shorter logic-第92部分

快捷操作: 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! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


form　of　the　specific　notion　in　general；　so　that　in　this　way　its　genus　and　its
universal　character　or　speciality　are　explicitly　stated；　we　have　the　Definition。　The
materials　and　the　proof　of　Definition　are　procured　by　means　of　the　Analytical
method　（§　227）。　The　specific　character　however　is　expected　to　be　a　'mark'　only：
that　is　to　say　it　is　to　be　in　behoof　only　of　the　purely　subjective　cognition　which　is
external　to　the　object。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　229n

Definition　involves　the　three　organic　elements　of　the　notion：　the　universal　or　proximate　genus
（genus　proximum）；　the　particular　or　specific　character　of　the　genus　（qualitas　specifica）；　and　the
individual；　or　object　defined。　The　first　question　that　definition　suggests；　is　where　it　comes　from。
The　general　answer　to　this　question　is　to　say；　that　definitions　originate　by　way　of　analysis。　This　will
explain　how　it　happens　that　people　quarrel　about　the　correctness　of　proposed　definitions；　for　here
everything　depends　on　what　perceptions　we　started　from；　and　what　points　of　view　we　had　before
our　eyes　in　so　doing。　The　richer　the　object　to　be　defined　is；　that　is；　the　more　numerous　are　the
aspects　which　it　offers　to　our　notice；　the　more　various　are　the　definitions　we　may　frame　of　it。　Thus
there　are　quite　a　host　of　definitions　of　life；　of　the　state；　etc。　Geometry；　on　the　contrary；　dealing　with
a　theme　so　abstract　as　space；　has　an　easy　task　in　giving　definitions。　Again；　in　respect　of　the　matter
or　contents　of　the　objects　defined；　there　is　no　constraining　necessity　present。　We　are　expected　to
admit　that　space　exists；　that　there　are　plants；　animals；　etc。；　nor　is　it　the　business　of　geometry；
botany；　etc。；　to　demonstrate　that　the　objects　in　question　necessarily　are。　This　very　circumstance
makes　the　synthetic　method　of　cognition　as　little　suitable　for　philosophy　as　the　analytical：　for
philosophy　has　above　all　things　to　leave　no　doubt　of　the　necessity　of　its　objects。　And　yet　several
attempts　have　been　made　to　introduce　the　synthetic　method　into　philosophy。　Thus　Spinoza；　in
particular；　begins　with　definitions。　He　says；　for　instance；　that　substance　is　the　causa　sui。　His
definitions　are　unquestionably　a　storehouse　of　the　most　speculative　truth；　but　it　takes　the　shape　of
dogmatic　assertions。　The　same　thing　is　also　true　of　Schelling。　



　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　230

（b）　The　statement　of　the　second　element　of　the　notion；　i。e。　of　the　specific
character　of　the　universal　as　particularising；　is　given　by　Division　in　accordance
with　some　external　consideration。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　230n

Division　we　are　told　ought　to　be　complete。　That　requires　a　principle　or　ground　of　division　so
constituted　that　the　division　based　upon　it　embraces　the　whole　extent　of　the　region　designated　by
the　definition　in　general。　But；　in　division；　there　is　the　further　requirement　that　the　principle　of　it　must
be　borrowed　from　the　nature　of　the　object　in　question。　If　this　condition　be　satisfied；　the　division　is
natural　and　not　merely　artificial；　that　is　to　say；　arbitrary。　Thus；　in　zoology；　the　ground　of　division
adopted　in　the　classification　of　the　mammalia　is　mainly　afforded　by　their　teeth　and　claws。　That　is　so
far　sensible；　as　the　mammals　themselves　distinguish　themselves　from　one　another　by　these　parts　of
their　bodies　back　to　which　therefore　the　general　type　of　their　various　classes　is　to　be　traced。　In
every　case　the　genuine　division　must　be　controlled　by　the　notion。　To　that　extent　a　division；　in　the
first　instance；　has　three　members：　but　as　particularity　exhibits　itself　as　double；　the　division　may　go
to　the　extent　even　of　four　members。　In　the　sphere　of　mind　trichotomy　is　predominant；　a
circumstance　which　Kant　has　the　credit　for　bringing　into　notice　



