<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0027" id="link2H_4_0027"></SPAN></p>
<h2> SECT. VII. OF THE NATURE OF THE IDEA OR BELIEF. </h2>
<p>The idea of an object is an essential part of the belief of it, but not
the whole. We conceive many things, which we do not believe. In order then
to discover more fully the nature of belief, or the qualities of those
ideas we assent to, let us weigh the following considerations.</p>
<p>It is evident, that all reasonings from causes or effects terminate in
conclusions, concerning matter of fact; that is, concerning the existence
of objects or of their qualities. It is also evident, that the idea, of
existence is nothing different from the idea of any object, and that when
after the simple conception of any thing we would conceive it as existent,
we in reality make no addition to or alteration on our first idea. Thus
when we affirm, that God is existent, we simply form the idea of such a
being, as he is represented to us; nor is the existence, which we
attribute to him, conceived by a particular idea, which we join to the
idea of his other qualities, and can again separate and distinguish from
them. But I go farther; and not content with asserting, that the
conception of the existence of any object is no addition to the simple
conception of it, I likewise maintain, that the belief of the existence
joins no new ideas to those which compose the idea of the object. When I
think of God, when I think of him as existent, and when I believe him to
be existent, my idea of him neither encreases nor diminishes. But as it is
certain there is a great difference betwixt the simple conception of the
existence of an object, and the belief of it, and as this difference lies
not in the parts or composition of the idea, which we conceive; it
follows, that it must lie in the manner, in which we conceive it.</p>
<p>Suppose a person present with me, who advances propositions, to which I do
not assent, that Caesar dyed in his bed, that silver is more fusible, than
lead, or mercury heavier than gold; it is evident, that notwithstanding my
incredulity, I clearly understand his meaning, and form all the same
ideas, which he forms. My imagination is endowed with the same powers as
his; nor is it possible for him to conceive any idea, which I cannot
conceive; nor conjoin any, which I cannot conjoin. I therefore ask,
Wherein consists the difference betwixt believing and disbelieving any
proposition? The answer is easy with regard to propositions, that are
proved by intuition or demonstration. In that case, the person, who
assents, not only conceives the ideas according to the proposition, but is
necessarily determined to conceive them in that particular manner, either
immediately or by the interposition of other ideas. Whatever is absurd is
unintelligible; nor is it possible for the imagination to conceive any
thing contrary to a demonstration. But as in reasonings from causation,
and concerning matters of fact, this absolute necessity cannot take place,
and the imagination is free to conceive both sides of the question, I
still ask, Wherein consists the deference betwixt incredulity and belief?
since in both cases the conception of the idea is equally possible and
requisite.</p>
<p>It will not be a satisfactory answer to say, that a person, who does not
assent to a proposition you advance; after having conceived the object in
the same manner with you; immediately conceives it in a different manner,
and has different ideas of it. This answer is unsatisfactory; not because
it contains any falshood, but because it discovers not all the truth. It
is contest, that in all cases, wherein we dissent from any person, we
conceive both sides of the question; but as we can believe only one, it
evidently follows, that the belief must make some difference betwixt that
conception to which we assent, and that from which we dissent. We may
mingle, and unite, and separate, and confound, and vary our ideas in a
hundred different ways; but until there appears some principle, which
fixes one of these different situations, we have in reality no opinion:
And this principle, as it plainly makes no addition to our precedent
ideas, can only change the manner of our conceiving them.</p>
<p>All the perceptions of the mind are of two kinds, viz. impressions and
ideas, which differ from each other only in their different degrees of
force and vivacity. Our ideas are copyed from our impressions, and
represent them in all their parts. When you would any way vary the idea of
a particular object, you can only encrease or diminish its force and
vivacity. If you make any other change on it, it represents a different
object or impression. The case is the same as in colours. A particular
shade of any colour may acquire a new degree of liveliness or brightness
without any other variation. But when you produce any other variation, it
is no longer the same shade or colour. So that as belief does nothing but
vary the manner, in which we conceive any object, it can only bestow on
our ideas an additional force and vivacity. An opinion, therefore, or
belief may be most accurately defined, a lively idea related to or
associated with a present impression.</p>
<p>We may here take occasion to observe a very remarkable error, which being
frequently inculcated in the schools, has become a kind of establishd
maxim, and is universally received by all logicians. This error consists
in the vulgar division of the acts of the understanding, into CONCEPTION,
JUDGMENT and REASONING, and in the definitions we give of them. Conception
is defind to be the simple survey of one or more ideas: Judgment to be the
separating or uniting of different ideas: Reasoning to be the separating
or uniting of different ideas by the interposition of others, which show
the relation they bear to each other. But these distinctions and
definitions are faulty in very considerable articles. For FIRST, it is far
from being true, that in every judgment, which we form, we unite two
different ideas; since in that proposition, GOD IS, or indeed any other,
which regards existence, the idea of existence is no distinct idea, which
