history of philosophy-第51章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


but　it　cannot　be　that　I　judge　this；　and　that　my　mind　which　judges　this　does　not　exist。”　（10）　That　is
to　say；　everything　which　is　for　me　I　may　assert　to　be　non…existent；　but　when　I　assert　myself　to　be
non…existent；　I　myself　assert；　or　it　is　my　judgment。　For　I　cannot　set　aside　the　fact　that　I　judge；
even　if　I　can　abstract　from　that　respecting　which　I　judge。　In　this　Philosophy　has　regained　its　own
ground　that　thought　starts　from　thought　as　what　is　certain　in　itself；　and　not　from　something　external；
not　from　something　given；　not　from　an　authority；　but　directly　from　the　freedom　that　is　contained　in
the　‘I　think。’　Of　all　else　I　may　doubt；　of　the　existence　of　bodily　things；　of　my　body　itself；　or　this
certainty　does　not　possess　immediacy　in　itself。　For　‘I’　is　just　certainty　itself；　but　in　all　else　this
certainty　is　only　predicate；　my　body　is　certain　to　me；　it　is　not　this　certainty　itself。　（11）　As　against
the　certainty　we　feel　of　having　a　body；　Descartes　adduces　the　empirical　phenomenon　that　we　often
hear　of　persons　imagining　they　feel　pain　in　a　limb　which　they　have　lost　long　ago。　（12）　What　is
actual；　he　says　is　a　substance；　the　soul　is　a　thinking　substance；　it　is　thus　for　itself；　separate　from　all
external　material　things　and　independent。　That　it　is　thinking　is　evident　from　its　nature：　it　would　think
and　exist　even　if　no　material　things　were　present；　the　soul　can　hence　know　itself　more　easily　than
its　body：　（13）

All　else　that　we　can　hold　as　true　rests　on　this　certainty；　for　in　order　that　anything　should　be　held　as
true；　evidence　is　requisite；　but　nothing　is　true　which　has　not　this　inward　evidence　in　consciousness。
“Now　the　evidence　of　everything　rests　upon　our　perceiving　it　as　clearly　and　vividly　as　that　certainty
itself；　and　on　its　so　entirely　depending　from；　and　harmonizing　with　this　principle；　that　if　we　wished
to　doubt　it　we　should　also　have　to　doubt　this　principle　likewise”　（our　ego）。　（14）　This　knowledge
is　indeed　on　its　own　account　perfect　evidence；　but　it　is　not　yet　the　truth；　or　if　we　take　that　Being　as
truth；　it　is　an　empty　content；　and　it　is　with　the　content　that　we　have　to　do。

c。　What　comes　third　is　thus　the　transition　of　this　certainty　into　truth；　into　the　determinate；
Descartes　again　makes　this　transition　in　a　na？ve　way；　and　with　it　we　for　the　first　time　begin　to
consider　his　metaphysics。　What　here　takes　place　is　that　an　interest　arises　in　further　representations
and　conceptions　of　the　abstract　unity　of　Being　and　Thought；　there　Descartes　sets　to　work　in　an
externally　reflective　manner。　“The　consciousness　which　merely　knows　itself　to　be　certain　now
however　seeks　to　extend　its　knowledge；　and　finds　that　it　has　conceptions　of　many　things　—　in
which　conceptions　it　does　not　deceive　itself；　so　long　as　it　does　not　assert　or　deny　that　something
similar　outside　corresponds　to　them。”　Deception　in　the　conceptions　has　meaning　only　in　relation
to　external　existence。　“Consciousness　also　discovers　universal　conceptions；　and　obtains　from　them
proofs　which　are　evident；　e。g。　the　geometric　proposition　that　the　three　angles　of　a　triangle　are
together　equal　to　two　right　angles　is　a　conception　which　follows　incontrovertibly　from　others。　But
in　reflecting　whether　such　things　really　exist　doubts　arise。”　（15）　That　there　is　such　a　thing　as　a
triangle　is　indeed　in　this　case　by　no　means　certain；　since　extension　is　not　contained　in　the　immediate
certainty　of　myself。　The　soul　may　exist　without　the　bodily　element；　and　this　last　without　it；　they　are
in　reality　different；　one　is　conceivable　without　the　other。　The　soul　thus　does　not　think　and　know　the
other　as　clearly　as　the　certainty　of　itself。　（16）

