Reading 版 (精华区)
发信人: Christy (风中的绿叶), 信区: Reading
标 题: The Reality of Freedom VIII(转载)
发信站: 哈工大紫丁香 (2001年11月29日02:38:21 星期四), 站内信件
【 以下文字转载自 Philosophy 讨论区 】
【 原文由 Christy 所发表 】
THE PHILOSOPHY OF SPIRITUAL ACTIVITY
The Reality of Freedom
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
VIII
THE FACTORS OF LIFE
Let us recapitulate the results arrived at in the previous chapters. The wor
ld confronts man as a multiplicity, as a sum of separate entities. Man himse
lf is one of these separate entities, a being among other beings. This aspec
t of the world we characterized simply as that which is given, and inasmuch
as we do not evolve it by conscious activity, but find it present, we called
it perception. Within the world of perceptions we perceive ourself. This se
lf perception would remain merely one among the many other perceptions, did
not something arise from the midst of this self-perception which proves capa
ble of connecting perceptions in general and therefore also the sum of all o
ther perceptions with that of ourself. This something which emerges is no lo
nger mere perception, neither is it, like perceptions, simply given. It is b
rought about by our activity. To begin with, it appears united with what we
perceive as ourself. But in accordance with its inner significance it reache
s out beyond the self. It bestows on the separate perceptions ideal definiti
ons, and these relate themselves to one another and stem from a unity. What
is attained by self-perception, it defines ideally in the same way as it def
ines all other perceptions, placing this as subject, or "I," over against th
e objects. This something is thinking, and the ideal definitions are the con
cepts and ideas. Thinking, therefore, first manifests itself in the percepti
on of the self, but it is not merely subjective, for the self characterizes
itself as subject only with the help of thinking. This relationship to onese
lf by means of thoughts is a life-definition of our personality. Through it
we lead a purely ideal existence. Through it we feel ourselves to be thinkin
g beings. This life-definition would remain a purely conceptual (logical) on
e if no other definitions of our self were added to it. We should then be be
ings whose life would be exhausted in establishing purely ideal relations be
tween perceptions themselves, and between them and ourself. If we call the e
stablishing of such a thought connection, an act of cognition, and the resul
ting condition of our self knowledge, then according to the abovementioned p
resupposition, we should have to consider ourselves as beings who merely cog
nize or know.
However, the presupposition does not correspond to the facts. We relate perc
eptions to ourselves not merely ideally, through concepts, but also, as we h
ave seen, through feeling. Therefore we are not beings with a merely concept
ual life-content. The naive realist even sees in the life of feeling a more
genuine life of the personality than in the purely ideal element of knowledg
e. And from his standpoint he is right in interpreting the matter in this wa
y. For feeling on the subjective side to begin with, is exactly the same as
perception on the objective side. From the basic principle of naive realism,
that everything that can be perceived is real, it follows that feeling is t
he guarantee of the reality of one's own personality. Monism, however, as un
derstood here, must confer upon feeling the same supplement that it consider
s necessary for all perceptions if these are to be present as a complete rea
lity. For monism, feeling is an incomplete reality which, in the form it is
first given to us, does not as yet contain its second factor, the concept or
idea. This is why in actual life, feelings, like perceptions, appear before
cognition has occurred. At first we have merely a feeling of existence, and
it is only in the course of gradual development that we reach the point whe
re the concept of our self dawns within the dim feeling of our existence. Bu
t what for us appears only later is fundamentally and indivisibly bound up w
ith feeling. This fact leads the naive man to the belief that in feeling, ex
istence is present directly, in knowledge only indirectly. Therefore the dev
elopment of the feeling-life appears to him more important than anything els
e. He will believe that he has grasped the connection of things only when he
has felt it. He attempts to make feelings rather than knowing the means of
cognition. But as feeling is something quite individual, something equivalen
t to perception, a philosopher of feeling makes into the universal principle
, a principle which has significance only within his personality. He tries t
o permeate the whole world with his own self. What the monist, in the sense
we have described, strives to grasp by means of concepts, the philosopher of
feeling tries to attain by means of feeling, and considers this relationshi
p with objects to be the one that is most direct.
The view just characterized, the philosophy of feeling, is often called myst
icism. The error in mysticism based on feeling alone is that the mystic want
s to experience43 in feeling what should be attained as knowledge; he wants
to develop something which is individual, into something universal.
Feeling is purely individual, it is the relation of the external world to ou
r subject, insofar as this relation comes to expression in merely subjective
experience. There is yet another expression of the human personality. The I
, through its thinking, lives within the universal life of the world; throug
h thinking the "I" relates purely ideally (conceptually) the perception to i
tself, and itself to the perception. In feeling, it experiences a relation o
f the object to its own subject. In the will, the opposite is the case. In w
ill, we are again confronted with a perception, namely that of the individua
l relation of our own self to the object. Everything in the will which is no
t a purely ideal factor is just as much a merely perceived object as any obj
ect in the external world.
