an enquiry concerning human understanding-第34节

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！


of　the　P/YRRHONIAN　doubts　and　scruples；　is　the　limitation
of　our　enquiries　to　such　subjects　as　are　best　adapted　to　the
narrow　capacity　of　human　understanding。　The　　of
man　is　naturally　sublime；　delighted　with　whatever　is　remote
and　extraordinary；　and　running；　without　control；　into　the
most　distant　parts　of　space　and　time　in　order　to　avoid　the
objects；　which　custom　has　rendered　too　familiar　to　it。　A
correct　　observes　a　contrary　method；　and　avoiding
all　distant　and　high　enquiries；　confines　itself　to　common
life；　and　to　such　subjects　as　fall　under　daily　practice　and
experience；　leaving　the　more　sublime　topics　to　the
embellishment　of　poets　and　orators；　or　to　the　arts　of
priests　and　politicians。　To　bring　us　to　so　salutary　a

determination；　nothing　can　be　more　serviceable；　than　to　be
once　thoroughly　convinced　of　the　force　of　the　P/YRRHONIAN
doubt；　and　of　the　impossibility；　that　any　thing；　but　the
strong　power　of　natural　instinct；　could　free　us　from　it。
Those　who　have　a　propensity　to　philosophy；　will　still
continue　their　researches；　because　they　reflect；　that；
besides　the　immediate　pleasure　attending　such　an　occupation；
philosophical　decisions　are　nothing　but　the　reflections　of
common　life；　methodized　and　corrected。　But　they　will　never
be　tempted　to　go　beyond　common　life；　so　long　as　they
consider　the　imperfection　of　those　faculties　which　they
employ；　their　narrow　reach；　and　their　inaccurate　operations。
While　we　cannot　give　a　satisfactory　reason；　why　we　believe；
after　a　thousand　experiments；　that　a　stone　will　fall；　or
fire　burn；　can　we　ever　satisfy　ourselves　concerning　any
determination；　which　we　may　form；　with　regard　to　the　origin
of　worlds；　and　the　situation　of　nature；　from；　and　to
eternity？

　　　　　This　narrow　limitation；　indeed；　of　our　enquiries；　is；
in　every　respect；　so　reasonable；　that　it　suffices　to　make
the　slightest　examination　into　the　natural　powers　of　the
human　mind　and　to　compare　them　with　their　objects；　in　order
to　recommend　it　to　us。　We　shall　then　find　what　are　the
proper　subjects　of　science　and　enquiry。

　　　　　It　seems　to　me；　that　the　only　objects　of　the　abstract
science　or　of　demonstration　are　quantity　and　number；　and
that　all　attempts　to　extend　this　more　perfect　species　of
knowledge　beyond　these　bounds　are　mere　sophistry　and
illusion。　As　the　component　parts　of　quantity　and　number　are
entirely　similar；　their　relations　become　intricate　and
involved；　and　nothing　can　be　more　curious；　as　well　as
useful；　than　to　trace；　by　a　variety　of　mediums；　their
equality　or　inequality；　through　their　different　appearances。
But　as　all　other　ideas　are　clearly　distinct　and　different
from　each　other；　we　can　never　advance　farther；　by　our　utmost
scrutiny；　than　to　observe　this　diversity；　and；　by　an　obvious
reflection；　pronounce　one　thing　not　to　be　another。　Or　if
there　be　any　difficulty　in　these　decisions；　it　proceeds
entirely　from　the　undeterminate　meaning　of　words；　which　is
corrected　by　juster　definitions。　That　；
cannot　be　known；　let　the　terms　be　ever　so　exactly　defined；
without　a　train　of　reasoning　and　enquiry。　But　to　convince　us
of　this　proposition；　；　it　is　only　necessary　to　define　the
terms；　and　explain　injustice　to　be　a　violation　of　property。
This　proposition　is；　indeed；　nothing　but　a　more　imperfect
definition。　It　is　the　same　case　with　all　those　pretended
syllogistical　reasonings；　which　may　be　found　in　every　other
branch　of　learning；　except　the　sciences　of　quantity　and
number；　and　these　may　safely；　I　think；　be　pronounced　the
only　proper　objects　of　knowledge　and　demonstration。

　　　　　All　other　enquiries　of　men　regard　only　matter　of　fact
and　existence；　and　these　are　evidently　incapable　of
demonstration。　Whatever　　may　。　No　negation　of　a
fact　can　involve　a　contradiction。　The　non…existence　of　any
being；　without　exception；　is　as　clear　and　distinct　an　idea
as　its　existence。　The　proposition；　which　affirms　it　not　to
be；　however　false；　is　no　less　conceivable　and　intelligible；
than　that　which　affirms　it　to　be。　The　case　is　different　with
the　sciences；　properly　so　called。　Every　proposition；　which
is　not　true；　is　there　confused　and　unintelligible。　That　the
cube　root　of　64　is　equal　to　the　half　of　10；　is　a　false
proposition；　and　can　never　be　distinctly　conceived。　But　that
C/AESAR；　or　the　angel　G/ABRIEL；　or　any　being　never
existed；　may　be　a　false　proposition；　but　still　is　perfectly
conceivable；　and　implies　no　contradiction。

