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