The similarity between (a) and (e) is fundamental, and
is known by a comparison of a percept with a memory. Thus the problem
of the relation between perception and memory is involved; but as
this problem is psychological, I will only say that the inference
from a recollection (which occurs now) to what is recollected (which
occurred at a former time) appears to me to be essentially similar to
the inferences in physics, and to warrant only a belief in identity
(or close similarity) of structure between the recollection and the
event recollected. The grounds for the trustworthiness of memory seem
to be of the same kind as those for the trustworthiness of perception.
But I shall take all this for granted, since our theme is physics, not
psychology. I shall therefore assume that (a) and (e) can
be known to be similar in structure, in the sense explained in Chapter
XXIV.
We have thus a chain of processes, (a) at one end and (e)
at the other; the end-processes are similar in the technical sense, and
we assume that the intermediate processes are also similar, both to
each other and to the end-processes. Let us consider this in somewhat
more detail. The relation of (a) and (b) is that of
percept and stimulus—i.e. a relation of effect to cause. The
effect is a complex process; we assume that recognizably different
percepts must have different stimuli; therefore the cause must be a
complex process, at least semi-similar to the effect. We may take it
as similar, not merely semi-similar, by ignoring those respects, if
any, in which the structure of the cause is more complex than the
structure of the effect. A similar argument will enable us to treat
(d) and (e) as similar. Since (a) and (e)
are similar, it follows that (b) and (d) are similar. We
cannot attribute this similarity to chance, since it is found to exist
whenever the necessary conditions have[Pg 267] been fulfilled. Hence we infer
that (c) must also be similar to the other processes. Since the
dictaphone may be placed anywhere in the neighbourhood of the speakers,
we infer that throughout a region surrounding them there are physical
events similar in structure to the aural percepts of the listener. For
light, the same thing follows from photographs. Consequently a percept,
considered physically, is not very different from other physical
events. We may suppose, if we choose, that it differs from them in
intrinsic quality, and we know that it differs causally, since it
gives rise to memories and inferences. Even these, however, are not so
different from certain physical processes as they seem at first sight.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account