The Motives for Materialism

78. Why did Men suppose the Existence of material Substance?

They thought that Colour, Figure, Motion, and the other sensible Qualities or Accidents did really exist without the Mind.

This made it necessary to suppose some unthinking Substratum or Substance wherein they did exist, since they could not be conceived to exist by themselves.

Afterwards, in due time, Men became convinced that Colours, Sounds, and the other sensible secondary Qualities had no Existence without the Mind.

So they stripped this Substratum or material Substance of those Qualities.

• This left only the primary ones: Figure, Motion, and such like
• These they still conceived to exist without the Mind.
• Consequently, these need a material Support.

But I have shewn that not even these can possibly exist otherwise than in a Spirit or Mind which perceives them.

It follows that we no reason to suppose the being of Matter.

It is utterly impossible for Matter to exist so long as the word “matter” means an unthinking Substratum of Qualities or Accidents, wherein they exist without the Mind.

74. Materialists might allow Matter to exist only for the sake of supporting Accidents.

The reason intirely ceasing, one might expect the Mind should naturally, and without any reluctance at all, quit the belief of what was solely grounded thereon.

Yet the Prejudice is riveted so deeply in our Thoughts, that we can scarce tell how to part with it.

We are therefore inclined, since the Thing it self is indefensible, at least to retain the Name; which we apply to I know not what abstracted and indefinite Notions of Being, or Occasion, though without any shew of Reason, at least so far as I can see.

For what is there on our part, or what do we perceive amongst all the Ideas, Sensations, Notions, which are imprinted on our Minds, either by Sense or Reflexion, from whence may be inferred the Existence of an inert, thoughtless, unperceived Occasion?

On the other hand, on the part of an all-sufficient Spirit, what can there be that should make us believe, or even suspect, he is directed by an inert Occasion to excite Ideas in our Minds?

75. It is a very extraordinary Instance of the force of Prejudice, and much to be lamented, that the Mind of Man retains so great a Fondness against all the evidence of Reason, for a stupid thoughtless Somewhat, by the interposition whereof it would, as it were, skreen it self from the Providence of God, and remove him farther off from the Affairs of the World.

But though we do the utmost we can, to secure the belief of Matter, though when Reason forsakes us, we endeavour to support our Opinion on the bare possibility of the Thing, and though we indulge our selves in the full Scope of an Imagination not regulated by Reason, to make out that poor Possibility, yet the upshot of all is, that there are certain unknown Ideas in the Mind of God; for this, if any thing, is all that I conceive to be meant by Occasion with regard to God. And this, at the Bottom, is no longer contending for the Thing, but for the Name.

76. Whether therefore there are such Ideas in the Mind of God, and whether they may be called by the name Matter, I shall not dispute. But if you stick to the Notion of an unthinking Substance, or Support of Extension, Motion, and other sensible Qualities, then to me it is most evidently impossible there should be any such thing. Since it is a plain Repugnancy, that those Qualities should exist in or be supported by an unperceiving Substance.

77. You say that though it be granted that there is no thoughtless support of Extension, and the other Qualities or Accidents which we perceive; yet there may, perhaps, be some inert unperceiving Substance, or Substratum of some other Qualities, as incomprehensible to us as Colours are to a Man born blind, because we have not a Sense adapted to them. But if we had a new Sense, we should possibly no more doubt of their Existence, than a Blind-man made to see does of the Existence of Light and Colours. I answer, First, if what you mean by the word Matter be only the unknown Support of unknown Qualities, it is no matter whether there is such a thing or no, since it no way concerns us: And I do not see the Advantage there is in disputing about what we know not what, and we know not why.

78. But secondly, if we had a new Sense, it could only furnish us with new Ideas or Sensations: And then we should have the same reason against their existing in an unperceiving Substance, that has been already offered with relation to Figure, Motion, Colour, and the like. Qualities, as hath been shewn, are nothing else but Sensations or Ideas, which exist only in a Mind perceiving them; and this is true not only of the Ideas we are acquainted with at present, but likewise of all possible Ideas whatsoever.

79. But you will insist, what if I have no reason to believe the Existence of Matter, what if I cannot assign any use to it, or explain any thing by it, or even conceive what is meant by that Word? Yet still it is no Contradiction to say that Matter exists, and that this Matter is in general a Substance, or Occasion of Ideas; though, indeed, to go about to unfold the meaning, or adhere to any particular Explication of those Words, may be attended with great Difficulties. I answer, when Words are used without a Meaning, you may put them together as you please, without danger of running into a Contradiction. You may say, for Example, that twice Two is equal to Seven, so long as you declare you do not take the Words of that Proposition in their usual Acceptation, but for Marks of you know not what. And by the same reason you may say, there is an inert thoughtless Substance without Accidents, which is the occasion of our Ideas. And we shall understand just as much by one Proposition, as the other.