The Monist, Vol. 1, 1890-1891 : $b A quarterly magazineVarious
Philosophy
The Monist, Vol. 1, 1890-1891 : $b A quarterly magazine
Various
Philosophy -- Periodicals
Let us first take into consideration how people really behave when a
statement of new facts is made. Take, for instance, the following case.
Two strangers meet; A. and B. Mr. A. relates to Mr. B. some incident
of his life. He is apparently a very trustworthy person and during
the conversation remains perfectly serious. He tells a ghost story in
detail, how a departed friend of his appeared to him in distinctly
visible form; he says that the spirit spoke to him and told him many
strange things, and that he pointed out to him an imminent danger.
We suppose that on the one hand A. makes his statement in good faith
and that on the other hand B. is a spiritualist. Will B. consider
A.'s story as possible? B., being a spiritualist, most probably will
consider A.'s story as possible, and, if he is convinced of A.'s
honesty, he will believe the story the same as if he had experienced
it himself; no less than a scientist will rely on the statement of an
experiment made by one of his colleagues whose scientific veracity he
has no reason to doubt.
Suppose A. tells the same story to C. Mr. C. is an infidel and a
materialist. As characteristic features of his personality we might
mention that he considers religion as pure superstition originated by
the fraud of cunning priests. This man will, we may fairly suppose,
laugh at A.'s story, because it appears to him an out and out lie. Mr.
A. as well as Mr. B., he who tells and he who believes the story, C.
will declare, are either insane or they are both impostors.
The difference of opinion in B. and C. indicates that the criterion
of truth is different with different persons and that it depends upon
their conception of the world. Men who have the same world-conception
will also have the same criterion of truth.
The problem consequently is, whether this criterion of truth (i. e. the
criterion of what is possible) is necessarily wholly subjective, or
whether we can arrive at an objective criterion. It is apparent that
this question is intimately connected with another problem, namely,
Is every world-conception necessarily subjective, or, Is it possible
to arrive at an objective world-conception? It appears to me that we
can; and the ideal of philosophy to-day is just such an objective
representation of facts.
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