Читать книгу An Essay Concerning Human Understanding / Ein Versuch über den menschlichen Verstand. Auswahlausgabe - John Locke - Страница 10

Other Considerations concerning innate Principles, both speculative and practical

§ 1. HAD those, who would perswade us, that there are innate Principles, not taken them together in gross; but considered, separately, the parts, out of which those Propositions are made, [70]they would not, perhaps, have been so forward to believe they were innate. Since, if the Ideas, which made up those Truths, were not, it was impossible, that the Propositions, made up of them, should be innate, or our Knowledge of them be born with us. For if the Ideas be not innate, there was a time, when the Mind was without those Principles; and then, they will not be innate, but be derived from some other Original. For, where the Ideas themselves are not, there can be no Knowledge, no Assent, no Mental or Verbal Propositions about them.

§ 2. If we will attentively consider newborn Children, we shall have little Reason, to think, that they bring many Ideas into the World with them. For, bating, perhaps, some faint Ideas, of Hunger, and Thirst, and Warmth, and some Pains, which they may have felt in the Womb, there is not the least appearance of any setled Ideas at all in them; especially of Ideas, answering the Terms, which make up those universal Propositions, that are esteemed innate Principles. One may perceive how, by degrees, afterwards, Ideas come into their Minds; and that they get no more, nor no other, than what Experience, and the Observation of things, that come in their way, furnish them with; which might be enough to satisfy us, that they are not Original Characters, stamped on the Mind.

§ 3. It is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be, is certainly (if there be any such) an innate Principle. But can any one think, or will any one say, that Impossibility and Identity, are two innate Ideas? Are they such as all Mankind have, and [72]bring into the World with them? And are they those, that are the first in Children, and antecedent to all acquired ones? If they are innate, they must needs be so. Hath a child an Idea of Impossibility and Identity, before it has of White or Black; Sweet or Bitter? And is it from the Knowledge of this Principle, that it concludes, that Wormwood rubb’d on the Nipple, hath not the same Taste, that it used to receive from thence? Is it the actual Knowledge of impossibile est idem esse, et non esse, that makes a Child distinguish between its Mother and a Stranger; or, that makes it fond of the one, and fly the other? […] The Names Impossibility and Identity, stand for two Ideas, so far from being innate, or born with us, that I think it requires great Care and Attention, to form them right in our Understandings. […]

§ 4. If Identity (to instance that alone) be a native Impression; and consequently so clear and obvious to us, that we must needs know it even from our Cradles; I would gladly be resolved, by one of Seven, or Seventy Years old, Whether a Man, being a Creature, consisting of Soul and Body, be the same Man, when his Body is changed? Whether Euphorbus and Pythagoras, having had the same Soul, were the same Man, though they lived several Ages asunder? Nay, Whether the Cock too, which had the same Soul, were not the same with both of them? Whereby, perhaps, it will appear, that our Idea of sameness, is not so settled and clear, as to deserve to be thought innate in us. For if those innate Ideas, are not clear and distinct, so as to be universally known, and naturally agreed [74]on, they cannot be Subjects of universal, and undoubted Truths; but will be the unavoidable Occasion of perpetual Uncertainty. For, I suppose, every one’s Idea of Identity, will not be the same, that Pythagoras, and Thousands others of his Followers, have: And which then shall be true? Which innate? Or are there two different Ideas of Identity, both innate?

§ 5. Nor let any one think, that the Questions, I have here proposed, about the Identity of Man, are bare, empty Speculations; which if they were, would be enough to shew, That there was in the Understandings of Men no innate Idea of Identity. He, that shall, with a little Attention, reflect on the Resurrection, and consider, that Divine Justice shall bring to Judgment, at the last Day, the very same Persons, to be happy or miserable in the other, who did well or ill in this Life, will find it, perhaps, not easy to resolve with himself, what makes the same Man, or wherein Identity consists: And will not be forward to think he, and every one, even Children themselves, have naturally a clear Idea of it.

§ 6. Let us examine that Principle of Mathematicks, viz. That the whole is bigger than a part. This, I take it, is reckon’d amongst innate Principles. I am sure it has as good a Title, as any, to be thought so; which yet, no Body can think it to be, when he considers the Ideas it comprehends in it, Whole and Part, are perfectly Relative; but the Positive Ideas, to which they properly and immediately belong, are Extension and Number, of which alone, Whole and Part, are Relations. So that if Whole and Part are innate Ideas, Extension and Number must be so too, it being impossible to have an Idea of a [76]Relation, without having any at all of the thing to which it belongs, and in which it is founded. Now, Whether the Minds of Men have naturally imprinted on them the Ideas of Extension and Number, I leave to be considered by those, who are the Patrons of innate Principles.

