without connection, and we talk at
random.

It is not to be expected, in a work which professes to be merely
contributions to the Natural History and Physiology of Intelligent
Beings, that a particular discussion of moral subjects should be
instituted; and such is the question concerning the freedom of the human
will: the reader is therefore referred to those writers who have fully,
and with considerable acuteness, discussed this intricate and important
topic. The nature of this attribute is however so interwoven with the
philosophy of mind, so connected with the view which has been taken of
its history and constitution, that it is impossible wholly to abstain
from the consideration of its influence on the excellence and demerit of
human actions. It has been endeavoured, throughout this chapter, to
establish, that the power which goads or stimulates the muscles to
action, and the mind to exertion, is not inherent, but acquired by
practice; and this is exemplified by the state of the new-born infant,
which, at that period, manifests no more of volition, than of
perception, reflection, or reason. It has also been conjectured, that
the possession of this influence must be subsequent to perception, for
reasons which have been assigned. With its intimate nature we are
unacquainted; but we see, as far as muscular motion is concerned, that
the same effect is produced by the stimulus of galvanism after the head
is removed, and when, according to our existing philosophy,
consciousness is destroyed, and the power of willing is abolished. It is
by no means intended to suppose that the stimulus of the will has any
affinity with the galvanic fluid, because we are unable to prove it;
although such opinion has been entertained. According to my own
interpretation, Will is to be considered as the mere spur, the simple
stimulus to action: it possesses no intelligence to direct; but in the
healthy state, excites motion in consequence of being itself directed to
such excitement. To invest Will with intelligence sufficient for its
purposes, would render reason, the highest of our attainments,
superfluous. Those who have most strenuously contended for the freedom
of the will, have insisted that it possesses the liberty of choosing or
preferring: allow this, and then enquire what must be the nature of that
choice or preference, which is selected by an arbitrary decision,
without the previous estimate or calculation of reason. Man, beyond all