Philosophy 版 (精华区)
发信人: Christy (风中的绿叶), 信区: Philosophy
标 题: The Reality of Freedom X
发信站: 哈工大紫丁香 (2001年11月29日02:21:56 星期四), 站内信件
THE PHILOSOPHY OF SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY
The Reality of Freedom
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
X
PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM (SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY) AND MONISM
The naive man who regards as real only what he can see with his eyes and gra
sp with his hands, also needs to have motives for his moral life that are pe
rceptible to the senses. He needs someone who will impart these motives to h
im in a way that he can understand by means of his senses. He will let them
be dictated to him as commands by a person whom he considers wiser and more
powerful than himself, or whom he acknowledges, for some other reason, to be
a power standing above him. In this way the moral principles already mentio
ned come about through being prescribed by authority of family, state, socie
ty, church, or the Divinity. An undeveloped person still trusts in the autho
rity of a single individual; a somewhat more advanced person lets his moral
conduct be dictated by a majority (state, society). But it is always percept
ible powers upon which he relies.When at last the conviction dawns upon him
that fundamentally all these are weak human beings just like himself, then h
e will seek guidance from a higher power, from a divine Being, whom, however
, he endows with sense-perceptible qualities. He lets the conceptual content
of his moral life be dictated to him by this Being, again in a perceptible
way, for example when God appears in the burning bush, or moves among men in
bodily human form and in a manner perceptible to their ears tells them what
to do and what not to do.
The highest level of development of naive realism in the moral sphere is rea
ched when the moral command (moral idea) has been separated from every forei
gn entity, and is hypothetically thought of as an absolute force in one's ow
n inner being. What at first is sensed as the external voice of God, is now
sensed as an independent power within man, and is spoken of in a way that sh
ows the inner power to be identified with the voice of conscience.
When this happens, the level of naive consciousness has been abandoned and w
e enter the region where moral laws become independent rules. They no longer
have a bearer, but have become metaphysical entities, existing by themselve
s. They are similar to the invisible-visible forces of the metaphysical real
ist who does not look for the reality of things in the human soul's particip
ation in this reality through thinking, but who hypothetically imagines real
ity as an addition to actual experience. Extra-human moral rules, therefore,
always accompany metaphysical realism. Metaphysical realism cannot do other
wise than seek the origin of morality too in a sphere beyond human reach. An
d here there are several possibilities. If the presupposed Being is thought
of as in itself unthinking, acting according to purely mechanical laws, as m
aterialism thinks of it, then out of itself it must also produce, by purely
mechanical necessity, the human individual and all that belongs to him. The
consciousness of freedom can then be only an illusion. For while I believe m
yself to be the creator of my deeds, it is the material substances of which
I am composed, together with their processes, that are at work within me. I
believe myself to be free, whereas in reality all my actions are but results
of the material processes which are the foundation of my bodily and spiritu
al organism. According to this point of view, it is simply because we do not
know the motives compelling us, that we have the feeling of freedom. "We mu
st emphasize that the feeling of freedom is due to the absence of external c
ompelling motives." "Our actions as well as our thinking are subject to nece
ssity."49
Another possibility is that the extra-human absolute is seen as a spiritual
Being behind the world of phenomena. Then the impulse to action will also be
sought in such a spiritual power. The moral principles to be found in man's
reason will be regarded as issuing from this Being-in-itself, which has its
own particular intentions with regard to man. Moral laws appear to such a d
ualist as dictated by the Absolute, and through his reason, man simply has t
o discover and carry out these decisions of the Absolute Being. The moral wo
rld-order appears to the dualist as the perceptible reflection of a higher o
rder that stands behind it. Earthly morality is the manifestation of the ext
ra-human world order. It is not man that matters in this moral order, but th
e Being-in-itself, the extra-human Being. Man ought to do what this Being wi
lls. Eduard von Hartmann, who sees the Being-in-itself as the Godhead whose
very existence is suffering, believes that this divine Being has created the
world in order that through the world he will be redeemed from his infinite
ly great pain. This philosopher therefore regards the moral development of m
ankind as a process which exists for the purpose of redeeming the Godhead.
"Only through the building up of a moral world-order by sensible, responsibl
e individuals can the aim of the world-process be carried through...." "Exis
tence in its reality is the incarnation of the Godhead - the world process i
s the Passion of the God becoming flesh, and at the same time the path of re
demption of Him who was crucified in the flesh; and morality is the co-opera
tion in the shortening of this path of suffering and redemption.""
