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
It may be said perhaps, that not the sensation excited by any of the
parts of an object separately, but the sum of our sensations, excited by
all the parts, produces our idea of the whole. But it is not possible
that in a given number of impressions, where the mind never has
perception of more than a single part, there should be contained
notwithstanding a view of the whole at once. For as a single part cannot
of itself represent the whole object, so neither can this part by being
actually joined to others, which by the supposition are never perceived
to be joined with it, produce that idea, any more than if those other
parts had no existence. If the impression of the parts of an object,
absolutely and individually considered, were the same thing as the idea
of the object, any number of actual impressions, arranged in any manner
whatever, would necessarily be the same object. But this is contrary to
all fact. For then a curve line, consisting of the same number of
points, would not be distinguishable from a straight one, nor a square
from a triangle of the same dimensions, and so on. In a being endued
only with a power of sensation, and supposed to be simple and undivided,
there could be no room for more than an individual impression at once.
Our sensations must always succeed each other. One thought must have
completely passed away, before another could supply its place. Our ideas
would leave no traces of themselves, like the bubbles that rise and
disappear on the water, or the snow that melts as it falls. There would
be nothing in their fugitive, momentary existence to bind them together.
Ere we could stop to compare any one impression with any other, it would
be lost for ever in the dark abyss of time. Nothing could be connected
with any thing else, either coexisting with it, or going before or after
it. If on the other hand, we suppose any merely sentient being to be
extended and compounded, or to be capable of receiving more than one
impression at once, we shall yet gain little by it. Such a sentient
being will be nothing but a number of distinct sentient beings. For as
in the former instance, no two impressions could co-exist together, so
in the latter, though they existed together, there could be no sort of
communication between them. They would be absolutely cut off from and
exclusive of each other. The mind in attending to any one must be wholly
absorbed by it, and insensible of the rest. Our sensations would to
every rational purpose be placed as completely out of the sphere of each
other’s consciousness, as if they were parcel of another intellect, or
floated in the region of the moon. That any number of detached,
unconnected, actual sensations, impressed on different sentient beings,
would not of themselves imply a conception of any one entire object is
what every one is ready to grant:—it would be equally clear, that this
idea could not arise from the impression of the different parts of an
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