Re-
marker to impuce that opinion FOMI. LOcR,
and to thint that the Mlistery aimi d at all
alons in an Fslay, where upon ererr occasion
he Spcaks oF the soul as a real distinet (Ub-
Stance, in t00many places to De instanced;
and ot Mon as a treeAsent, subjeet i0 an
Eternal Retribution, accordins eo his do
inss in this Lite; anc chat (o trequentlY,
and s0 expresr, that tis impostibleto de
clare his sentimenis upon char grand Point
FOT
abid.

## Folio 70 — 797937889:0092
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000092.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 15 lines, status machine
(70)
For the RemarkOrs Fale a5 he desires)
more plainis than he hasdone, irhich, in-
deed, is io effectual a rar ot concealine a
Alystery (o oppolite tothole Notions, That
I Deliere no Body will suspect it to De MI.
Locks aim, but the Remarker: And he, I
hope, upon turther reflection, will Aind
an casier Key to decipher this Philosophy, 2nd
De a5 Forrard to onn his miltates ot MI.
LockS Principles, and rone interences
trom them, a5 herras to publim Remarks
o injurioustohim, upon uncertain Conclu-
sions, and pronnaless suppositions.
u

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0093
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000093.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 1 line, status machine
Marg. 3. LOiBn. Nar9. 3

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0094
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000094.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 4 lines, status machine
b
MLHELMLEIBN.
ASÄCHSICHE LANDESBIBI
:LEN Lcibn. Marg. 3i Lcion. Mar9. 3,

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0095
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000095.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 5 lines, status machine
E tunm
 est
a
pai gulbar
e

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0096
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000096.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 106 lines, status machine
e
li
n
t
E 
i f
 pm
d
u
i
e  
e
a
se
ia
ortidie
ite
es tn
s
a
e
a
 a
a
n 
 es
s
a
io
se s
t 
q
i  
de
seb
d
e
ea
ps
quet
i
e
a
s
od
e
 
 
a
 
o
a
i
i
 o
e
 o
e
a
 
a
tamose
 
d
ate
e
t
s
te
l
e p a
 o
pa
 
s
 
eb
a
e
 pe
a
as
s
14
i. 2t
i
pa
(  a
r
ap  e 
 a 
e ie
enta
e
i
 
te
t
i
 se t
a
a
a
ba
du
s

## Folio  -  — 797937889:0097
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/797937889/jpgs/default/00000097.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 2 lines, status machine
e
e