(2) The same course of reasoning will make us conclude that just as there is only one kind of cause, so also there is only one kind of necessity, and that the common distinction between ‘moral’ and ‘physical’ necessity has no basis. This account I have given of necessity makes this clear. The constant conjunction of objects, along with the determination of the mind, constitutes physical necessity; and when these are absent what you have is chance. As objects must either be conjoined or not, and as the mind must either be determined or not determined to pass from one object to another, there can’t be any middle case between chance and absolute necessity. You don’t change the nature of the necessity by weakening this conjunction and determination. Even in the operation of bodies there are different degrees of constancy ·of going-together·, and different degrees of force ·exerted on the mind in its movement from impression to idea·, without producing different kinds of causality.