my principles for granted; and then, I doubt not, but I can demonstrate too. All that I shall say for the principles I proceed on is, that I can only appeal to men's own unprejudiced experience and observation whether they be true or not; and this is enough for a man who professes no more than to lay down candidly and freely his own conjectures, concerning a subject lying somewhat in the dark, without any other design than an unbiased inquiry after truth. 


The Essay on the Understanding, produced by an illustrious Englishman, is one of the finest and most admired works of the age. Since I have thought at length about the same subject and about most of the topics which are dealt with in it, I have decided to comment upon it. I thought that this would be a good opportunity to publish something entitled New Essays on the Understanding and to gain a more favourable reception for my thoughts by putting them in such good company. I thought too that I might benefit from someone elseÕs labour, not only to lessen mine (since it is easier to follow the thread of a good author than to do everything by oneÕs own efforts), but also to add something to what he has produced for us, which is always easier than to start from the beginning. It is true that my opinions frequently differ from his, but far from denying the merit of this famous writer I testify in his favour by showing where and why I differ from him, when I find that on certain significant points I have to prevent his authority from prevailing over reason.
  Indeed, although the author of the Essay says hundreds of fine things which I applaud, our systems are very different. His is closer to Aristotle and mine to Plato, although each of us parts company at many points from the teachings of both of these ancient writers. He is more popular whereas I am sometimes forced to be a little more esoteric and abstract - which is no advantage for me, particularly when writing in a living language. However, I think that by using two speakers, one of whom presents opinions drawn from that authorÕs Essay and the other adds my comments, the confrontation will be more to the readerÕs taste than a dry commentary from which he would have to be continually turning back to the authorÕs book in order to understand mine. Nevertheless it would be well to compare our writings from time to time, and to judge of his opinions only from his own book even though I have usually retained its wording. I am afraid that the obligation to follow the thread, when commenting on someone elseÕs