But, in order to show

But, in order to show Post Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 9:45:45 +0000
But since I had not as yet sufficient knowledge to enable me to treat of these in the same manner as of the rest, that is to say, by deducing effects from their causes, and by showing from what elements and in what manner Nature must produce them, I remained satisfied with the supposi tion that God formed the body of man wholly like to one of ours, as well in the external shape of the members as in the internal con formation of the organs, of the same matter with that I had de- scribed, and at first placed in it no Rational Soul, nor any other principle, in room of the Vegetative or Sensitive Soul, beyond kindling in the heart one of those fires without light, such as I had already described, and which I thought was not different from the heat in hay that has been heaped together before it is dry, or that which causes fermentation in new wines before they are run clear of the fruit. For, when I examined the kind of functions which might, as consequences of this supposition, exist in this body, I found precisely all those which may exist in us independently of all power of thinking, and consequently without being in any measure owing to the soul; in other words, to that part of us which is distinct from the body, and of which it has been said above that the nature distinctively consists in thinking, functions in which the animals void of Reason may be said wholly to resemble us; but among which I could not discover any of those that, as dependent on thought alone, belong to us as men, while, on the other hand, I did afterwards discover these as soon as I supposed God to have created a Rational Soul, and to have annexed it to this body in a particular manner which I described. But, in order to show how I there handled this matter, I mean here to give the explication of the motion of the heart and arteries, which, as the first and most general motion observed in animals, will afford the means of readily determining what should be thought of all the rest.

Autor of the post: Undefined

redOrbit.com -- Science, Health, Technology Videos
redOrbit.com is a science, health, and technology news and information portal. Learn something new today!
redorbit.com

Recent post:

1. - It is directly asserted only Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:50:27 +0000
The cognitive consciousness affirms the object directly, which, as we saw, stands indirectly as the symbol of the eject. At best, then, the eject is only indirectly asserted in the consciousness which defines the object. It is directly asserted only by the metaphysical consciousness in which the active self approaches its world through its own agency.

Autor of the post: Undefined

2. - I do not mean Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:34:08 +0000
This approach gives rise to a metaphysical reaction, an experience of the frustration of agency which takes the form usually of a more or less violent rebuff. The cogni- tion, as we saw, develops as a means of avoiding this rebuff, but the rebuff itself is related directly to a metaphysical object, an eject which the bunch of perceptions only sym- bolizes, but to which the rebuff has a direct reference. I do not mean to say that the dog, for example, has any idea of causation, or that he regards the cognized object as merely the symbol of a reality that does not appear.

Autor of the post: Undefined

3. - The merging of distinctions Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:19:43 +0000
What I do mean is that as a hard fact it is not ire cause of his bunch of perceptions which the dog takes to be real and is afraid of. It is rather the immediate cause of his unpleasant feelings when he experiences the rebuff, which he fears and avoids, though he does not clearly distinguish it from the cause of his perceptions. The merging of distinctions and the taking of the symbol as the real, even when the real is all the while meant, is a characteristic of the spontaneous consciousness.

Autor of the post: Undefined

4. - Now the world of physical Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:06:03 +0000
The physical eject stands, then, as the immediate cause of certain metaphysical experiences of the self. It is unpicturable except in terms of its objective symbol, but it is known to exist as the symbolized cause of certain experiences of the self. Now the world of physical science is a world of exist- ences corresponding to these symbolized physical ejects.

Autor of the post: Undefined

5. - They are the ejects Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:46:29 +0000
Physics, as we have seen, resolves its world into phenomena and underlying grounds or substances. The phenomena are the symbols of the underlying substances or forces, while these are the hidden but uniform and stable forces which are causally related to the phenomenal effects. They are the ejects of the physical world, and the grounds on which science holds them to be necessary are identical with the grounds on which the reflective consciousness asserts the existence of physical ejects.

Autor of the post: Undefined

6. - That the physical eject exists Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:30:48 +0000
The reflective basis of our knowledge here is an inference which takes the form of the rationally necessary. But this inference rests on the more intimate and direct certitude of the spontaneous consciousness. That the physical eject exists as real we have the united testimony of both spontaneity and reflec- tion.

Autor of the post: Undefined

7. - And being but an ordinary Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:20:20 +0000
The definition of the character of this ejective existence is a matter of inference and analogy. To the dog its nature will express itself mainly in its dogged obstinacy in blocking his way. And being but an ordinary dog, his idea of the nature of the cause of his troubles will contain a great many kyno-morphic elements, just as that of the plain man will reveal elements which are anthropo-morphic.

Autor of the post: Undefined

8. - But in con- nection Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:02:55 +0000
It is only in the critical reflection of physics that we find these elements carefully eliminated and the characteriza- tion reduced to the minimum of the necessary. What, then, does modern physics say regarding the nature of these physical ejects? As to their nature as things in themselves, it professes to know nothing. But in con- nection with its scientific aims it is obliged to regard them as the ground-causes of the phenomenal world.

Autor of the post: Undefined

9. - If force, we then emphasize Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:52:12 +0000
And while it is in a state of unstable equilibrium on the question whether these physical existences are to be regarded as matter, force, ether, or something beyond its present ken, there is no uncertainty as to whether some ground- causes of a physical character are essential; nor is there any doubt as to what the most fundamental attributes of these must be. If we call them matter, we put the empha- sis on persistence, inertia and stability. If force, we then emphasize agency and causal energy.

Autor of the post: Undefined

10. - And it does this all Post Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:38:27 +0000
If ether, we accent the desideratum of a perfect medium for motion. 1 Physics thus defines its ejects in terms of strict inferential neces- sity, as persistent inert and stable substances ; as mechani- cally acting causes and as perfect media for the initiation and propagation of motions. And it does this all consist- ently with its general profession of ignorance as to the nature of things.

Autor of the post: Undefined