The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 11 (of 12)Hazlitt, William
Philosophy
The collected works of William Hazlitt, Vol. 11 (of 12)
Hazlitt, William
English essays -- 19th century
This property of the understanding, by which certain judgments,
naturally follow certain perceptions, and are followed by other
judgments, is the faculty of reason, of order and proportion in the
mind, and is indeed nothing but the understanding acting by rule or
necessity. The long controversy between Locke and Leibnitz with respect
to innate ideas turned upon the distinction here stated, innate ideas
being thus referred not to the actual impressions of objects, but to the
forms or moulds existing in the mind, and in which those impressions are
cast. Leibnitz contended that there was a germ or principle of truth, a
pre-established harmony between its innate faculties and its acquired
ideas, implied in the essence of the mind itself. According to the one
it was like a piece of free stone, which the mason hews with equal ease
in all directions, and into any shape, as circumstances require:
according to the other, it resembles a piece of marble strongly
ingrained, with the figure of a man, or other animal, inclosed in it,
and which the sculptor has only to separate from the surrounding mass.
I will add one more passage to draw the attention of my readers to this
intricate subject, and to show that the difficulties surrounding it were
not completely cleared up or even apprehended by the author of the
‘Essay.’
‘Hath a child,’ he says, ‘an idea of impossibility and identity, before
it has of white or black, sweet or sour? Or is it from the knowledge of
this principle that it concludes that wormwood rubbed on the nipple hath
not the same taste that it used to receive from thence? Is it the actual
knowledge of _Impossibile est idem esse et non esse_ that makes a child
distinguish between its mother and a stranger, or that makes it fond of
the one, and fly the other? Or does the mind regulate itself and its
assent by ideas that it never had? Or the understanding draw conclusions
from principles which it never yet knew or understood? The names
_impossibility_ and _identity_ stand for two ideas, so far from being
innate, or born with us, that I think it requires great care and
attention to form them right in our understandings. They are so far from
being brought into the world with us, so remote from the thoughts of
infancy and childhood, that I believe upon examination it will be found
that many grown men want them.
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