The Monist, Vol. 3, 1892-1893 : $b A quarterly magazineVarious
Philosophy
The Monist, Vol. 3, 1892-1893 : $b A quarterly magazine
Various
Philosophy -- Periodicals
I may briefly indicate here how I think the problem ought to be
attacked. “Objective facts” can only be established by induction. I do
not mean by that term necessarily the process described by Mill, but
some similar process, based ultimately on _inductio per enumerationem
simplicem_. Now no such process can ever lead to a necessary truth. The
most fundamental and certain induction which can be made, that which
induces us to believe in the objectivity of our environment, does not
lead to a “necessary truth”; and much less can any other induction based
upon this one do so. “Objective facts” then may be established with
greater or less probability, but can never be _necessarily_ true. But
all inductions are based on our perceptions, that is ultimately on our
subjective sensations. And a man can, nay, must be, absolutely certain
of the reality of his own sensations though he cannot be certain of the
interpretations he puts upon them. If I have a toothache I cannot be
absolutely certain that I have a tooth, but, at least while the pain
lasts, I am _absolutely_ certain that I have an ache. And so of any
subjective sensation.
I can similarly be absolutely certain that I entertain a given concept,
while that concept is before my mind; though of course it is possible
that if I assert the possession of that concept I may do so in language
which may be misunderstood by the person I am addressing. If then a
man has certain concepts which he can call up at will, the reality of
those concepts, _qua_ concepts, is to him a _necessary truth_. He may
lay down such necessary truths as axioms, and by their aid he may give
real subjective import to a symbolic argument, and so obtain new and
complicated assertions which are also to him necessary truths. This is
what I do in my subjective theory of geometry. That theory might be
regarded as purely symbolic—the axioms might have been left out, and
all its conclusions looked upon as mere truisms. The conclusions of
geometry of four or more independent directions can perhaps _only_ be
regarded as truisms. But by the aid of the axioms, geometry of two and
three independent directions can be given real subjective import, and its
conclusions therefore regarded as necessary truths, as long as they are
only taken subjectively. They may further be applied objectively by the
aid of objective facts established by induction, but in this case their
validity is no greater than that of the primary facts, the counterparts
of the subjective axioms, which are employed to give the theory objective
import.
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