太子爷小说网 > 英语电子书 > the six enneads >

第167节

the six enneads-第167节

小说: the six enneads 字数: 每页4000字

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!



 is either not later but concomitant or; being essential to the existence; is precedent。 In our view; Unity and Number are precedent。     11。 It may be suggested that the decad is nothing more than so many henads; admitting the one henad why should we reject the ten? As the one is a real existence why not the rest? We are certainly not compelled to attach that one henad to some one thing and so deprive all the rest of the means to unity: since every existent must be one thing; the unity is obviously common to all。 This means one principle applying to many; the principle whose existence within itself we affirmed to be presupposed by its manifestation outside。     But if a henad exists in some given object and further is observed in something else; then that first henad being real; there cannot be only one henad in existence; there must be a multiplicity of henads。     Supposing that first henad alone to exist; it must obviously be lodged either in the thing of completest Being or at all events in the thing most completely a unity。 If in the thing of completest Being; then the other henads are but nominal and cannot be ranked with the first henad; or else Number becomes a collection of unlike monads and there are differences among monads 'an impossibility'。 If that first henad is to be taken as lodged in the thing of completest unity; there is the question why that most perfect unity should require the first henad to give it unity。     Since all this is impossible; then; before any particular can be thought of as a unit; there must exist a unity bare; unrelated by very essence。 If in that realm also there must be a unity apart from anything that can be called one thing; why should there not exist another unity as well?     Each particular; considered in itself; would be a manifold of monads; totalling to a collective unity。 If however Nature produces continuously… or rather has produced once for all… not halting at the first production but bringing a sort of continuous unity into being; then it produces the minor numbers by the sheer fact of setting an early limit to its advance: outgoing to a greater extent… not in the sense of moving from point to point but in its inner changes… it would produce the larger numbers; to each number so emerging it would attach the due quantities and the appropriate thing; knowing that without this adaptation to Number the thing could not exist or would be a stray; something outside; at once; of both Number and Reason。     12。 We may be told that unity and monad have no real existence; that the only unity is some definite object that is one thing; so that all comes to an attitude of the mind towards things considered singly。     But; to begin with; why at this should not the affirmation of Being pass equally as an attitude of mind so that Being too must disappear? No doubt Being strikes and stings and gives the impression of reality; but we find ourselves just as vividly struck and impressed in the presence of unity。 Besides; is this attitude; this concept itself; a unity or a manifold? When we deny the unity of an object; clearly the unity mentioned is not supplied by the object; since we are saying it has none; the unity therefore is within ourselves; something latent in our minds independently of any concrete one thing。     'An objector speaks…' 〃But the unity we thus possess comes by our acceptance of a certain idea or impression from things external; it is a notion derived from an object。 Those that take the notion of numbers and of unity to be but one species of the notions held to be inherent in the mind must allow to numbers and to unity the reality they ascribe to any of the others; and upon occasion they must be met; but no such real existence can be posited when the concept is taken to be an attitude or notion rising in us as a by…product of the objects; this happens when we say 〃This;〃 〃What;〃 and still more obviously in the affirmations 〃Crowd;〃 〃Festival;〃 〃Army;〃 〃Multiplicity。〃 As multiplicity is nothing apart from certain constituent items and the festival nothing apart from the people gathered happily at the rites; so when we affirm unity we are not thinking of some Oneness self…standing; unrelated。 And there are many other such cases; for instance 〃on the right;〃 〃Above〃 and their opposites; what is there of reality about this 〃On…the…right…ness〃 but the fact that two different positions are occupied? So with 〃Above〃: 〃Above〃 and 〃Below〃 are a mere matter of position and have no significance outside of this sphere。     Now in answer to this series of objections our first remark is that there does exist an actuality implicit in each one of the relations cited; though this is not the same for all or the same for correlatives or the same for every reference to unity。     But these objections must be taken singly。     13。 It cannot reasonably be thought that the notion of unity is derived from the object since this is physical… man; animal; even stone; a presentation of that order is something very different from unity 'which must be a thing of the Intellectual'; if that presentation were unity; the mind could never affirm unity unless of that given thing; man; for example。     Then again; just as in the case of 〃On the right〃 or other such affirmation of relation; the mind does not affirm in some caprice but from observation of contrasted position; so here it affirms unity in virtue of perceiving something real; assuredly the assertion of unity is not a bare attitude towards something non…existent。 It is not enough that a thing be alone and be itself and not something else: and that very 〃something else〃 tells of another unity。 Besides Otherness and Difference are later; unless the mind has first rested upon unity it cannot affirm Otherness or Difference; when it affirms Aloneness it affirms unity…with…aloneness; thus unity is presupposed in Aloneness。     Besides; that in us which asserts unity of some object is first a unity; itself; and the object is a unity before any outside affirmation or conception。     A thing must be either one thing or more than one; manifold: and if there is to be a manifold there must be a precedent unity。 To talk of a manifold is to talk of what has something added to unity; to think of an army is to think of a multitude under arms and brought to unity。 In refusing to allow the manifold to remain manifold; the mind makes the truth clear; it draws a separate many into one; either supplying a unity not present or keen to perceive the unity brought about by the ordering of the parts; in an army; even; the unity is not a fiction but as real as that of a building erected from many stones; though of course the unity of the house is more compact。     If; then; unity is more pronounced in the continuous; and more again where there is no separation by part; this is clearly because there exists; in real existence; something which is a Nature or Principle of Unity。 There cannot be a greater and less in the non…existent: as we predicate Substance of everything in sense; but predicate it also of the Intellectual order and more strictly there… since we hold that the greater and more sovereign substantiality belongs to the Real Beings and that Being is more marked in Substance; even sensible Substance; than in the other Kinds… so; finding unity to exhibit degree of more and less; differing in sense…things as well as in the Intellectual; we must similarly admit that Unity exists under all forms though still by reference; only; to that primal Unity。     As Substance and Real Being; despite the participation of the sensible; are still of the Intellectual and not the sensible order; so too the unity observed present in things of sense by participation remains still an Intellectual and to be grasped by an Intellectual Act。 The mind; from a thing present to it; comes to knowledge of something else; a thing not presented; that is; it has a prior knowledge。 By this prior knowledge it recognises Being in a particular being; similarly when a thing is one it can affirm unity as it can affirm also duality and multiplicity。     It is impossible to name or conceive anything not making one or two or some number; equally impossible that the thing should not exist without which nothing can possibly be named or conceived; impossible to deny the reality of that whose existence is a necessary condition of naming or affirming anything; what is a first need; universally; to the formation of every concept and every proposition must exist before reasoning and thinking; only as an existent can it be cited to account for the stirring of thought。 If Unity is necessary to the substantial existence of all that really is… and nothing exists which is not one… Unity must precede Reality and be its author。 It is therefore; an existent Unity; not an existent that develops Unity; considered as Being…with…Unity it would be a manifold; whereas in the pure Unity there is no Being save in so far as Unity attends to producing it。 As regards the word 〃This;〃 it is nat a bare word; it affirms an indicated existence without using the name; it tells of a certain presence; whether a substance or some other existent; any This must be significant; it is no attitude of the mind applying itself to a non…existent; the This show

返回目录 上一页 下一页 回到顶部 1 0

你可能喜欢的