Here man does not act because he wills, but he ought to act because it is Go
d's will to be redeemed. Just as the materialistic dualist makes man into an
automaton whose conduct is merely the result of purely mechanical laws, so
the spiritualistic dualist (that is, he who sees the Absolute, the Being-in-
itself, as a spiritual entity in which man has no conscious share) makes him
into a slave of the will of the Absolute. Freedom is out of the question in
materialism as well as in one-sided spiritualism, in fact in any kind of me
taphysical realism which does not experience, but infers something extra-hum
an as the true reality.
Naive as well as metaphysical realism, in order to be consistent, must deny
freedom for one and the same reason, since they regard man as being simply t
he agent or executor of principles which are forced upon him by necessity. N
aive realism kills freedom through subjection to the authority either of a p
erceptible being or of an entity thought of as similar to a perceptible bein
g, or else through submission to the authority of the abstract inner voice w
hich is interpreted as "conscience;" the metaphysical realist, who merely in
fers something extra-human, cannot acknowledge freedom because he lets man b
e determined, mechanically or morally, by a "Being-in-itself."
Monism must acknowledge the partial justification of naive realism because i
t acknowledges the justification of the world of perceptions. Someone who is
incapable of bringing forth moral ideas through intuition, will have to rec
eive them from others. Insofar as a man receives his moral principles from o
utside, he is positively unfree. But monism ascribes equal significance to t
he idea compared with perception. And the idea can come to manifestation in
the human individual. Insofar as man follows the impulses coming from this s
ide, he feels free. But monism denies all justification to a metaphysics whi
ch merely draws inferences, and consequently also to impulses of action stem
ming from a so-called "Being-in-itself," According to the monistic view, man
's action is unfree when he obeys some perceptible external compulsion; it i
s free when he obeys himself. Monism cannot acknowledge any kind of unconsci
ous compulsion hidden behind perception and concept. When someone maintains
that a fellow man was not free when he performed an action, it must be possi
ble to prove the existence within the perceptible world of the thing, the pe
rson, or the institution that made the man act; but if an appeal is made to
causes for the action lying outside the sphere of physical and spiritual rea
lity, then monism cannot enter the discussion.
According to monism, in his activity man is partly unfree, partly free. He i
s unfree in the world of perceptions, but brings the free spirit to realizat
ion in himself.
The moral commands which the metaphysical realist merely infers and cannot b
ut consider as issuing from a higher power, for the monist are thoughts of m
en; for the monist the moral world order is neither a copy of a purely mecha
nical natural order, nor of an extra-human world order, but entirely a free
undertaking of man. Man does not have to carry out the will of some Being ex
isting beyond his reach; he carries out his own will; he does not bring to r
ealization the decisions and intentions of another Being, but brings his own
to realization. Monism does not see the purpose of a foreign rulership behi
nd man, determining him from outside, but rather that insofar as they bring
intuitive ideas to realization, human beings pursue solely their own human p
urposes. And indeed, each individual pursues his own particular purpose. For
the world of ideas expresses itself not in a community of men, but only in
the individual man. The common goal of a group of men is nothing but the res
ult of the separate will-activities of the individual persons, and usually o
f a few outstanding ones whom the rest follow as their authorities. Each one
of us is destined to become a free spirit, just as every rose seed is desti
ned to become a rose.
The monistic view, in the sphere of truly moral conduct, is a philosophy of
freedom. And as it is also a philosophy of reality, it rejects metaphysical
and unreal restrictions of man's free spirit just as it acknowledges physica
l and historical (naively real) restrictions of the naive man. Since monism
does not regard man as a finished product, as a being who at every moment of
his life unfolds his full nature, it seems futile to discuss whether man, a
s such, is free or not. Man is seen as a being in the process of self-develo
pment, and one may ask whether, in the course of this development the stage
of the free spirit can be attained.
Monism knows that nature does not release man from its care complete and fin
ished as a free spirit, but it leads him up to a certain level from which, s
till unfree, he continues to develop until he reaches the point where he fin
ds his own self.
To monism it is obvious that a being acting under physical or moral compulsi
on cannot be moral in a real sense. It regards the level of transition throu
gh automatic conduct (according to natural urges and instincts) and through
obedient conduct (according to moral rules) as necessary preliminary stages
of morality, but it also recognizes the possibility for man to overcome both
transitory levels through his free spirit. A truly moral world view is rele
ased by monism, both from the fetters of naive moral principles in man's inn
er world, and from the moral principles of the speculating metaphysicist in
the external world. The naive principles of morality can be eliminated from
the world as little as can perceptions. The metaphysical view is rejected be
cause monism seeks all the factors for explaining world-phenomena within the
world, and none outside it. Just as monism finds it unnecessary to entertai
n thoughts of principles of knowledge other than those inherent in man, (p.