§ 7. That God is to be worshipped, is, without doubt, as great a Truth as any that can enter into the mind of Man, and deserves the first place amongst all practical Principles. But yet, it can by no means be thought innate, unless the Ideas of God and Worship, are innate. That the Idea, the Term Worship stands for, is not in the Understanding of Children, and a Character stamped on the Mind in its first Original, I think, will be easily granted, by any one, that considers how few there be, amongst grown Men, who have a clear and distinct Notion of it. […]

§ 8. If any Idea can be imagin’d innate, the Idea of God may, of all others, for many Reasons be thought so; since it is hard to conceive, how there should be innate Moral Principles, without an innate Idea of a Deity: Without a Notion of a Law-maker, it is impossible to have a Notion of a Law, and an Obligation to observe it. Besides the Atheists, taken notice of amongst the Ancients, and left branded upon the Records of History, hath not Navigation discovered, in these latter Ages, whole Nations, […] amongst whom there was to be found no Notion of a God, no Religion. […] These are Instances of Nations where uncultivated Nature has been left to it self, without the help of Letters, and Discipline, and the Improvements of Arts and Sciences. But there are others to be found, who have enjoy’d [78]these in a very great measure, who yet, for want of a due application of their thoughts this way, want the Idea, and Knowledge of God. […] And, perhaps, if we should, with attention, mind the Lives, and Discourses of People not so far off, we should have too much Reason to fear, that many, in more civilized Countries, have no very strong, and clear Impressions of a Deity upon their Minds; and that the Complaints of Atheism, made from the Pulpit, are not without Reason. […]

§ 9. But had all Mankind, every where, a Notion of a God, (whereof yet History tells us the contrary) it would not from thence follow, that the Idea of him was innate. For, though no Nation were to be found without a Name, and some few dark Notions of him; yet that would not prove them to be natural Impressions on the Mind, no more than the Names of Fire, or the Sun, Heat, or Number, do prove the Ideas they stand for, to be innate, because the Names of those things, and the Ideas of them, are so universally received, and known amongst Mankind. Nor, on the contrary, is the want of such a Name, or the absence of such a Notion out of Men’s Minds, any Argument against the Being of a God, any more, than it would be a Proof, that there was no Load-stone in the World, because a great part of Mankind, had neither a Notion of any such thing, nor a Name for it; […]

[…]

§ 12. Indeed it is urged, That it is suitable to the goodness of God, to imprint, upon the Minds of Men, Characters and Notions of himself, and not to leave them in the dark, and [80]doubt, in so grand a Concernment; and also by that means, to secure to himself the Homage and Veneration, due from so intelligent a Creature as Man; and therefore he has done it.

This Argument, if it be of any Force, will prove much more than those, who use it in this case, expect from it. For if we may conclude, that God hath done for Men, all that Men shall judge is best for them, because it is suitable to his goodness so to do, it will prove, not only, that God has imprinted on the Minds of Men an Idea of himself; but that he hath plainly stamp’d there, in fair Characters, all that Men ought to know, or believe of him, all that they ought to do in obedience to his Will; and that he hath given them a Will and Affections conformable to it. This, no doubt, every one will think it better for Men, than that they should, in the dark, grope after Knowledge. […] But the Goodness of God hath not been wanting to Men without such Original Impressions of Knowledge, or Ideas stamped on the Mind: since he hath furnished Man with those Faculties, which will serve for the sufficient discovery of all things requisite to the end of such a Being; and I doubt not but to shew, that a Man by the right use of his natural Abilities, may, without any innate Principles, attain the Knowledge of a God, and other things that concern him. God having endued Man with those Faculties of knowing which he hath, was no more obliged by his Goodness, to implant those innate Notions in his Mind, than that having given him Reason, Hands, and Materials, he should build him Bridges, or Houses; which [82]some People in the World, however of good parts, do either totally want, or are but ill provided of, as well as others are wholly without Ideas of God, and Principles of Morality; or at least have but very ill ones. The reason in both cases being, That they never employ’d their Parts, Faculties, and Powers, industriously that way, but contented themselves with the Opinions, Fashions, and Things of their Country, as they found them, without looking any farther. […]

[…]

§ 14. Can it be thought, that the Ideas Men have of God, are the Characters, and Marks of Himself, engraven in their minds by his own finger, when we see, that in the same Country, under one and the same Name, Men have far different, nay, often contrary and inconsistent Ideas, and conceptions of him? Their agreeing in a Name, or Sound, will scarce prove an innate Notion of Him.

