principle, and that of this last, the divine is seated in the brain, the passions and appetites in the liver and heart; that the rational part is immortal, the sentient principle perishable." They further taught, that the imperishable part, freed from the chains of the body, assumes a new form, passes to the centre of the earth for judgment, and, if not deemed worthy of associating with perfect spirits, is returned to earth to inhabit another body, of higher or lower nature, according to its former deserts. This doctrine has been so developed and exemplified in the final teaching of Socrates, before his death, that that dialogue[1] may be regarded as a faithful exposition of the argument and its merits. Aristotle, overlooking every supernal cause or agency, objects to the doctrine, not on its own grounds but, by reasonings, which are purely deductive; and the doctrine is, no doubt, when tested by physical science, incongruous.
Note 9, p. 35. Such opinions are, in fact, &c.] This
passage is apparently abstruse and ambiguous, owing to the
terms being applicable to more than one art or implement;
and yet, "[2] as it involves a kind of antithesis between
the art and the implements, the Vital Principle and the
body," the general sense can be made sufficiently obvious.
The purport of the phrase is well given in the Latin
version: Perinde igitur dicunt atqui si quispiam artem
fabrilem fistulas ingredi dicat ; etenim ars quidam instru-
mentis, anima vero corpore utatur oportet. The French