140) so it also definitely finds it unnecessary to entertain thoughts of pri
nciples of morality other than those inherent in man. Human morality, like h
uman knowledge, is determined through human nature. And just as knowledge wo
uld mean something quite different to beings other than man, so other beings
would also have a different morality. Morality for the monist is a specific
ally human quality, and freedom is the form in which human morality finds ex
pression.
First Addition to the Revised Edition, 1918. Difficulty in judging what is p
resented in the two preceding chapters may arise because one believes onesel
f to be confronted by a contradiction. On the one hand, the experience of th
inking is spoken of as having a general significance of equal value for ever
y human consciousness; on the other hand, it is shown that though the ideas
realized in moral life are of the same kind as those worked out by thinking,
they come to expression in each human consciousness in an individual way. I
f one cannot overcome seeing a "contradiction," in this, and cannot recogniz
e that it is just in a living experience of this actually present contrast t
hat a glimpse into man's true being is revealed, then it is also impossible
to see either the idea of knowledge or the idea of freedom in their true lig
ht. For those who think of concepts as merely drawn (abstracted) from the se
nse-world, and who do not give full recognition to intuitions, the thought p
resented here as the reality must seem a "mere contradiction." For an insigh
t that recognizes how ideas are intuitively experienced as a self-sustaining
reality, it is clear that in the sphere of the world of ideas man penetrate
s in cognition into something which is universal for all men, but when he de
rives from that same idea world the intuitions for his acts of will, then he
individualizes a member of this idea world by means of the same activity wh
ich, as a general human one, he unfolds in the spiritual ideal process of co
gnition. For this reason what appears as a logical contradiction, namely the
universal character of cognitive ideas and the individual character of mora
l ideas, when experienced in its true reality, becomes a living concept. A c
haracteristic feature of human nature consists in the fact that what can be
intuitively grasped oscillates in man like a living pendulum between knowled
ge which is universally valid, and the individual experience of this univers
al element. For the man who cannot recognize one swing of the pendulum in it
s reality, thinking will remain merely a subjective human activity; for the
one who cannot recognize the other swing, all individual life appears to cea
se in man's activity of thinking. To the first person, cognition is unintell
igible, to the second, moral life is unintelligible. Both will call in all s
orts of representations in order to explain the one or the other, all of whi
ch miss the point, because both persons, fundamentally, either do not recogn
ize that thinking can be experienced, or take it to be an activity which mer
ely abstracts.
Second Addition to the Revised Edition, 1918. On page 189, materialism was r
eferred to. I am well aware that there are thinkers like the above-mentioned
Th. Ziehen, who do not in the least consider themselves materialists, but w
ho must nevertheless be described as such from the point of view expressed i
n this book. It is not a matter that someone says that for him the world is
not restricted to merely material existence and therefore he is not a materi
alist. It is a matter of whether or not he develops concepts which are appli
cable only to a material existence. One who says: "Our conduct, like our thi
nking, is necessitated," expresses a concept applicable only to material pro
cesses, but applicable neither to actions nor to existence; and if he thinks
his concepts through, he will have to think materialistically. That he does
not do this is only the outcome of that inconsistency which is so often the
result of a thinking not carried through. - One often hears it said nowaday
s that the materialism of the nineteenth century no longer plays a part in s
cience. But in reality this is not so at all. It is only that at present it
is often not noticed that no other ideas are available than those which can
be applied only to something material. This veils present day materialism, w
hereas in the second half of the nineteenth century it was plain for all to
see. And present day veiled materialism is no less intolerant of a view that
grasps the world spiritually than was the openly-admitted materialism of th
e last century. However, it deceives many who believe they must reject a com
prehension of the world which includes spirit, because after all, the natura
l scientific comprehension of the world "has long ago abandoned materialism.
"
--
朝华易逝残月已无痕,
锁眉略展路旁待旧人。
飘飘零落不由他乡去,
尘凡晓破方知何为真。
※ 来源:·哈工大紫丁香 bbs.hit.edu.cn·[FROM: 天外飞仙]
Powered by KBS BBS 2.0 (http://dev.kcn.cn)
页面执行时间:205.050毫秒