we unite with that of the object, and which is capable of forming a
compound idea by the union. SECONDLY, As we can thus form a proposition,
which contains only one idea, so we may exert our reason without employing
more than two ideas, and without having recourse to a third to serve as a
medium betwixt them. We infer a cause immediately from its effect; and
this inference is not only a true species of reasoning, but the strongest
of all others, and more convincing than when we interpose another idea to
connect the two extremes. What we may in general affirm concerning these
three acts of the understanding is, that taking them in a proper light,
they all resolve themselves into the first, and are nothing but particular
ways of conceiving our objects. Whether we consider a single object, or
several; whether we dwell on these objects, or run from them to others;
and in whatever form or order we survey them, the act of the mind exceeds
not a simple conception; and the only remarkable difference, which occurs
on this occasion, is, when we join belief to the conception, and are
persuaded of the truth of what we conceive. This act of the mind has never
yet been explaind by any philosopher; and therefore I am at liberty to
propose my hypothesis concerning it; which is, that it is only a strong
and steady conception of any idea, and such as approaches in some measure
to an immediate impression. [FN 5.]</p>
<p>[FN 5. Here are the heads of those arguments, which<br/>
lead us to this conclusion. When we infer the existence of<br/>
an object from that of others, some object must always be<br/>
present either to the memory or senses, in order to be the<br/>
foundation of our reasoning; since the mind cannot run up<br/>
with its inferences IN INFINITUM. Reason can never satisfy<br/>
us that the existence of any one object does ever imply that<br/>
of another; so that when we pass from the impression of one<br/>
to the idea or belief of another, we are not determined by<br/>
reason, but by custom or a principle of association. But<br/>
belief is somewhat more than a simple idea. It is a<br/>
particular manner of forming an idea: And as the same idea<br/>
can only be varyed by a variation of its degrees of force<br/>
and vivacity; it follows upon the whole, that belief is a<br/>
lively idea produced by a relation to a present impression,<br/>
according to the foregoing definition.]<br/></p>
<p>This operation of the mind, which forms the belief of any matter of fact,
seems hitherto to have been one of the greatest mysteries of philosophy;
though no one has so much as suspected, that there was any difficulty in
explaining it. For my part I must own, that I find a considerable
difficulty in the case; and that even when I think I understand the
subject perfectly, I am at a loss for terms to express my meaning. I
conclude, by an induction which seems to me very evident, that an opinion
or belief is nothing but an idea, that is different from a fiction, not in
the nature or the order of its parts, but in the manner of its being
conceived. But when I would explain this manner, I scarce find any word
that fully answers the case, but am obliged to have recourse to every
one's feeling, in order to give him a perfect notion of this operation of
the mind. An idea assented to FEELS different from a fictitious idea, that
the fancy alone presents to us: And this different feeling I endeavour to
explain by calling it a superior force, or vivacity, or solidity, or
FIRMNESS, or steadiness. This variety of terms, which may seem so
unphilosophical, is intended only to express that act of the mind, which
renders realities more present to us than fictions, causes them to weigh
more in the thought, and gives them a superior influence on the passions
and imagination. Provided we agree about the thing, it is needless to
dispute about the terms. The imagination has the command over all its
ideas, and can join, and mix, and vary them in all the ways possible. It
may conceive objects with all the circumstances of place and time. It may
set them, in a manner, before our eyes in their true colours, just as they
might have existed. But as it is impossible, that that faculty can ever,
of itself, reach belief, it is evident, that belief consists not in the
nature and order of our ideas, but in the manner of their conception, and
in their feeling to the mind. T confess, that it is impossible to explain
perfectly this feeling or manner of conception. We may make use of words,
that express something near it. But its true and proper name is belief,
which is a term that every one sufficiently understands in common life.
And in philosophy we can go no farther, than assert, that it is something
felt by the mind, which distinguishes the ideas of the judgment from the
fictions of the imagination. It gives them more force and influence; makes
them appear of greater importance; infixes them in the mind; and renders
them the governing principles of all our actions.</p>
<p>This definition will also be found to be entirely conformable to every
one's feeling and experience. Nothing is more evident, than that those
ideas, to which we assent, are more strong, firm and vivid, than the loose
reveries of a castle-builder. If one person sits down to read a book as a
romance, and another as a true history, they plainly receive the same
ideas, and in the same order; nor does the incredulity of the one, and the
belief of the other hinder them from putting the very same sense upon
their author. His words produce the same ideas in both; though his
testimony has not the same influence on them. The latter has a more lively
conception of all the incidents. He enters deeper into the concerns of the
persons: represents to himself their actions, and characters, and
friendships, and enmities: He even goes so far as to form a notion of
their features, and air, and person. While the former, who gives no credit
to the testimony of the author, has a more faint and languid conception of
all these particulars; and except on account of the style and ingenuity of
the composition, can receive little entertainment from it.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />