FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   >>   >|  
and finally {~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA~}infinity for the absolute truth valid in infinity. To make it easier to explain, I will illustrate the suggestions by an example. Let us suppose that the human time-binding capacities or energies in the _organic_ chemistry correspond to radium in the _inorganic_ chemistry; being of course of different dimensions and of absolutely different character. It may happen, for it probably is so, that the complex time-binding energy has many different stages of development and different kinds of "rays" _A_, _B_, _C_, ... _M_.... Let us suppose that the so-called mental capacities are the _M_ rays of the time-binding energy; the "spiritual" capacities, the _A_ rays; the "will" powers, the _B_ rays; and so on. Psychological truths will then be a function of all rays together, namely _A_ _B_ _C_ ... _M_ ... or _f_ (_A_ _B_ _C_ ... _M_ ...), the character of any "truth" in question will largely depend upon which of these elements prevail. If it were possible to isolate completely from the other rays the "mental" process--the "logos"--the _M_ rays--and have a complete abstraction (which in the present could only be in mathematics), then the work of _M_ could be compared to the work of an impersonal machine which always gives the same _correctly_ shaped product _no matter what is_ the material put into it. It is a fact that mathematics is correct--impersonal--passionless. Again, as a matter of fact, all the basic axioms which underlie mathematics are "psychological axioms"; therefore it may happen that these "axioms" are not of the {~GREEK SMALL LETTER ALPHA~}infinity type but are of the _f_ (_A_ _B_ _C_ ...) personal type and this may be why mathematics cannot account for psychological facts. If psychology is to be an _exact science_ it must be mathematical in principle. And, therefore, mathematics must find a way to embrace psychology. Here I will endeavor to outline a way in which this can be done. To express it correctly is more than difficult: I beg the mathematical reader to tolerate the form and look for the sense or even the feelings in what I attempt to express. To make it less shocking to the ear of the pure mathematician, I will use for the "infinitesimals" the words "very small numbers," for the "finite" the words "normal numbers" and for the "transfinite" the words "very great numbers." Instead of using the word "number" I will sometimes use the word "magnitude" and under the
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   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   151   152   153   154   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

mathematics

 
binding
 

numbers

 

capacities

 

axioms

 

infinity

 
energy
 
impersonal
 

express

 
psychology

happen

 

mental

 

mathematical

 

suppose

 

matter

 

correctly

 

psychological

 

character

 
chemistry
 

LETTER


principle

 

account

 

embrace

 

personal

 
science
 

underlie

 
infinitesimals
 

finite

 

mathematician

 
shocking

normal

 

transfinite

 

magnitude

 

number

 

Instead

 

attempt

 
difficult
 

endeavor

 

outline

 

reader


feelings

 

passionless

 

tolerate

 

isolate

 
stages
 
complex
 

dimensions

 

absolutely

 
development
 

Psychological