Logic Notebook 1865-7

ReadAboutContentsVersionsHelp
000602456 ms am 1632 339 0023 thumb

5

This page is not transcribed, please help transcribe this page

000602456 ms am 1632 339 0024 thumb

6

conception of the determination of anything by another without it, of causality, that is to say. To resolve this problem we have been forced first to consider the object as also de termined by the subject. And this is to encroach already upon the absolute boundary of I & not I. But even this will not do Even the object itself does not determine the subject, but only a false object does it. * * * * * * What shall we finally say then? The theory that now (?) is is incomprehensible \alpha self-contradictory hypothesis? Certainly not. Nay, such a hypothesis is not intellectual by the very definition of the intellect. It cannot be held in a comprehensible form but it may be held. The intellect did not make this hypothesis. The intellect makes no hypotheses , which are incomprehensible. The intellect is not therefore alone concerned in any proposition. But we make it. All that the words convey is something in capable of being made distinct. Hence it is emotional in its own nature. And as an emotion it is justified.

Last edit over 1 year ago by jeffdown1
000602456 ms am 1632 339 0025 thumb

7

This page is not transcribed, please help transcribe this page

000602456 ms am 1632 339 0026 thumb

8

This page is not transcribed, please help transcribe this page

000602456 ms am 1632 339 0027 thumb

9

This page is not transcribed, please help transcribe this page

Records 6 – 10 of 27