Dialogue

  1 1|         from those sensations or ideas, in an intense degree?~HYL.
  2 1|       only so many sensations or ideas existing nowhere but in
  3 1|    measured by the succession of ideas in our minds?~HYL. It is.~
  4 1|           And is it not possible ideas should succeed one another
  5 1|         or disagreeable than the ideas of extension, figure, and
  6 1|    relative to the succession of ideas in our own minds. But, it
  7 1|        Can you even separate the ideas of extension and motion
  8 1|    extension and motion from the ideas of all those qualities which
  9 1|        they contemplate the bare ideas, I believe you will find,
 10 1|          not the pure abstracted ideas of extension.~HYL. But what
 11 1|    INTELLECT? May not abstracted ideas be framed by that faculty?~
 12 1|          I cannot frame abstract ideas at all, it is plain I cannot
 13 1|         the mind to disunite the ideas of extension and motion
 14 1|          idea, or combination of ideas—should exist in an unthinking
 15 1|         all I can do is to frame ideas in my own mind. I may indeed
 16 1|        in it than this: from the ideas you actually perceive by
 17 1|    learned to collect what other ideas you will (according to the
 18 1|          know nothing beside our ideas?~PHIL. As for the rational
 19 1|      than your own sensations or ideas? You have indeed more than
 20 1|        which are likewise called IDEAS; the other are real things
 21 1|    perceived by the mediation of ideas, which are their images
 22 1|      representations. Now, I own ideas do not exist without the
 23 1|     seems then you will have our ideas, which alone are immediately
 24 1| conformity or resemblance to our ideas?~HYL. That is my meaning.~
 25 1|   proceed from the sensations or ideas of sense by you then perceived;
 26 1|          immediate perception of ideas by one sense SUGGESTS to
 27 1|     things, or archetypes of our ideas, are not perceived by sense,
 28 1|         you rightly, you say our ideas do not exist without the
 29 1|      which indeed may affect the ideas in our minds, but it were
 30 1|     fleeting and variable as our ideas should be copies or images
 31 1|        colour, &c., that is, our ideas, are continually changing,
 32 1|   resembles some one only of our ideas, how shall we be able to
 33 1|     nothing can be perceived but ideas. All material things, therefore,
 34 1|         be perceived only by our ideas.~PHIL. Ideas then are sensible,
 35 1|         only by our ideas.~PHIL. Ideas then are sensible, and their
 36 1|          perfectly know your own ideas?~HYL. I know them perfectly;
 37 2| accounting for our sensations or ideas.~PHIL. How is that?~HYL.
 38 2|          variously affected with ideas.~PHIL. And call you this
 39 2|     whereby we are affected with ideas?~HYL. Why not, Philonous?
 40 2|       causes or occasions of our ideas. Pray tell me whether by
 41 2|      immediately perceivable are ideas; and these exist only in
 42 2|         mind occasions all other ideas. And, if you think so, pray
 43 2|        explain the origin of our ideas by that brain which is perceivable
 44 2|          combination of sensible ideas—but by another which I imagine.~
 45 2|        this while accounting for ideas by certain motions or impressions
 46 2|          or conceive are our own ideas. When, therefore, you say
 47 2|           therefore, you say all ideas are occasioned by impressions
 48 2|         you do, then you talk of ideas imprinted in an idea causing
 49 2|   perceived by the senses beside ideas; and that no idea or archetype
 50 2|        do not understand how our ideas, which are things altogether
 51 2|        the most abstract general ideas, which I entirely disclaim.
 52 2|     things I perceive are my own ideas, and that no idea can exist
 53 2|         it less plain that these ideas or things by me perceived,
 54 2|         pleasure what particular ideas I shall be affected with
 55 2|        immediately perceived are ideas or sensations, call them
 56 2|         as I perceive numberless ideas; and, by an act of my will,
 57 2|       Nature besides Spirits and Ideas? May we not admit a subordinate
 58 2|         and limited cause of our ideas? In a word, may there not
 59 2|     myself affected with various ideas, whereof I know I am not
 60 2|       that it is THE CAUSE OF MY IDEAS. And this thing, whatever
 61 2|        which is the cause of our ideas. But what else is this than
 62 2|         in the production of our ideas, not by any act of will,
 63 2|           I ask whether all your ideas are not perfectly passive
 64 2|      qualities anything else but ideas?~HYL. How often have I acknowledged
 65 2| efficient or active Cause of our ideas, other than SPIRIT, is highly
 66 2|         in the production of our ideas?~PHIL. An instrument say
 67 2|        such thing, when you form ideas in your own mind?~HYL. You
 68 2|          such an occasion of our ideas?~HYL. As to the first point:
 69 2|     presence whereof God excites ideas in our minds.~PHIL. And
 70 2|          thing.~HYL. When we see ideas produced in our minds, after
 71 2|     alone to be the cause of our ideas, and that He causes them
 72 2|  observable in the series of our ideas, or the course of nature,
 73 2|        the occasion of producing ideas in us?~HYL. I am perfectly
 74 2|        be affected with the same ideas you now are, and consequently
 75 2| particular things, qualities, or ideas, that I perceive, imagine,
 76 2|         demonstrated between the ideas comprehended in its definition.~
 77 2|           But where there are no ideas, there no repugnancy can
 78 2|          be demonstrated between ideas?~HYL. I agree with you.~
 79 2|       prove a repugnancy between ideas, where there are no ideas;
 80 2|        ideas, where there are no ideas; or the impossibility of
 81 3|     distinguish between your own ideas. That yellowness, that weight,
 82 3|      such certain appearances or ideas; but it cannot be concluded
 83 3|        immediately perceived are ideas; and ideas cannot exist
 84 3|         perceived are ideas; and ideas cannot exist without the
 85 3|           Philonous. Are all our ideas perfectly inert beings?