Now　the　truth　of　all　knowledge　rests　on　the　proof　of　the　existence　of　God。　The　soul　is　an
imperfect　substance；　but　it　has　the　Idea　of　an　absolute　perfect　existence　within　itself；　this　perfection
is　not　begotten　in　itself；　just　because　it　is　an　imperfect　substance；　this　Idea　is　thus　innate。　In
Descartes　the　consciousness　of　this　fact　is　expressed　by　his　saying　that　as　long　as　the　existence　of
God　is　not　proved　and　perceived　the　possibility　of　our　deceiving　ourselves　remains；　because　we
cannot　know　whether　we　do　not　possess　a　nature　ordered　and　disposed　to　err　（supra；　p。　226）。
（17）　The　form　is　rather　a　mistaken　one；　and　it　only　generally　expresses　the　opposition　in　which
self…consciousness　stands　to　the　consciousness　of　what　is　different；　of　the　objective；　and　we　have
to　deal　with　the　unity　of　both　—　the　question　being　whether　what　is　in　thought　likewise　possesses
objectivity。　This　unity　rests　in　God　or　is　God　Himself。　I　shall　put　these　assertions　in　the　manner　of
Descartes：　“Amongst　these　various　conceptions　possessed　by　us　there　likewise　is　the　conception
of　a　supremely　intelligent；　powerful；　and　absolutely　perfect　Being；　and　this　is　the　most　excellent　of
all　conceptions。”　This　all…embracing　universal　conception　has　therefore　this　distinguishing　feature；
that　in　its　case　the　uncertainty　respecting　Being　which　appears　in　the　other　conceptions；　finds　no
place。　It　has　the　characteristic　that　“In　it　we　do　not　recognize　existence　as　something　merely
possible　and　accidental；　as　we　do　the　conceptions　of　other　things　which　we　perceive　clearly；　but
as　a　really　essential　and　eternal　determination。　For　instance；　as　mind　perceives　that　in　the
conception　of　a　triangle　it　is　implied　that　the　three　angles　are　equal　to　two　right　angles；　the　triangle
has　them；　and　in　the　same　way　from　the　fact　that　mind　perceives　existence　to　be　necessarily　and
eternally　implied　in　the　Notion　of　the　most　perfect　reality；　it　is　forced　to　conclude　that　the　most
perfect　reality　exists。”　（18）　For　to　perfection　there　likewise　pertains　the　determination　of
existence；　since　the　conception　of　a　non…existent　is　less　perfect。　Thus　we　there　have　the　unity　of
thought　and　Being；　and　the　ontological　proof　of　the　existence　of　God；　this　we　met　with　earlier　（p。
63；　seq。）　in　dealing　with　Anselm。

The　proof　of　the　existence　of　God　from　the　Idea　of　Him　is　in　this　wise：　In　this　Notion　existence　is
implied；　and　therefore　it　is　true。　Descartes　proceeds　further　in　the　same　direction；　in　so　far　as　after
the　manner　of　empirical　axioms　he　sets　forth：　“There　are　different　degrees　of　reality　or　entity；　for
the　substance　has　more　reality　than　the　accident　or　the　mode；　and　infinite　substance　has　more　than
finite。”　“In　the　Notion　of　a　thing　existence　is　implied；　either　the　merely　potential　or　the
necessary；”　i。e。；　in　the　‘I’　there　is　Being　as　the　immediate　certainty　of　an　other…being；　of　the
not…I　opposed　to　the　I。　“No　thing　or　no　perfection　of　a　thing　which　really　exists　actu　can　have　the
Nothing　as　original　cause　of　its　existence。　For　if　anything　could　be　predicated　of　nothing；　thought
could　equally　well　be　predicated　of　it；　and　I　would　thus　say　that　I　am　nothing　because　I　think。”
Descartes　here　arrives　at　a　dividing　line；　at　an　unknown　relationship；　the　Notion　of　cause　is
reached；　and　this　is　a　thought　indeed；　but　a　determinate　thought。　Spinoza　says　in　his　explanation；
“That　the　conceptions　contain　more　or　less　reality；　and　those　moments　have　just　as　much　evidence
as　thought　itself；　because　they　not　only；　say　that　we　think；　but　how　we　think。”　These　determinate
modes　as　differences　in　the　simplicity　of　thought；　had；　however；　to　be　demonstrated。　Spinoza　adds
to　this　step　in　advance　that　“The　degrees　of　reality　which　we　perceive　in　ideas　are　not　in　the　ideas
in　as　far　as　they　are　considered　merely　as　kinds　of　thought；　but　in　so　far　as　the　one　represents　a
substance　and　the　other　a　mere　mode　of　substance；　or；　in　a　word；　in　so　far　as　they　are　considered
as　conceptions　of　things。”　“The　objective　reality　of　Notions　（i。e。；　the　entity　of　what　is　represented
in　so　far　as　it　is　in　the　Notion）；　〃demands　a　first　cause　in　which　the　same　reality　is　contained　not
merely　objectively”　（that　is　to　say　in　the　Notion）；　“but　likewise　formally　or　even　eminenter　—
formally；　that　is　perfectly　likewise：　eminenter；　more　perfectly。　For　there　must　at　least　be　as　much
in　the　cause　as　in　the　effect。”　“The　existence　of　God；　is　known　immediately”　—　a　priori　—
“from　the　contemplation　of　His　nature。　To　say　that　anything　is　contained　in