The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Vol. I, Nos. 1-4, 1867Various
Philosophy
The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Vol. I, Nos. 1-4, 1867
Various
Philosophy -- Periodicals
The series is and remains a simple one; and you have not at all
explained what was to be explained. You were to prove the connection
between Being and Representation; but this you do not, nor can you do
it; for your principle contains merely the ground of a Being, and not of
a Representation, totally opposed to Being. You take an immense leap
into a world, totally removed from your principle. This leap they seek
to hide in various ways. Rigorously—and this is the course of consistent
dogmatism, which thus becomes materialism;—the soul is to them no Thing
at all, and indeed nothing at all, but merely a production, the result
of the reciprocal action of Things amongst themselves. But this
reciprocal action produces merely a change in the Things, and by no
means anything apart from the Things, unless you add an observing
intelligence. The similes which they adduce to make their system
comprehensible, for instance, that of the harmony resulting from sounds
of different instruments, make its irrationality only more apparent. For
the harmony is not in the instruments, but merely in the mind of the
hearer, who combines within himself the manifold into One; and unless
you have such a hearer there is no harmony at all.
But who can prevent Dogmatism from assuming the Soul as one of the
Things, _per se_? The soul would thus belong to what it has postulated
for the solution of its problem, and, indeed, would thereby be made the
category of cause and effect applicable to the Soul and the
Things—materialism only permitting a reciprocal action of the Things
amongst themselves—and thoughts might now be produced. To make the
Unthinkable thinkable, Dogmatism has, indeed, attempted to presuppose
Thing or the Soul, or both, in such a manner, that the effect of the
Thing was to produce a representation. The Thing, as influencing the
Soul, is to be such, as to make its influences representations; GOD, for
instance, in Berkley’s system, was such a thing. (His system is
dogmatic, not idealistic.) But this does not better matters; we
understand only mechanical effects, and it is impossible for us to
understand any other kind of effects. Hence, that presupposition
contains merely words, but there is no sense in it. Or the soul is to be
of such a nature that every effect upon the Soul turns into a
representation. But this also we find it impossible to understand.
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