　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Theorem
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　231

＇c＇　In　the　concrete　individuality；　where　the　mere　unanalysed　quality　of　the
definition　is　regarded　as　a　correlation　of　elements；　the　object　is　a　synthetic　nexus
of　distinct　characteristics。　It　is　a　Theorem。　Being　different；　these　characteristics
possess　but　a　mediated　identity。　To　supply　the　materials；　which　form　the　middle
terms；　is　the　office　of　Construction：　and　the　process　of　mediation　itself；　from
which　cognition　derives　the　necessity　of　that　nexus；　is　the　Demonstration。　

As　the　difference　between　the　analytical　and　synthetic　methods　is　commonly
stated；　it　seems　entirely　optional　which　of　the　two　we　employ。　If　we　assume；　to
start　with；　the　concrete　thing　which　the　synthetic　method　presents　as　a　result；　we
can　analyse　from　it　as　consequences　the　abstract　propositions　which　formed　the
pre…suppositions　and　the　material　for　the　proof。　Thus；　algebraical　definitions　of
curved　lines　are　theorems　in　the　method　of　geometry。　Similarly　even　the
Pythagorean　theorem；　if　made　the　definition　of　a　right…angled　triangle；　might　yield
to　analysis　those　propositions　which　geometry　had　already　demonstrated　on　is
behoof。　The　optionalness　of　either　method　is　due　to　both　alike　starting　from　an
external　presupposition。　So　far　as　the　nature　of　the　notion　is　concerned；　analysis　is
prior；　since　it　has　to　raise　the　given　material　with　its　empirical　concreteness　into
the　form　of　general　abstractions；　which　may　then　be　set　in　the　front　of　the
synthetic　method　as　definitions。　

That　these　methods；　however　indispensable　and　brilliantly　successful　in　their　own
province；　are　unserviceable　for　philosophical　cognition；　is　self…evident。　They　have
presuppositions；　and　their　style　of　cognition　is　that　of　understanding；　proceeding
under　the　canon　of　formal　identity。　In　Spinoza；　who　was　especially　addicted　to
the　use　of　the　geometrical　method；　we　are　at　once　struck　by　its　characteristic
formalism。　Yet　his　ideas　were　speculative　in　spirit；　whereas　the　system　of　Wolf；
who　carried　the　method　out　to　the　height　of　pedantry；　was　even　in　subject…matter
a　metaphysic　of　the　understanding。　

The　abuses　which　these　methods　with　their　formalism　once　led　to　in　philosophy
and　science　have　in　modern　times　been　followed　by　the　abuses　of　what　is　called
'Construction'。　Kant　brought　into　vogue　the　phrase　that　mathematics　'construes'
its　notions。　All　that　was　meant　by　the　phrase　was　that　mathematics　has　not　to　do
with　notions；　but　with　abstract　qualities　of　sense…perceptions。　The　name
'Construction　（construing）　of　notions'　has　since　been　given　to　a　sketch　or
statement　of　sensible　attributes　which　were　picked　up　from　perception；　quite
guiltless　of　any　influence　of　the　notion；　and　to　the　additional　formalism　of
classifying　scientific　and　philosophical　objects　in　a　tabular　form　on　some
presupposed　rubric；　but　in　other　respects　at　the　fancy　and　discretion　of　the
observer。　In　the　background　of　all　this；　certainly；　there　is　a　dim　consciousness　of
the　Idea；　of　the　unity　of　the　notion　and　objectivity　…　a　consciousness　too　that　the
idea　is　concrete。　But　that　play　of　what　is　styled　'construing'　is　far　from　presenting
this　unity　adequately；　a　unity　which　is　none　other　than　the　notion　properly　so
called：　a　perception　is　as　little　the　concreteness　of　reason　and　the　idea。　

Another　point　calls　for　notice。　Geometry　works　with　t