 86 3|          perfectly inert, as our ideas are. I do nevertheless know
 87 3|        as certainly as I know my ideas exist. Farther, I know what
 88 3|     figured, moveable things are ideas; and that which perceives
 89 3|         and that which perceives ideas, which thinks and wills,
 90 3|          idea, nor like an idea. Ideas are things inactive, and
 91 3|           My own mind and my own ideas I have an immediate knowledge
 92 3|   existence of other spirits and ideas. Farther, from my own being,
 93 3|          I find in myself and my ideas, I do, by an act of reason,
 94 3|        altogether different from ideas. Consequently that no idea
 95 3|  immediately from my sensations, ideas, notions, actions, or passions,
 96 3|       the notion of Spirit. That ideas should exist in what doth
 97 3|         should be the subject of ideas, or an active thing the
 98 3|        only a system of floating ideas, without any substance to
 99 3|          that I MYSELF am not my ideas, but somewhat else, a thinking,
100 3|        wifls, and operates about ideas. I know that I, one and
101 3|        sensible things and inert ideas. But, I am not in like manner
102 3|          substance or support of ideas, that is, that a spirit
103 3|       spirit knows and perceives ideas. But, I do not know what
104 3|        in it and supports either ideas or the archetypes of ideas.
105 3|       ideas or the archetypes of ideas. There is therefore upon
106 3|   equally in the mind?~PHIL. The ideas formed by the imagination
107 3|  dependence on the will. But the ideas perceived by sense, that
108 3|        the world but spirits and ideas. And this, you must needs
109 3|          is no substance wherein ideas can exist beside spirit
110 3|        immediately perceived are ideas, is on all hands agreed.
111 3|      mistaken with regard to the ideas he actually perceives, but
112 3|        be affected with the like ideas, he is mistaken. But his
113 3|          he makes concerning the ideas he apprehends to be connected
114 3|    perceived: or, concerning the ideas that, from what he perceives
115 3|        That we are affected with ideas FROM WITHOUT is evident;
116 3|           corresponding to those ideas. And, as these Powers cannot
117 3|       that a thing which hath no ideas in itself cannot impart
118 3|      them to me; and, if it hath ideas, surely it must be a Spirit.
119 3|       out of MY mind: but, being ideas, neither they nor their
120 3|          cause, therefore, of my ideas is in strict propriety of
121 3|      have asserted that whatever ideas we perceive from without
122 3|       mind which affects us. The ideas, therefore, of pain and
123 3|  complexion of such qualities or ideas as have no existence distinct
124 3|      nature, between two sets of ideas, or things immediately perceivable.
125 3|       latter. God knows, or hath ideas; but His ideas are not conveyed
126 3|           or hath ideas; but His ideas are not conveyed to Him
127 3| perceived by sense, are they not ideas?~HYL. I have told you so
128 3|         come to be affected with ideas, in that manner and order
129 3|        should produce or exhibit ideas is easily understood. But
130 3|        should be able to produce ideas, or in any sort to affect
131 3|  reasoning upon the connexion of ideas, they discover the laws
132 3|         changing all things into ideas? You, I say, who are not
133 3|         for changing things into ideas, but rather ideas into things;
134 3|    things into ideas, but rather ideas into things; since those
135 3|         combine together several ideas, apprehended by divers senses,
136 3|         aim is only to know what ideas are connected together;
137 3|        knows of the connexion of ideas, the more he is said to
138 3|          What, therefore, if our ideas are variable; what if our
139 3|     speaking of several distinct ideas as united into one thing
140 3|           It is your opinion the ideas we perceive by our senses
141 3|         farther real than as our ideas are the true REPRESENTATIONS
142 3|   impossible to know how far our ideas resemble them; or whether
143 3|       knowledge. Farther, as our ideas are perpetually varied,
144 3|           Whether your referring ideas to certain absolutely existing
145 3|         manner affected with the ideas I frame in my IMAGINATION.
146 3|      senses we perceive only the ideas existing in our minds?~PHIL.
147 3|         our senses to be our own ideas. Your difficulty, therefore,
148 3|          referring their several ideas they may truly be said to
149 3|         sensible impressions, or ideas perceived by various senses:
150 3|         by various senses: which ideas are united into one thing (
151 3|           a creation of what? of ideas? No, certainly, but of things,
152 3|          make no question. If by IDEAS you mean fictions and fancies
153 3|          mind, then these are no ideas. If by IDEAS you mean immediate
154 3|        these are no ideas. If by IDEAS you mean immediate objects
155 3|      mind, then these things are ideas. But whether you do or do
156 3|       you do or do not call them IDEAS, IT matters little. The
157 3|        our senses are not termed IDEAS, but THINGS. Call them so
158 3|    spirits, all you conceive are ideas; and the existence of these
159 3|        so.~PHIL. And are not all ideas, or things perceived by
160 3|   PHENOMENA are nothing else but IDEAS; God is a SPIRIT, but Matter
161 3|     Matter’s thinking, origin of ideas, the manner how two independent
162 3|       supposing only Spirits and ideas?—Even the MATHEMATICS themselves,
163 3|         the reality of things in ideas, fleeting indeed, and changeable;—
164 3|          things, rather than the ideas in our minds: and who can
165 3|        in the productions of our ideas? But is not this proceeding
166 3|        IMMEDIATELY PERCEIVED ARE IDEAS, WHICH EXIST ONLY IN THE