Page:Of the conduct of the understanding (IA ofconductofunder00lock).pdf/97

Rh But this I am sure, to one that can form no determined ideas of what they stand for, they signify nothing at all, and all that he thinks he knows about them is to him so much knowledge about nothing, and amounts at most but to be a learned ignorance. It is not without all reason supposed that there are many such empty terms to be found in some learned writers, to which they had recourse to etch out their systems, where their understandings could not furnish them with conceptions from things. But yet I believe the supposing of some realities in nature answering those and the like words, have much perplexed some and quite misled others in the study of nature. That which in any discourse signifies, “I know not what,” should be considered “I know not when.” Where men have any conceptions, they can, if they are never so abstruse or abstracted, explain them and the terms they use for them, For our conceptions being nothing but ideas, which are all made up of simple ones, if they cannot give us the ideas their words stand for it is plain they have none. To what purpose can it be to hunt after his conceptions who has none, or none distinct? he that knew not what he himself meant by a learned term, cannot make us know anything by his use of it, let us beat our heads about it never so long. Whether we are able to comprehend all the operations of nature and the manners of them, it matters not to inquire, but this is certain, that we can comprehend no more of them than we can distinctly conceive, and therefore to obtrude terms where we heave no distinct