"At some time in the development of thought, a point must have been reached when man became conscious of the fact that what he called the _qualities of a thing_ were merely the sensations of the feeling subject: and thus the qualities ceased from belonging to the thing." The "thing-in-itself" remained over. 'The distinction between the thing-in-itself and the thing-for-us, is based upon that older and artless observation which would fain grant energy to things: but analysis revealed that even force was only ascribed to them by our fancy, as was also--substance. "The thing affects a subject?" Thus the root of the idea of substance is in language, not in things outside ourselves! The thing-in-itself is not a problem at all! Being will have to be conceived as a sensation which is no longer based upon anything quite devoid of sensation. In movement no new _meaning_ is given to feeling. That which is, cannot be the substance of movement: it is therefore a form of Being. _N.B._--The explanation of life may be sought, in the first place, through mental images of phenomena which _precede_ it (purposes); Secondly, through mental images of phenomena which follow behind it (the mathematico-physical explanation). The two should not be confounded. Thus: the physical explanation, which is the symbolisation of the world by means of feeling and thought, cannot in itself make feeling and thinking originate again and show its derivation: physics must rather construct the world of feeling, consistently _without feeling or purpose _ right up to the highest man. And teleology is only a _history of purposes,_ and is never physical. 563. Our method of acquiring "knowledge" is limited to a process of establishing _quantities,_ but we can by no means help feeling the difference of quantity as differences of _quality._ Quality is merely a _relative_ truth for _us_; it is not a "thing-in-itself." Our senses have a certain definite quantum as a mean, within the limits of which they perform their functions--that is to say, we become conscious of bigness and smallness in accordance with the conditions of our existence. If we sharpened or blunted our senses tenfold, we should perish--that is to say, we feel even _proportions_ as _qualities_ in regard to our possibilities of existence. 564. But could not all _quantities_ be merely tokens of _qualities_? Another consciousness and scale of desires must correspond to greater power in fact, another point of view; growth in itself is the expression of a desire _to become more;_ the desire for a greater _quantum_ springs from a certain _quale,_ in a purely quantitative world, everything would be dead, stiff, and motionless.--The reduction of all qualities to quantities is nonsense: it is discovered that they can only stand together, an analogy-- 565.