FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   >>  
not? Does its existence depend upon our existence, or has it a being altogether independent of us? Now that, and that alone, is the point to decide which our natural belief should be appealed to; but Dr Reid did not see this. His appeal to the conviction of common sense was premature. He appealed to this belief without allowing scepticism and idealism to run their full course; without allowing them to confound the psychological analysis, and thus bring, us back to a better condition by compelling us to accept the fact, not as given in the spurious analysis of man, but as given in the eternal synthesis of God. The consequence was, that Reid's appeal came to naught. Instead of interrogating our belief as to the objective existence of the perception of matter, (the proper question,) the question which he brought under its notice was the objective existence of matter _per se_--matter _minus_ perception. Now, matter _per se_, or _minus_ perception, is a thing which no belief will countenance. Reid, however, could not admit this. Having appealed to the belief, he was compelled to distort its evidence in his own favour, and to force it, in spite of itself, to bear testimony to the fact which he wished it to establish. Thus Dr Reid's appeal not only came to naught, but being premature, it drove him, as has been said and shown, to falsify the primitive convictions of our nature. Scepticism must indeed be terrible, when it could thus hurry an honest man into a philosophical falsehood. The question, then, which we have to refer to our natural belief, and abide the answer whatever it may be, is this:--Is the perception of matter (taken in its integrity, as it must be taken,) is it a modification of the human mind, or is it not? We answer unhesitatingly for ourselves, that _our_ belief is, that it is not. This "confession of faith" saves us from the imputation of subjective idealism, and we care not what other kind of idealism we are charged with. We can think of no sort of evidence to prove that the perception of matter is a modification of the human mind, or that the human mind is its proper and exclusive abode: and all our belief sets in towards the opposite conclusion. Our primitive conviction, when we do nothing to pervert it, is that the perception of matter is not, either wholly, or in part, a condition of the human soul; is not bounded in any direction by the narrow limits of our intellectual span, but that it "dwells apar
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   >>  



Top keywords:

belief

 

matter

 
perception
 

existence

 
question
 

appeal

 

appealed

 
idealism
 

condition

 

objective


naught

 

modification

 

answer

 
primitive
 

evidence

 

proper

 
allowing
 

natural

 

analysis

 

premature


conviction
 

limits

 
integrity
 
narrow
 

confession

 
unhesitatingly
 

direction

 

honest

 

dwells

 

philosophical


falsehood

 

intellectual

 

opposite

 
charged
 

conclusion

 

exclusive

 

terrible

 

subjective

 

wholly

 

imputation


pervert

 

bounded

 
countenance
 

confound

 

psychological

 

synthesis

 

consequence

 

eternal

 

spurious

 
compelling