history of philosophy-第46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！


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　the　nature　or　in　the
Notion　of　a　thing　is　tantamount　to　saying　that　it　is　true：　existence　is　directly　contained　in　the　Notion
of　God。　Hence　it　is　quite　true　to　say　of　Him　that　existence　pertains　of　necessity　to　Him。　There　is
implied　in　the　Notion　of　every　particular　thing　either　a　possible　or　a　necessary　existence　—　a
necessary　existence　in　the　Notion　of　God；　i。e。　of　the　absolutely　perfect　Being；　for　else　He　would
be　conceived　as　imperfect。”　（19）

Descartes　likewise　argues　after　this　manner：　“Problem：　to　prove　a　posteriori　from　the　mere
Notion　within　us　the　existence　of　God。　The　objective　reality　of　a　Notion　demands　a　cause　in　which
the　same　reality　is　not　merely　contained　objectively”　（as　in　the　finite）；　“but　formally”　（freely；
purely　for　itself；　outside　of　us）　“or　eminenter”　（as　original）。　（Axiom。）　“We　now　have　a　Notion　of
God；　but　His　objective　reality　is　neither　formally　nor　eminenter　contained　within　us；　and　it　can　thus
be　only　in　God　Himself。”　（20）　Consequently　we　see　that　with　Descartes　this　Idea　is　an
hypothesis。　Now　we　should　say　we　find　this　highest　Idea　in　us。　If　we　then　ask　whether　this　Idea
exists；　why；　this　is　the　Idea；　that　existence　is　asserted　with　it。　To　say　that　it　is　only　a　conception　is
to　contradict　the　meaning　of　this　conception。　But　here　it　is　unsatisfactory　to　find　that　the　conception
is　introduced　thus：　‘We　have　this　conception；’　and　to　find　that　it　consequently　appears　like　an
hypothesis。　In　such　a　case　it　is　not　proved　of　this　content　in　itself　that　it　determines　itself　into　this
unity　of　thought　and　Being。　In　the　form　of　God　no　other　conception　is　thus　here　given　than　that
contained　in　Cogito；　ergo　sum；　wherein　Being　and　thought　are　inseparably　bound　up　—　though
now　in　the　form　of　a　conception　which　I　possess　within　me。　The　whole　content　of　this　conception；
the　Almighty；　All…wise；　&c。；　are　predicates　which　do　not　make　their　appearance　until　later；　the
content　is　simply　the　content　of　the　Idea　bound　up　with　existence。　Hence　we　see　these
determinations　following　one　another　in　an　empirical　manner；　and　not　philosophically　proved　—
thus　giving　us　an　example　of　how　in　a　priori　metaphysics　generally　hypotheses　of　conceptions　are
brought　in；　and　these　become　objects　of　thought；　just　as　happens　in　empiricism　with　investigations；
observations；　and　experiences。

Descartes　then　proceeds：　“Mind　is　the　more　convinced　of　this　when　it　notices　that　it　discovers
within　itself　the　conception　of　no　other　thing　wherein　existence　is　necessarily　implied。　From　this　it
will　perceive　that　that　idea　of　highest　reality　is　not　imagined　by　it；　it　is　not　chimerical；　but　a　true　and
unalterable　fact　which　cannot　do　otherwise　than　exist；　seeing　that　existence　is　necessarily　involved
in　it。　Our　prejudices　hinder　us　from　apprehending　this　with　ease；　for　we　are　accustomed　to
distinguish　in　all　other　things　the　essence”　（the　Notion）　“from　the　existence。”　Respecting　the
assertion　that　thought　is　not　inseparable　from　existence；　the　common　way　of　talking　is　as　follows：
‘If　what　men　think　really　existed；　things　would　be　different。’　But　in　saying　this　men　do　not　take
into　account　that　what　is　spoken　of　in　this　way　is　always　a　particular　content；　and　that　in　it　the
essential　nature　of　the　finality　of　things　simply　signifies　the　fact　that　Notion　and　Being　are　separable。
But　how　can　one　argue　from　finite　things　to　the　infinite？　“This　Notion；”　Descartes　continues；　“is
furthermore　not　made　by　us。”　It　is　now　declared　to　be　an　eternal　truth　which　is　revealed　in　us。
“We　do　not　find　in　ourselves　the　perfections　which　are　contained　in　this　conception。　Thus　we　are
certain　that　a　first　cause　in　which　is　all　perfection；　i。e。；　God　as　really　existent；　has　given　them　to　us；
for　it　is　certain　to　us　that　from　nothing；　nothing　arises”　（according　to　Boehme　God　derived　the
material　of　the　world　from　Himself）；　“and　what　is　perfect　cannot　be　the　effect　of　anything
imperfect。　From　Him　we　must　thus　in　true　science　deduce　all　created　things。”　（21）　With　the　proof
of　the　existence　of　God　the　validity　of　and　evidence　for　all　truth　in　its　origin　is　immediately
established。　God　as　First　Cause　is　Being…for…self；　the　reality　which　is　not　merely　entity　or　existence
in　thought。　An　existence　such　as　this　first　cause　（which　is　not　what　we　know　as　a　thing）　rests　in　the
Notion　of　the　not…I；　not　of　each　determinate　thing　—　since　these　as　determinate　are　negations　—
but　only　in　the　Notion　of　pure　existence　or　the　perfect　cause。　It　is　the　cause　of　the　truth　of　ideas；
for　the　aspect　that　it　represents　is　that　of　their　Being。

d。　Fourthly；　Descartes　goes　on　to　assert：　“We　must　believe　what　is　revealed　to　us　by　God；　though
we　cannot　understand　it。　It　is　not　to　be　wondered　at；　since　we　are　finite；　that　there　is　in　God’s
nature　as　inconceivably　infinite；　what　passes　our　comprehension。”　This　represents　the　entrance　of
a　very　ordinary　conception。　Boehme　on　the　other　hand　says　（supra；　p。　212）：　‘The　mystery　of　the
Trinity　is　ever　born　within　us。’　Descartes；　however；　concludes：　“Hence　we　must　not　trouble
ourselves　with　investigations　respecting　the　infinite；　for　seeing　that　we　are　finite；　it　is　absurd　for　us
to　say　anything　about　it。”　（22）　This　matter　we　shall　not；　however；　enter　upon　at　present。

“Now　the　first　attribute　of　God　is　that　He　is　true　and　the　Giver　of　all　light；　it　is　hence　quite　contrary
to　His　nature　to　deceive　us。　Hence　the　light　of　nature　or　the　power　of　acquiring　knowledge　given
us　by　God　can　affect　no　object　which　is　not　really　true　in　as　far　as　it　is　affected　by　it”　（the　power
of　acquiring　knowledge）　“i。e。；　as　it　is　perceived　clearly　and　distinctly。”　We　ascribe　truth　to　God。
From　this　Descartes　goes　on　to　infer　the　universal　bond　which　exists　between　absolute　knowledge
and　the　objectivity　of　what　we　thus　know。　Knowledge　has　objects；　has　a　content　which　is　known；
we　call　this　connection　truth。　The　truth　of　God　is　just　this　unity　of　what　is　thought　by　the　subject　or
clearly　perceived；　and　external　reality　or　existence。　“Thereby　an　en