Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

relations. Einstein's frequent mention of the observer's point of view has led to a confusion of relativity with subjectivity; but in every case the observer could be replaced by some other recording instrument. Moreover, for Einstein the observer, even in a psychological sense, does not necessarily differ in kind from other parts of the spacetime continuum. Mind, like matter, is space-time or nothing. From certain points of view, however, his whole position is characterized by a selective relativity. It is relative in fact, if not in form, to the highest velocity we know, that of light. It is relative inevitably to the fact that our observations must be made on, and from, the Earth. But of still greater significance for philosophy, the Einsteinian view of the world, like the behavioristic view of the soul, is relative to the mathematical or measuring approach of science. From these points of view the theory of physical relativity probably presents an approximately accurate description of an important aspect of reality.

We seem to be ready for a thoroughly relativistic philosophy. Reality is a complex of relations. Entities are relational configurations whose nature and boundaries are relative to the point of view. Such reality and such entities exhibit permanent quantitative characteristics. They exhibit also creativity, originality, development, design. This aspect is most evident to introspection and intuition, which relationships are no more psychological than metaphysical. Knowledge is not a function peculiar to that portion of reality we call human, although man most readily recognizes it himself and in other entities which his crude senses represent as most analogous to himself. Receptive knowledge is taking account of the differentiations in one's environment in such a way as to retain a corresponding set of differentiations within one's own complex of relations. In this way both quantity and quality consist of relations. The most evidently relative are the so-called

primary qualities. This is indicated by the inconceivable example of a universal uniform variation. It is said that if absolutely all velocities were suddenly reduced to half their present rate, or all things to half their present size, we should never know the difference. They say truly, for there would be no difference. Such a uniform variation is no variation at all. Likewise, the secondary qualities are but systems of differentiation. If your perceived colorscheme varies systematically from mine, it does not vary at all. Yet qualities of this sort,which are introspective appreciations, cannot be reduced to quantity, although the same set of relations seen from a different point of view and in a somewhat different total situation, appears as quantity. The validity of the qualitative aspect is suggested by the fact that all the wisdom which the method of physics and behaviorism can acquire, can be communicated entire to the congenitally blind man, but can never enable him to understand or appreciate the quality red. The colors correspond to differentiations in certain complex situations which include eyes. The epistemological significance lies in the theory that the system or form of the relations or differentiations constitutes quality. Except for other relative considerations, such as empathy, the Venus of Melos is just as beautiful in statuette as in heroic size-it is her form that counts.

I shall neglect a consideration of the relativity of value for a final observation concerning the value of relativity. First, with respect to accuracy. If Ptolemy, Copernicus, and Einstein each had said, "Relative to my point of view, to the data at my disposal, the most probable explanation of the world is the following," each would have spoken an eternal verity. Moreover, that attitude would have discouraged their disciples from burning at the stake those who would bring forward new data. The relativistic spirit is death to censoriousness, dogmatism, and such sectarian

ism as is seen in religion and psychology today and in the way many scientists accept or reject Einstein. In ethics and religion, for how many millions of the most enlightened lives must absolutism answer! Without the support of the absolutistic attitude of mind, crusades, holy wars, inquisitions, and pogroms would at least have caused conscientious hesitation on the part of their devoutly sincere perpetrators. Nothing is more encouraging for fanaticism, or more discouraging for sustained effort, than so-called absolute ideals, which, for all their dialectical and revelational justification, are intuitively known to be unattainable, and somehow untrue of the real world. The result is jugglery in the moral life, or a consistency which is worse because sanctioned by fear which is maintained by an ignorance. enforced at the hands of absolutism. Relativity goes forward with the conviction that the relative ideals of the present are attainable at least in that part of their essence which requires that they shall change and develop with increasing experience and knowledge. Relativity says that no ideal that can be known in the present is good enough for the future. Moreover, my ideal is never good enough for another man. This all means that collectively and individually we must help discover our own ideals, and, because they are relative, act vigorously upon them in order that their relativity may become more and more inclusive, true of more and more reality, ever adapting them to the actual situations of which they must form parts.

In this day, when no man can take all learning for his province, cooperation, the sharing of points of view, is necessary for progress. Since things are essentially relative, the best policy is to see a thing in as many of its relations as possible. In philosophy the absolute played the vicious role of the lotus, lulling to sleep in a dreamy nothingness those who might have been courageous searchers for new points of view. In science the absolute has, for

the same reason, delayed discoveries for centuries. Once the earth was believed flat or at rest, man could be roused from his lethargy only by the dogged insistence of circumstance in the form of a few men who for truth's sake would risk the absolute's hell.

The relativistic attitude does not lead to scepticism. The relativist knows that only by action on the basis of present knowledge, with a full awareness of its relative character, will he discover new facts, and arrive at more comprehensive, and therefore more useful, generalizations. The believer in the absolute hesitates to act from fear of his having failed to comprehend the absolute. The relativist knows that there is no awful absolute; knows that action must be based upon the relative; knows that the world is an inexhaustible stream of increasingly interesting relations which will blend each individual personality in an ever greater harmony with other personalities and the rest of reality.

"New times demand new measures and new men;
The world advances, and in time outgrows
The laws that in our fathers' day were best;
And doubtless, after us, some purer scheme
Will be shaped out by wiser ones than we,
Made wiser by the steady growth of truth."

THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY.

-Lowell.

W. A. SHIMER.

HEGEL AND FREUD

I

T

HE unconscious self is postulated by Freud and is an integral element in his psychology, but it seems to me to be a contradiction in terms. It may therefore be worth while to attempt to find a substitute. Such a term must be valid, and, if Freud's system is a complete system, it must be demanded by the other terms which constitute the system.

Certain determinations of the mind are said to arise out of the Unconscious and again to be repressed into it when the historical description of the event would be "there was not, but now is" and "there was, but now is not." The Unconscious is that into which these determinations sink, and out of which they arise. Further, "the Unconscious" means, I think, a collection of unconscious states so that Freud is not involved in the fallacy of positing a form which is nothing except the totality of its content. But if he succeeds in avoiding this fallacy the alternative is that he must predicate something of the unconscious states and this is impossible, for a state of the mind can be experienced only by the conscious mind, or, rather, is a modification of consciousness. What has been said in this paragraph is not designed to be additional proof of the invalidity of "unconscious self": it is intended to make more acceptable the proposition that "we must predicate Nothing of the unconscious self" and thereby to indicate

« AnteriorContinuar »