FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233  
234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   >>   >|  
e argues earnestly against his assertion that the Absolute is a "mere negation of thought." "Every one of the arguments by which the relativity of our knowledge is demonstrated distinctly postulates the _positive existence_ of something beyond the relative. To say we can not know the Absolute is, by implication, to affirm there _is_ an Absolute. In the very denial of our power to learn _what_ the Absolute is, there lies hidden the assumption _that_ it is; and the making of this assumption proves that the Absolute has been present to the mind, not as nothing, but as _something_. And so with every step in the reasoning by which the doctrine is upheld, the Noumenon, everywhere named as the antithesis of the Phenomenon, is throughout thought as actuality. It is rigorously impossible to conceive that our knowledge is a knowledge of appearances only, without, at the same time, conceiving a Reality of which these are appearances, for appearances without reality are unthinkable. "Truly to represent or realize in thought any one of the propositions of which the argument consists, the unconditioned must be represented as _positive_, and not negative. How, then, can it be a legitimate conclusion from the argument that our consciousness of it is negative? An argument, the very construction of which assigns to a certain term a certain meaning, but which ends in showing that this term has no meaning, is simply an elaborate suicide. Clearly, then, the very demonstration that a definite consciousness [comprehension] of the Absolute is impossible, unavoidably presupposes an indefinite consciousness of it [an apprehension]."--"First Principles," p. 88.] Still we have the word _infinite_, and we have _the notion_ which the word expresses. This, at least, is spared to us by Sir William Hamilton. He who says we have no such notion asks the question _how we have it?_ Here it may be asked, how have we, then, the word infinite? How have we the notion which this word expresses? The answer to this question is contained in the distinction of positive and negative thought. We have a positive concept of a thing when we think of it by the qualities of which it is the complement. But as the attribution of qualities is an affirmation, as affirmation and negation are relatives, and as relatives _are known only in and through each other_, we can not, therefore, have a _consciousness_ of the affirmation of any quality without having, at the same t
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233  
234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Absolute
 

positive

 
consciousness
 

thought

 
appearances
 

notion

 

affirmation

 
negative
 

argument

 

knowledge


impossible
 

assumption

 

question

 

infinite

 

relatives

 
negation
 

meaning

 
qualities
 
expresses
 

Principles


apprehension

 

indefinite

 

simply

 

showing

 

assigns

 

construction

 

elaborate

 

suicide

 

comprehension

 

unavoidably


definite
 

demonstration

 

Clearly

 
presupposes
 

complement

 

distinction

 

concept

 

attribution

 
quality
 
contained

answer

 

William

 
spared
 

Hamilton

 

denial

 

affirm

 

implication

 

present

 

proves

 

hidden