shorter logic-第51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!
indifference。 This gives the correlation of Force and its Expression。
The relationship of whole and part is the immediate and therefore unintelligent
(mechanical) relation—a revulsion of self…identity into mere variety。 Thus we pass
from the whole to the parts; and from the parts to the whole: in the one we forget
its opposition to the other; while each on its own account; at one time the whole;
at another the parts; is taken to be an independent existence。 In other words;
when the parts are declared to subsist in the whole; and the whole to consist of
the parts; we have either member of the relation at different times taken to be
permanently subsistent; while the other is non…essential。 In its superficial form the
mechanical nexus consists in the parts being independent of each other and of the
whole。
This relation may be adopted for the progression ad infinitum; in the case of the
divisibility of matter: and then it becomes an unintelligent alternation with the two
sides。 A thing at one time is taken as a whole: then we go on to specify the parts:
this specifying is forgotten; and what was a part is regarded as a whole: then the
specifying of the part comes up again; and so on for ever。 But if this infinity be
taken as the negative which it is; it is the negative self…relating element in the
correlation — Force; the self…identical whole; or immanency — which yet
supersedes this immanency and gives itself expression; and conversely the
expression which vanishes and returns into Force。
Force; notwithstanding this infinity; is also finite: for the content; or the one and
the same of the Force and its out…putting; is this identity at first only for the
observer: the two sides of the relation are not yet; each on its own account; the
concrete identity of that one and same; not yet the totality。 For one another they
are therefore different; and the relationship is a finite one。 Force consequently
requires solicitation from without: it works blindly: and on account of this
defectiveness of form; the content is also limited and accidental。 It is not yet
genuinely identical with the form: not yet is it as a notion and an end; that is to
say; it is not intrinsically and actually determinate。 This difference is most vital;
but not easy to apprehend: it will assume a clearer formulation when we reach
Design。 If it be overlooked; it leads to the confusion of conceiving God as Force;
a confusion from which Herder's God especially suffers。
It is often said that the nature of Force itself is unknown and only its
manifestation apprehended。 But; in the first place; it may be replied; every article
in the import of Force is the same as what is specified in the Exertion: and the
explanation of a phenomenon by a Force is a mere tautology。 What is supposed
to remain unknown; therefore; is really nothing but the empty form of
reflection…into…self; by which alone the Force is distinguished from the Exertion …
and that form too is something familiar。 It is a form that does not make the
slightest addition to the content and to the law; which have to be discovered from
the phenomenon alone。 Another assurance always given is that to speak of forces
implies no theory as to their nature: and that being so; it is impossible to see why
the form of Force has been introduced into the sciences at all。 In the second place
the nature of Force is undoubtedly unknown: we are still without any necessity
binding and connecting its content together in itself; as we are without necessity in
the content; in so far as it is expressly limited and hence has its character by
means of another thing outside it。
§136n1
Compared with the immediate relation of whole and parts; the relation between force and its
putting…forth may be considered infinite。 In it that identity of the two sides is realised; which in the
former relation only existed for the observer。 The whole; though we can see that it consists of
parts; ceases to be a whole when it is divided: whereas force is only shown to be force when it
exerts itself; and in its exercise only comes back to itself。 The exercise is only force once more。
Yet; on further examination even this relation will appear finite; and finite in virtue of this mediation:
just as; conversely; the relation of whole and parts is obviously finite in virtue of its immediacy。 The
first and simplest evidence for the finitude of the mediated relation of force and its exercise is; that
each and every force is conditioned and requires something else than itself for its subsistence。 For
instance; a special vehicle of magnetic force; as is well known; is iron; the other properties of
which; such as its colour; specific weight; or relation to acids; are independent of this connection
with magnetism。 The same thing is seen in all other forces; which from one end to the other are
found to be conditioned and mediated by something else than themselves。 Another proof of the
finite nature of force is that it requires solicitation before it can put itself forth。 That through which
the force is solicited; is itself another exertion of force; which cannot put itself forth without similar
solicitation。 This brings us either to a repetition of the infinite progression; or to a reciprocity of
soliciting and being solicited。 In either case we have no absolute beginning of motion。 Force is not
as yet; like the final cause; inherently self…determining: the content is given to it as determined; and
force; when it exerts itself; is; according to the phrase; blind in its working。 That phrase implies the
distinction between abstract force…manifestation and teleological action。
§ 136n2
The oft…repeated statement; that the exercise of the force and not the force itself admits of being
known; must be rejected as groundless。 It is the very essence of force to manifest itself; and thus in
the totality of manifestation; conceived as a law; we at the same time discover the force itself。 And
yet this assertion that force in its own self is unknowable betrays a well…grounded presentiment
that this relation is finite。 The several manifestations of a force at first meet us in indefinite
multiplicity; and in their isolation seem accidental: but; reducing this multiplicity to its inner unity;
which we term force; we see that the apparently contingent is necessary; by recognising the law
that rules it。 But the different forces themselves are a multiplicity again; and in their mere
juxtaposition seem to be contingent。 Hence in empirical physics; we speak of the forces of gravity;
magnetism; electricity; etc。; and in psychology of the forces of memory; imagination; will; and all
the other faculties。 All this multiplicity again excites a craving to know these different forces as a
single whole; nor would this craving be appeased even if the several forces were traced back to
one common primary force。 Such a primary force would be really no more than an empty
abstraction; with as little content as the abstract thing…in…itself。 And besides this; the correlation of
force and manifestation is essentially a mediated correlation (of reciprocal dependence); and it
must therefore contradict the notion of force to view it as primary or resting on itself。
Such being the case with the nature of force; though we may consent to let the world be called a
manifestation of divine forces; we should object to have God himself viewed as a mere force。 For
force is after all a subordinate and finite category。 At the so…called renaissance of the sciences;
when steps were taken to trace the single phenomena of nature back to underlying forces; the
Church branded the enterprise as impious。 The argument of the Church was as follows。 If it be the
forces of gravitation; of vegetation; etc。; which occasion the movements of the heavenly bodies;
the growth of plants; etc。; there is nothing left for divine providence; and God sinks to the level of
a leisurely onlooker; surveying this play of forces。 The students of nature; it is true; and Newton
more than others; when they employed the reflective category of force to explain natural
phenomena; have expressly pleaded that the honour of God; as the Creator and Governor of the
world; would not thereby be impaired。 Still the logical issue of this explanation by means of forces
is that the inferential understanding proceeds to fix each of these forces; and to maintain them in
their finitude as ultimate。 And contrasted with this de…infinitised world of independent forces and
matters; the only terms in which it is possible still to describe God will present him in the abstract
infinity of an unknowable supreme Being in some other world far away。 This Is precisely the
position of materialism; and of modern 'freethinking'; whose theology ignores what God is and
restricts itself to the mere fact that he is。 In this dispute therefore the Church and the religious mind
have to a certain extent the right on their side。 The finite forms of understanding certainly fail to
fulfil the conditions for a knowledge either of Nature or of the formations in the world of Mind as
they truly are。 Yet on the other si