The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and WrongBrentano, Franz
Philosophy
The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and Wrong
Brentano, Franz
Ethics
The
opposition, the incompatibility of the qualities in a real, is already
evident on the ground of the combination of ideas representing the
opposite qualities which, as I repeat once more, cannot, according to
Sigwart himself (p. 89 note; and p. 98 seq.), be called an attempt
at positive judgment. Although this may now and again happen in the
case of contradictory ideas, it certainly does not happen always. If,
for example, the question is put to me: Does there exist a regular
chiliagon with 1001 sides? then--assuming that I am not perfectly
clear in my own mind, as will be the case with most men, that there
does exist a regular chiliagon, I certainly do not attempt to form a
judgment (i.e. according to Sigwart, confidently assume) that there
exists a regular chiliagon having 1001 sides before forming the
negative judgment that no such figure exists on the ground of the
opposition between the qualities.
Sigwart himself, as his language frequently betrays (cf. e.g. pp. 152
and 150) recognizes at bottom, as he is bound to recognize, in spite
of his attack upon the negative copula, that negation and denial are
just as much a special function of the judgment as affirmation and
recognition. If this be granted, then the range of their application
is by no means so limited as he erroneously asserts. It is false that
in every case where a denial takes place the predicate denied is the
notion “valid.” Even of a judgment we may deny now its validity, now
its certainty, now its _à priori_ character. And just in the same way
the subject of the judgment can change most frequently. Of a judgment
we may deny certainty, and validity; of a request, modesty; and so
in every case, universally expressed, we may deny B of A. Sigwart
himself, of course, does this just like any one else. Indeed he
sometimes speaks unintentionally far more correctly than his theory
would admit, and witnesses, as it were, instinctively to the truth;
as, e.g. p. 151, where he declares not--as he elsewhere teaches--that
the subject of a negative proposition is always a judgment, and its
predicate the term “valid,” but “that of _every subject_ ... _a
countless_ _number of predicates may be denied_.” This is certainly
true and just on this account the old doctrine holds that affirmation
and denial are equally primordial species.
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