FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125  
126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   >>   >|  
ind" of _this_ one? It is the kind that consists in what mathematicians call "confusion of types," or "mixing of dimensions." The answer can not be made too clear nor too emphatic, for its importance in the criticism of _all_ our thinking is great beyond measure. There are millions of examples that help to make the matter clear. I will again employ the simplest of them--one so simple that a child can understand it. It is a mathematical example, as it ought to be, for the whole question of logical types, or dimensions, is a mathematical one. I beg the reader not to shy at, or run away from, the mere word mathematical, for, although most of us have but little mathematical _knowledge_, we all of us have the mathematical _spirit_, for else we should not be human--we are all of us mathematicians _at heart_. Let us, then, proceed confidently and at once to our simple example. Here is a _surface_, say a _plane_ surface. It has length and breadth--and so it has, we say, _two_ dimensions; next consider a _solid_, say a _cube_. It has length, breadth and thickness--and so _it_ has, we say, _three_ dimensions. Now we notice that the cube _has_ surfaces and so _has certain surface properties_. Do we, therefore, say that a solid _is_ a surface? That the cube is a member of the class of surfaces? If we did, we should be fools--type-confusing fools--dimension-mixing fools. That is evident. Or suppose we notice that solids have certain _surface_ properties and certain properties that surfaces do _not_ have; and suppose we say the _surface_ properties of solids are _natural_ but the other properties are so mysterious that they must be "_super_natural" or somehow "divine"; and suppose we then say that solids are unions, mixtures, compounds or hybrids of surfaces and something divine or _super_natural; is it not evident that, if we did that, we should be again blundering like fools? Type-confusing fools? Dimension-mixing fools? That such would be the case any one can see. Let us now consider animals and human beings, and let us look squarely and candidly at the facts. To get a start, think for a moment of plants. Plants are living things; they take, transform and appropriate the energies of sun, soil, and air, but they have _not_ the _autonomous_ power to move about in space; we may say that plants constitute the lowest order or class or type or dimension of life--the dimension _one_; plants, we see are binders of the _basic_ energies of the
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125  
126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149   150   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

surface

 
properties
 

mathematical

 

dimensions

 

surfaces

 

plants

 
solids
 

natural

 

suppose

 

mixing


dimension

 

simple

 

divine

 
length
 
confusing
 

breadth

 

notice

 

mathematicians

 

evident

 

energies


hybrids
 

compounds

 
unions
 

blundering

 
mysterious
 
mixtures
 

animals

 

autonomous

 

things

 
transform

binders
 
lowest
 
constitute
 
living
 

Plants

 

beings

 

Dimension

 

moment

 

squarely

 
candidly

matter

 

employ

 

millions

 
examples
 

simplest

 

question

 

understand

 
answer
 

confusion

 

emphatic