*****Note--This proposition can also be proved from the
Corollary to II. xvii. Whenever we remember anything, even
if it does not actually exist, we regard it only as present, and
the body is affected in the same manner; wherefore, in so far
as the remembrance of the thing is strong, a man is determined
to regard it with pain; this determination, while the image of the
thing in question lasts, is indeed checked by the remembrance
of other things excluding the existence of the aforesaid thing,
but is not destroyed: hence, a man only feels pleasure in so
far as the said determination is checked: for this reason the
joy arising from the injury done to what we hate is repeated,
every time we remember that object of hatred. For, as we
have said, when the image of the thing in question, is aroused,
inasmuch as it involves the thing's existence, it determines the
man to regard the thing with the same pain as he was wont to
do, when it actually did exist. However, since he has joined
to the image of the thing other images, which exclude its
existence, this determination to pain is forthwith checked, and
the man rejoices afresh as often as the repetition takes place.
This is the cause of men's pleasure in recalling past evils, and
delight in narrating dangers from which they have escaped.
For when men conceive a danger, they conceive it as still future,
and are determined to fear it; this determination is checked
afresh by the idea of freedom, which became associated with
the idea of the danger when they escaped therefrom:
this renders them secure afresh: therefore they rejoice afresh.
XLVIII. Love or hatred towards, for instance, Peter is destroyed,
if the pleasure involved in the former, or the pain involved in the
latter emotion, be associated with the idea of another cause: and
will be diminished in proportion as we conceive Peter not to have
been the sole cause of either emotion.
>>>>>Proof--This Prop. is evident from the mere definition
of love and hatred (III. xiii. note). For pleasure is called love
towards Peter, and pain is called hatred towards Peter, simply
in so far as Peter is regarded as the cause of one emotion or the
other. When this condition of causality is either wholly or partly
removed, the emotion towards Peter also wholly or in part
vanishes. Q.E.D.
XLIX. Love or hatred towards a thing, which we conceive
to be free, must, other conditions being similar, be greater than
if it were felt towards a thing acting by necessity.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account