　　　　　The　existence；　therefore；　of　any　being　can　only　be
proved　by　arguments　from　its　cause　or　its　effect；　and　these
arguments　are　founded　entirely　on　experience。　If　we　reason
；　any　thing　may　appear　able　to　produce　any　thing。
The　falling　of　a　pebble　may；　for　aught　we　know；　extinguish
the　sun；　or　the　wish　of　a　man　control　the　planets　in　their
orbits。　It　is　only　experience；　which　teaches　us　the　nature
and　bounds　of　cause　and　effect；　and　enables　us　to　infer　the
existence　of　one　object　from　that　of　another。＇40＇　Such　is
the　foundation　of　moral　reasoning；　which　forms　the　greater
part　of　human　knowledge；　and　is　the　source　of　all　human
action　and　behaviour。

　　　　　Moral　reasonings　are　either　concerning　particular　or
general　facts。　All　deliberations　in　life　regard　the　former；
as　also　all　disquisitions　in　history；　chronology；　geography；
and　astronomy。

　　　　　The　sciences；　which　treat　of　general　facts；　are
politics；　natural　philosophy；　physic；　chemistry；　&c。　where
the　qualities；　causes　and　effects　of　a　whole　species　of
objects　are　enquired　into。

　　　　　Divinity　or　Theology；　as　it　proves　the　existence　of　a
Deity；　and　the　immortality　of　souls；　is　composed　partly　of
reasonings　concerning　particular；　partly　concerning　general
facts。　It　has　a　foundation　in　；　so　far　as　it　is
supported　by　experience。　But　its　best　and　most　solid
foundation　is　　and　divine　revelation。

　　　　　Morals　and　criticism　are　not　so　properly　objects　of　the
understanding　as　of　taste　and　sentiment。　Beauty；　whether
moral　or　natural；　is　felt；　more　properly　than　perceived。　Or
if　we　reason　concerning　it；　and　endeavour　to　fix　its
standard；　we　regard　a　new　fact；　to　wit；　the　general　tastes
of　mankind；　or　some　such　fact；　which　may　be　the　object　of
reasoning　and　enquiry。

　　　　　When　we　run　over　libraries；　persuaded　of　these
principles；　what　havoc　must　we　make？　If　we　take　in　our　hand
any　volume；　of　divinity　or　school　metaphysics；　for　instance；
let　us　ask；　　No。　　No。　Commit　it　then　to　the　flames：　For　it　can
contain　nothing　but　sophistry　and　illusion。
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　*　*　*　*
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　NOTES
＇1＇＇COPYRIGHT：　（c）　1995；　James　Fieser　（jfieser@utm。edu）；　all
rights　reserved。　Unaltered　copies　of　this　computer　text　file
may　be　freely　distribute　for　personal　and　classroom　use。
Alterations　to　this　file　are　permitted　only　for　purposes　of
computer　printouts；　although　altered　computer　text　files　may
not　circulate。　Except　to　cover　nominal　distribution　costs；
this　file　cannot　be　sold　without　written　permission　from　the
copyright　holder。　This　copyright　notice　supersedes　all
previous　notices　on　earlier　versions　of　this　text　file。　When
quoting　from　this　text；　please　use　the　following　citation：
；　ed。　James　Fieser　（Internet
Release；　1995）。


　　　　　EDITORIAL　CONVENTIONS：　letters　between　slashes　（e。g。；
H/UME）　designate　small　capitalization。　Letters　within
angled　brackets　（e。g。；　）　designate　italics。　Note
references　are　contained　within　square　brackets　（e。g。；　＇1＇）。
Original　pagination　is　contained　within　curly　brackets
（e。g。；　）。　Spelling　and　punctuation　have　not　been
modernized。　Printer's　errors　have　been　corrected　without
note。　Bracketed　comments　within　the　end　notes　are　the
editor's。　This　is　a　working　draft。　Please　report　errors　to
James　Fieser　（jfieser@utm。edu）。＇
　　　　　＇2＇This　is　not　intended　any　way　to　detract　from　the
merit　of　Mr。　L/OCKE；　who　was　really　a　great　philosopher　and
a　just　and　modest　reasoner。　It　is　only　meant　to　show　the
common　fate　of　such　abstract　philosophy。　＇This　note　was
removed　by　Hume　from　later　editions　of　the　。　
J。F。＇
　　　　　＇3＇That　faculty　by　which　we　discern　truth　and
falsehood；　and　that　by　which　we　perceive　vice　and　virtue；
had　long　been　confounded　with　each　other；　and　all　morality
was　supposed　to　be　built　on　external　an　immutable　relations
which；　to　every　intelligent　mind；　were　equally　invariable　as
any　proposition　concerning　quantity　or　number。　But　a　late
philosopher　＇Francis　Hutcheson＇　has　taught　us；　by　the　most
convincing　arguments；　that　morality　is　nothing　in　the
abstract　nature　of　things；　but　is　entirely　relative　to　the
sentiment　or　mental　taste　of　each　particular　being；　in　the
same　manner　as　the　distinctions　of　sweet　and　bitter；　hot　and
cold　arise　from　the　particular　feeling　of　each　sense　or
organ。　Moral　perceptions；　therefore；　ought　not　to　be　classed
w