The Monist, Vol. 2, 1891-1892 : $b A quarterly magazineVarious
Philosophy
The Monist, Vol. 2, 1891-1892 : $b A quarterly magazine
Various
Philosophy -- Periodicals
“If I let myself believe anything on insufficient evidence,
there may be no great harm done by the mere belief; it may be
true after all, or I may never have occasion to exhibit it in
outward acts. But I cannot help doing this great wrong towards
man, that I make myself credulous. The danger to society is
not merely that it should believe wrong things, though that is
great enough; but that it should become credulous, and lose
the habit of testing things and inquiring into them; for then
it must sink back into savagery.... If a man, holding a belief
which he was taught in childhood or persuaded of afterwards,
keeps down and pushes away any doubts which arise about it in
his mind, purposely avoids the reading of books and the company
of men that call in question or discuss it, and regards as
impious those questions which cannot easily be asked without
disturbing it—the life of that man is one long sin against
mankind.”
The essay on the nature of things in themselves marks the furthest
limit at which Clifford’s speculation arrived. In it Clifford begins by
discarding the ordinary distinction between reality and ideas, eternal
object and eternal subject, of feeling and thing. The distinction
is really between two orders of feeling; there is the subjective or
inner order, in which sorrow succeeds the hearing of bad news, and the
objective or outward in which the feeling of letting go is followed
by sight of falling object. It is with the latter order that physical
science concerns itself, and all the inferences of natural science are
inferences of my real or possible feeling. Since an object is a set
of changes _in_ my consciousness and not anything out of it, is just
my feeling real or possible and therefore part of me, it might seem
as if we were shut up in ourselves and excluded from participation in
any other reality. So we should be, says Clifford, if we made no other
inferences beside those of physical science; but when I come to the
conclusion that _you_ are conscious and that you have objects in your
consciousness similar to those in mine, I am not inferring any actual or
possible feelings of my own, but _your_ feelings, which are not and can
never be objects in my consciousness. To feelings and consciousness thus
inferred to exist in another, Clifford gives the name of _eject_, because
in the very act of inference they are _thrown out_ of my consciousness,
recognised as outside of it, as _not_ being a part of me. “The existence
of my conception of you in my consciousness carries with it a belief in
the existence of you outside of my consciousness.... How this inference
is justified, how consciousness can testify to the existence of anything
outside of itself I do not pretend to say; I need not untie a knot which
the world has cut for me long ago.” (Vol. II, p. 73.)
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