Meaning: This quote comes from Joseph Priestley, a prominent 18th-century scientist, theologian, and philosopher known for his discoveries in the fields of chemistry and electricity. In this quote, Priestley offers a provocative perspective on the nature of human will, suggesting that it is merely a specific instance of the broader concept of association of ideas, and therefore, a wholly mechanical phenomenon.

To fully understand the significance of this quote, it is important to delve into the context of Joseph Priestley's work and the prevailing philosophical and scientific ideas of his time. Priestley was a leading figure in the intellectual movement known as British Empiricism, which emphasized the role of sensory experience and observation in the formation of knowledge. He was also deeply influenced by the ideas of other prominent thinkers of his era, such as John Locke and David Hume, who explored the connections between ideas, causality, and human behavior.

Priestley's assertion that will is a "particular case of the general doctrine of association of ideas" reflects his engagement with the empiricist tradition, which held that all human knowledge and mental processes ultimately stem from sensory experience and the associations formed between different ideas. According to this perspective, the mind operates as a kind of associative machine, linking together various impressions and ideas based on the principles of resemblance, contiguity, and cause and effect.

By characterizing will as a "perfectly mechanical thing," Priestley aligns himself with a determinist view of human behavior, which suggests that our actions are wholly determined by prior causes and conditions. This stance stands in contrast to the notion of free will, which posits that individuals possess the capacity to make choices independent of external influences. Instead, Priestley's perspective implies that the decisions and actions of individuals are ultimately shaped by the associations and connections formed within their minds, rendering the exercise of will a product of these internal processes rather than a truly autonomous faculty.

In the broader philosophical landscape of the 18th century, Priestley's views on the mechanical nature of will intersected with the ongoing debates surrounding the relationship between mind and body, the nature of causation, and the implications for moral and ethical responsibility. His perspective resonates with the burgeoning interest in understanding human psychology and behavior through the lens of natural philosophy, as well as the growing influence of materialist and determinist philosophies.

It is worth noting that Priestley's views on the mechanical nature of will also intersect with his scientific pursuits, particularly in the field of chemistry. As a proponent of the theory of phlogiston and an advocate for the use of experimental evidence in scientific inquiry, Priestley approached the study of natural phenomena with a keen emphasis on causal relationships and mechanistic explanations. His conception of will as a mechanical phenomenon may thus reflect his broader commitment to understanding the world in terms of natural laws and processes.

In conclusion, Joseph Priestley's quote offers a thought-provoking perspective on the nature of human will, framing it as a product of the general doctrine of association of ideas and emphasizing its mechanical character. This viewpoint reflects his engagement with empiricist philosophy, his commitment to naturalistic explanations, and the broader intellectual currents of his era. While challenging traditional notions of free will, Priestley's perspective invites us to contemplate the intricate relationships between the mind, causality, and the shaping of human behavior within a mechanistic framework.