[…]

§ 16. […] ’Tis as certain, that there is a God, as that the opposite Angles, made by the intersection of two strait Lines, are equal. There was never any rational Creature, that set himself sincerely to examine the truth of these Propositions, that could fail to assent to them: Though yet it be past doubt, that there are many Men, who having not applied their Thoughts that way, are ignorant both of the one and the other. If any one think fit to call this (which is the utmost of its extent) universal Consent, such an one I easily allow: But such an universal Consent [84]as this, proves not the Idea of God, no more than it does the Idea of such Angles, innate.

§ 17. Since then though the knowledge of a GOD, be the most natural discovery of humane Reason, yet the Idea of him, is not innate, as, I think, is evident from what has been said; I imagine there will be scarce any other Idea found, that can pretend to it. […] I must own, as far as I can observe, I can find none, and would be glad to be informed by any other.

§ 18. I confess, there is another Idea, which would be of general use for Mankind to have, as it is of general talk as if they had it; and that is the Idea of Substance, which we neither have, nor can have, by Sensation or Reflection. If Nature took care to provide us any Ideas, we might well expect it should be such, as by our own Faculties we cannot procure to our selves: But we see on the contrary, that since by those ways, whereby other Ideas are brought into our Minds, this is not, We have no such clear Idea at all, and therefore signify nothing by the word Substance, but only an uncertain supposition of we know not what; (i. e. of something whereof we have no particular distinct positive) Idea, which we take to be the substratum, or support, of those Ideas we do know.

[…]

§ 20. […] If there be any innate Ideas, any Ideas, in the mind, which the mind does not actually think on; they must be lodg’d in the memory, and from thence must be brought into view by Remembrance; i. e. must be known, when they are [86]remembred, to have been perceptions in the mind before, unless Remembrance can be without Remembrance. For to remember is to perceive any thing with memory, or with a consciousness, that it was known or perceived before: without this, whatever Idea comes into the mind is new, and not remembred: This consciousness of its having been in the mind before, being that, which distinguishes Remembring from all other ways of Thinking. […] whatever Idea being not actually in view, is in the mind, is there only by being in the memory; and if it be not in the memory, it is not in the mind; and if it be in the memory, it cannot by the memory be brought into actual view, without a perception that it comes out of the memory, which is this, that it had been known before, and is now remembred. […] By this it may be tried, whether there be any innate Ideas in the mind before impression from Sensation or Reflection. I would fain meet with the Man, who when he came to the use of reason, or at any other time remembred any of them: And to whom, after he was born, they were never new. If any one will say, there are Ideas in the mind, that are not in the memory; I desire him to explain himself, and make what he says intelligible.

[…]

§ 22. To conclude, some Ideas forwardly offer themselves to all Men’s Understandings; and some sorts of Truths result from any Ideas, as soon as the mind puts them into Propositions: Other Truths require a train of Ideas placed in order, a due comparing of them, and deductions made with attention, before they can be discovered, and assented to. Some of the [88]first sort, because of their general and easy reception, have been mistaken for innate: But the truth is, Ideas and Notions are no more born with us, than Arts and Sciences; though some of them, indeed, offer themselves to our Faculties, more readily than others; and therefore are more generally received. […]

[…]

§ 24. When Men have found some general Propositions that could not be doubted of, as soon as understood, it was, I know, a short and easy way to conclude them innate. This being once received, it eased the lazy from the pains of search, and stopp’d the enquiry of the doubtful, concerning all that was once styled innate: And it was of no small advantage to those who affected to be Masters and Teachers, to make this the Principle of Principles, That principles must not be questioned: For having once established this Tenet, That there are innate Principles, it put their Followers upon a necessity of receiving some Doctrines as such; which was to take them off from the use of their own Reason and Judgment, and put them upon believing and taking them upon trust, without farther examination: In which posture of blind Credulity, they might be more easily governed by, and made useful to some sort of Men, who had the skill and office to principle and guide them. Nor is it a small power it gives one Man over another, to have the Authority to be the Dictator of Principles, and Teacher of unquestionable Truths; and to make a Man swallow that for an innate Principle, which may serve to his purpose, who teacheth them. Whereas had they examined the ways, whereby Men came to [90]the knowledge of many universal Truths, they would have found them to result in the minds of Men, from the being of things themselves, when duly considered; and that they were discovered by the application of those Faculties, that were fitted by Nature to receive and judge of them, when duly employ’d about them.

§ 25. To shew how the Understanding proceeds herein, is the design of the following Discourse […]. Wherein I warn the Reader not to expect undeniable cogent demonstrations, unless I may be allow’d the Privilege, not seldom assumed by others, to take my Principles for granted; and then, I doubt not, but I can demonstrate too. All that I shall say for the Principles I proceed on, is, that I can only appeal to Mens own unprejudiced Experience, and Observation, whether they be true, or no. […]