13.02.2013 Views

Download (PDF, 23.58MB) - Plurality Press

Download (PDF, 23.58MB) - Plurality Press

Download (PDF, 23.58MB) - Plurality Press

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS AND BEST7LTS. 187<br />

KCti arroXXviuerov, OVTUQ Se ov^iiroTE ov (ever arising and<br />

perishing, but in fact never existing), the knowledge of<br />

which is merely a oa per aiadi iffewg a Xoyov, and which<br />

Christendom, with a correct instinct, calls temporal, after<br />

that form of our principle (Time) which I have denned as<br />

its simplest schema and the prototype of all limitation.<br />

The general meaning of the Principle of Sufficient Reason<br />

may, in the main, be brought back to this : that every<br />

thing existing no matter when or where, exists ~by reason of<br />

something else. Now, the Principle of Sufficient Eeason is<br />

nevertheless a priori in all its forms : that is, it has its root<br />

in our intellect, therefore it must not be applied to the<br />

totality of existent things, the Universe, including that in<br />

tellect in which it presents itself. For a world like this,<br />

which presents itself in virtue of a priori forms, is just on<br />

that account mere phenomenon ; consequently that which<br />

holds good with reference to it as the result of these forms,<br />

cannot be applied to the world itself, i.e. to the thing in<br />

itself, representing itself in that world. Therefore we can<br />

not say,<br />

&quot;<br />

the world and all things in it exist by reason of<br />

&quot;<br />

and this proposition is precisely the Cos-<br />

something else ;<br />

mological Proof.<br />

If, by the present treatise, I have succeeded in deducing<br />

the result just expressed, it seems to me that every specu<br />

lative philosopher who founds a conclusion upon the Prin<br />

ciple of Sufficient Eeason or indeed talks of a reason at all,<br />

is bound to specify which kind of reason he means. One<br />

of a<br />

might suppose that wherever there was any question<br />

reason, this would be done as a matter of course, and that<br />

all confusion would thus be impossible. Only too often,<br />

however, do we still find either the terms reason and cause<br />

confounded in indiscriminate use; or do we hear basis and<br />

what is based, condition and what is conditioned, principia<br />

and principiata talked about in quite a general way without<br />

any nearer determination, perhaps<br />

because there is a secret

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!