FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50  
51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   >>  
ied to the Understanding, which plays the part merely of a receptive surface or _tabula rasa_. In the hands of Aristotle this doctrine took the form of an affirmation that Nature must be regarded as an energetic process containing within itself the potency by which it perpetually generated the actual. Promising as it was in Aristotle's hands, this speculation was not carried forward or assimilated by his immediate successors. Indeed, it was practically forgotten until the intellectual revival of the sixteenth century, which inaugurated the foundations of modern Science. However little the fact may have been consciously recognised even by the leaders of scientific discovery, this was the conception of Nature which inspired and sustained the scientific advance. In the department of philosophic speculation, however, it appeared only under the debased and misleading form of a belief that the sensible presentation was the true source of the contents of Cognition, that it was from Sensation that the Mind of Man derived the whole fabric of Science. "_Penser c'est sentir_" was the form in which it was expressed by Condillac, but was equally the view which commended itself to Berkeley, at least in his early writings, to Hume, and to a whole army of successors down to J. S. Mill. We hope we have already sufficiently emphasised the falsity of such a view. Obviously, if the Mind were merely the passive recipient of a stream of impressions, no sort of rational Discourse, no scientific or cognitive effort could ever have been stimulated into activity, and the very ideas of causality and relation, indeed all that we associate with the exercise of the understanding, could never have been called into being. Upon neither of these views of the nature of Knowledge can we arrive at any consistent or intelligible conception of its genesis, nature, or method of operation. What, then, must we do? It is hardly doubtful that if we are to make any progress we must find another and a new key whereby to unlock the double door that bars the entrance to the inner shrine of truth. Now _the_ fundamental, or at least _a_ fundamental error characteristic of all these various efforts after a solution is to be found in the fact that they view the World as a static thing rather than as a kinetic process. The World to vision seems a great still thing in or on which no doubt innumerable bodies are moving to and fro, but which itself--the funda
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50  
51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   >>  



Top keywords:

scientific

 

nature

 

Science

 

successors

 

fundamental

 

speculation

 

conception

 

Aristotle

 

process

 
Nature

intelligible
 

consistent

 

arrive

 
Knowledge
 

cognitive

 

effort

 
stimulated
 

Discourse

 
rational
 

recipient


stream
 

impressions

 

activity

 

exercise

 

understanding

 

associate

 

genesis

 

causality

 

relation

 

called


static

 

kinetic

 

solution

 
characteristic
 

efforts

 

vision

 

bodies

 
moving
 

innumerable

 
doubtful

progress
 
operation
 

passive

 

entrance

 

shrine

 

unlock

 

double

 

method

 
commended
 

intellectual