34 in their know in fied witi no farth when ou These the crude us how faculties: we rest ti nothing o may be i extent of establishe points ha its future have beer. subject, n teriality our belie ́ on a spec es itself those pri spirit the with any guish tri forced up sponsible monitor man, a w its guida pelled to man rej remorse and shrin each has never g distinct i Immortal viction on t PART II. OF THE ORIGIN OF OUR KNOWLEDGE OF FACTS RELATING BOTH TO MIND AND MATTER. AMONG writers on the science of mind, there was formerly much controversy in regard to, the origin of our ideas. Some maintained that they are derived entirely from perception, that is, through the external senses; others considered them as arising partly from perception and partly from consciousness, or reflection; and some added a third class, which they called innate ideas, and which were supposed to exist in the mind itself, independently of and prior to the exercise either of perception or reflection. This phraseology had its origin in the ancient theory of ideas, according to which something was supposed to exist distinct both from the mind and the external object of its perception. This, as we have formerly seen, was what philosophers meant by an idea. It was believed to be the immediate object of the mind's perception, but to be only a kind of image or representative of the object perceived. This hypothesis, which kept its place in the science of mind till a very recent period, is now generally admitted to have been a fiction of philosophers; and the phraseology respecting ideas is abandoned by the best practical writers; because, though the ancient doctrine be exploded, and the term may De used only in a figurative sense, it still seems to imply something existing in the mind distinct from the mind itself. The impressions derived from external things are therefore to be considered as the occasions on which the various powers of the mind are brought into action. These powers themselves then become the objects of consciousness or reflection, and by their further exercise we acquire certain notions which arise out of the mental operations. This doctrine gives no encouragement to the scheme of materialism, for it is clear that we cannot remember till we are furnish Different opinions. Ancient theory of ideas-what? Present opinion of this theory Modern view-what? PART II. OF THE ORIGIN OF OUR KNOWLEDGE OF FACTS RELATING BOTH TO MIND AND MATTER. This AMONG writers on the science of mind, there was formerly much controversy in regard to, the origin of our ideas. Some maintained that they are derived entirely from perception, that is, through the external senses; others considered them as arising partly from perception and partly from consciousness, or reflection; and some added a third class, which they called innate ideas, and which were supposed to exist in the mind itself, independently of and prior to the exercise either of perception or reflection. phraseology had its origin in the ancient theory of ideas, according to which something was supposed to exist distinct both from the mind and the external object of its perception. This, as we have formerly seen, was what philosophers meant by an idea. It was believed to be the immediate object of the mind's perception, but to be only a kind of image or representative of the object perceived. This hypothesis, which kept its place in the science of mind till a very recent period, is now generally admitted to have been a fiction of philosophers; and the phraseology respecting ideas is abandoned by the best practical writers; because, though the ancient doctrine be exploded, and the term may De used only in a figurative sense, it still seems to imply something existing in the mind distinct from the mind itself. The impressions derived from external things are therefore to be considered as the occasions on which the various powers of the mind are brought into action. These powers themselves then become the objects of consciousness or reflection, and by their further exercise we acquire certain notions which arise out of the mental operations. This doctrine gives no encouragement to the scheme of materialism, for it is clear that we cannot remember till we are furnish Different opinions. Ancient theory of ideas-what? Present opinion of this theory Modern view-what? ed with some fact to be remembered; but this can never be supposed to affect our belief in the existence of the power of memory before the fact was so furnished. If we could suppose the case of a man who had lived all his life in the dark, he certainly could not see, but we should not say that the admission of light imparted to him the power of vision; it only furnished the circumstances which gave occasion to the exercise of sight. It has accordingly been shown by Mr. Stewart, that though we may not be conscious of our mental powers till they are called into action, yet this may arise from the most simple sensation, such as affords no evidence of the properties, or even of the existence of the material world. Through the senses, then, we acquire a knowledge of the facts relating to external things. The mental processes thus brought into action then become the subjects of consciousness, and we acquire a knowledge of the facts relating to them. By a further exercise of these powers on various facts referring to both matter and mind, we acquire certain notions arising out of our reflection upon the relations of these facts, such as our notions of time, motion, number, cause and effect, and personal identity; and we acquire, further, the impression of certain fundamental laws of belief, which are not referable to any process of reasoning, but are to be considered as a part of our constitution, or a spontaneous and instinctive exercise of reason in every sound mind. The origin of our knowledge then is referable, in a philosophical point of view, to perception and reflection. But, in point of fact, the knowledge which is acquired by an individual through his own perception and reflection is but a small part of what he possesses; much of the knowledge possessed by every one is acquired through the perceptions of other men. In an essay, therefore, which is intended to be entirely practical, I shall include this last department under the head of Testimony. The division of this part of the subject will therefore be, 1. Sensation and Perception. 2. Consciousness and Reflection. 3. Testimony. Illustration. Knowledge of external things-how acquired? Of their relations? Two sources } Additional source. Summary. |