Nevertheless, here again the naive realist believes that he has before him s
omething far more real than can be reached by thinking. He sees in the will
an element in which he is directly aware of a process, a causation, in contr
ast to thinking, which must first grasp the process in concepts. What the I
brings about by its will represents to such a view, a process which is exper
ienced directly. An adherent of this philosophy believes that in the will he
has really got hold of a corner of the universal process. Whereas all other
events he can follow only by perceiving them from outside, he believes that
in his will he is experiencing a real process quite directly. The form of e
xistence in which the will appears to him within the self becomes for him a
direct principle of reality. His own will appears to him as a special case o
f the universal process, and he therefore considers the latter to be univers
al will. The will becomes the universal principle just as in mysticism of fe
eling, feeling becomes the principle of knowledge. This view is a Philosophy
of the Will (Thelism).44 Here something which can be experienced only indiv
idually is made into the constituent factor of the world.
The philosophy of will can be called a science as little as can mysticism of
feeling. For both maintain that to permeate things with concepts is insuffi
cient. Both demand, side by side with an ideal-principle of existence, a rea
l principle also. And this with a certain justification. But since for this
so-called real principle, perceiving is our only means of comprehension, it
follows that mysticism of feeling and philosophy of will are both of the opi
nion that we have two sources of knowledge: thinking and perceiving, perceiv
ing being mediated through feeling and will as individual experience. Accord
ing to mysticism of feeling and philosophy of will, what flows from the sour
ce of experience44a cannot be taken up directly into what flows from the sou
rce of thinking; therefore the two forms of knowledge, perceiving and thinki
ng, remain standing side by side without a higher mediation. Besides the ide
al principle attainable through knowledge, there is also supposed to exist a
real principle which, although it can be experienced cannot be grasped by t
hinking. In other words: mysticism of feeling and philosophy of will are bot
h forms of naive realism; they both adhere to the principle: What is directl
y perceived is real. Compared with naive realism in its original form, they
are guilty of the further inconsistency of making one definite kind of perce
iving (feeling or will) into the one and only means of knowing existence; an
d this they should not do when they adhere in general to the principle: What
is perceived is real. According to this, for cognition, external perception
s should have equal value with inner perceptions of feeling
Philosophy of will becomes metaphysical realism when it considers will also
to be present in those spheres of existence where a direct experience of it,
as in one's own subject, is not possible. It hypothetically assumes a princ
iple outside the subject, for which subjective experience is the sole criter
ion of reality. The philosophy of will as a form of metaphysical realism is
open to the criticism indicated in the preceding chapter; it has to overcome
the contradictory element inherent in every form of metaphysical realism, a
nd acknowledge that the will is a universal world process only insofar as it
relates itself ideally to the rest of the world.
Addition to the Revised Version, 1918. The reason it is so difficult to obse
rve and grasp the nature of thinking lies in the fact that its nature all to
o easily eludes the contemplating soul, as soon as one tries to focus attent
ion on it. What then is left is something lifeless, abstract, the corpse of
living thinking. If this abstract alone is considered, then it is easy, by c
ontrast, to be drawn into the "living" element in mysticism of feeling, or i
nto the metaphysics of the will, and to find it strange that anyone should e
xpect to grasp the nature of reality in "mere thought." But one who really p
enetrates to the life within thinking will reach the insight that to experie
nce existence merely in feeling or in will cannot in any way be compared wit
h the inner richness, the inwardly at rest yet at the same time alive experi
ence, of the life within thinking, and no longer will he say that the other
could be ranked above this. It is just because of this richness, because of
this inner fullness of living experience, that its reflection in the ordinar
y life of soul appears lifeless and abstract. No other human soul-activity i
s so easily underestimated as thinking. Will and feeling warm the human soul
even when experienced only in recollection. Thinking all too easily leaves
the soul cold in recollection; the soul-life then appears to have dried out.
But this is only the strong shadow cast by its warm luminous reality, which
dives down into the phenomena of the world. This diving down is done by a p
ower that flows within the thinking activity itself, the power of spiritual
love. The objection should not be made that to see love in active thinking i
s to transfer into thinking a feeling, namely love. This objection is in tru
th a confirmation of what is said here. For he who turns toward the living e
ssence of thinking will find in it both feeling and will, and both of these
in their deepest reality; whereas for someone who turns away from thinking a
nd instead turns toward "mere" feeling or will, for him these will lose thei
r true reality. One who is willing to experience intuitively in thinking, wi
ll also be able to do justice to what is experienced in the realm of feeling
and in the element of will, whereas mysticism of feeling and metaphysics of
will are incapable of doing justice to the activity of permeating existence
with intuitive thinking. They all too easily come to the conclusion that th
ey have found reality, whereas the intuitive thinker produces in abstract th
oughts without feeling, and far removed from reality, a shadowy, chilling pi
cture of the world.
--
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]
--
※ 转载:.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:202.329毫秒