On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, and On the Will in Nature: Two Essays (revised edition) — John Shaqi
On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, and On the Will in Nature: Two Essays (revised edition)Schopenhauer, Arthur
Philosophy
On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason, and On the Will in Nature: Two Essays (revised edition)
Schopenhauer, Arthur
Sufficient reason; Will
With these precedents to guide them, the several writers on Logic
belonging to Kant's school; Hofbauer, Maass, Jakob, Kiesewetter
and others, have defined pretty accurately the distinction between
reason and cause. Kiesewetter, more especially, gives it thus quite
satisfactorily:[45] "Reason of knowledge is not to be confounded with
reason of fact (cause). The Principle of Sufficient Reason belongs
to Logic, that of Causality to Metaphysics.[46] The former is the
fundamental principle of thought; the latter that of experience.
Cause refers to real things, logical reason has only to do with
representations."
[45] Kiesewetter, "Logik," vol. i. p. 16.
[46] _Ibid._ p. 60.
Kant's adversaries urge this distinction still more strongly. G. E.
Schultze[47] complains that the Principle of Sufficient Reason is
confounded with that of Causality. Salomon Maimon[48] regrets that so
much should be said about the sufficient reason without an explanation
of what is meant by it, while he blames Kant[49] for deriving the
principle of causality from the logical form of hypothetical judgments.
[47] G. E. Schultze, "Logik," § 19, Anmerkung 1, und § 63.
[48] Sal. Maimon, "Logik," p. 20, 21.
[49] _Ibid._ "Vorrede," p. xxiv.
F. H. Jacobi[50] says, that by the confounding of the two conceptions,
reason and cause, an illusion is produced, which has given rise to
various false speculations; and he points out the distinction between
them after his own fashion. Here, however, as is usual with him,
we find a good deal more of self-complacent phrase-jugglery than of
serious philosophy.
[50] Jacobi, "Briefe über die Lehre des Spinoza," Beilage 7, p. 414.
How Herr von Schelling finally distinguishes reason from cause, may be
seen in his "Aphorisms introductory to the Philosophy of Nature,"[51]
§ 184, which open the first book of the first volume of Marcus and
Schelling's "Annals of Medecine." Here we are taught that gravity is
the _reason_ and light the _cause_ of all things. This I merely quote
as a curiosity; for such random talk would not otherwise deserve a
place among the opinions of serious and honest inquirers.
[51] "Aphorismen zur Einleitung in die Naturphilosophie."
§ 14. _On the Proofs of the Principle._
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