Читать книгу An Essay Concerning Human Understanding / Ein Versuch über den menschlichen Verstand. Auswahlausgabe - John Locke - Страница 31

Of Power

§ 1. THE Mind, being every day informed, by the Senses, of the alteration of those simple Ideas, it observes in things without; and taking notice how one comes to an end, and ceases to be, and another begins to exist, which was not before; reflecting also on what passes within it self, and observing a constant change of its Ideas, sometimes by the impression of outward Objects on the Senses, and sometimes by the Determination of its own choice; and concluding from what it has so constantly observed to have been, that the like Changes will for the future be made, in the same things, by like Agents, and by the like ways, considers in one thing the possibility of having any of its simple ideas changed, and in another the possibility of making that change; and so comes by that Idea which we call Power. Thus we say, Fire has a power to melt Gold, i. e. to destroy the consistency of its insensible parts, and consequently its hardness, and make it fluid; and Gold has a power to be melted […].

§ 2. Power thus considered is twofold, viz. as able to make, or able to receive any change: The one may be called Active, and the other Passive Power. Whether Matter be not wholly destitute of active Power, as its Author GOD is truly above all [238]passive Power; and whether the intermediate state of created Spirits be not that alone, which is capable of both active and passive Power, may be worth consideration. I shall not now enter into that Enquiry, my present Business being not to search into the original of Power, but how we come by the Idea of it. […]

[…]

§ 4. We are abundantly furnished with the Idea of passive Power, by almost all sorts of sensible things. In most of them we cannot avoid observing their sensible Qualities, nay their very Substances to be in a continual flux: And therefore with reason we look on them as liable still to the same Change. Nor have we of active Power (which is the more proper signification of the word Power) fewer instances. Since whatever Change is observed, the Mind must collect a Power somewhere, able to make that Change, as well as a possibility in the thing it self to receive it. But yet, if we will consider it attentively, Bodies, by our Senses, do not afford us so clear and distinct an Idea of active Power, as we have from reflection on the Operations of our Minds. For all Power relating to Action, and there being but two sorts of Action, whereof we have an Idea, viz. Thinking and Motion, let us consider whence we have the clearest Ideas of the Powers, which produce these Actions. 1. Of Thinking, Body affords us no Idea at all, it is only from Reflection that we have that: 2. Neither have we from Body any Idea of the beginning of Motion. A Body at rest affords us no Idea of [240]any active Power to move; and when it is set in motion it self, that Motion is rather a Passion, than an Action in it. […] The Idea of the beginning of motion, we have only from reflection on what passes in our selves, where we find by Experience, that barely by willing it, barely by a thought of the Mind, we can move the parts of our Bodies, which were before at rest. […]

§ 5. […] we find in our selves a Power to begin or forbear, continue or end several actions of our minds, and motions of our Bodies, barely by a thought or preference of the mind ordering, or as it were commanding the doing or not doing such or such a particular action. This Power which the mind has, thus to order the consideration of any Idea, or the forbearing to consider it; or to prefer the motion of any part of the body to its rest, and vice versâ in any particular instance is that which we call the Will. The actual exercise of that power, by directing any particular action, or its forbearance is that which we call Volition or Willing. The forbearance of that action, consequent to such order or command of the mind is called Voluntary. And whatsoever action is performed without such a thought of the mind is called Involuntary. […]

[…]

§ 7. Every one, I think, finds in himself a Power to begin or forbear, continue or put an end to several Actions in himself. From the consideration of the extent of this power of the mind over the actions of the Man, which every one finds in himself, arise the Ideas of Liberty and Necessity.

§ 8. […] so far as a man has a power to think, or not to think; to move, or not to move, according to the preference or [242]direction of his own mind, so far is a Man free. Where-ever any performance or forbearance are not equally in a Man’s power; where-ever doing or not doing, will not equally follow upon the preference of his mind directing it, there he is not Free, though perhaps the Action may be voluntary. So that the Idea of Liberty, is the Idea of a Power in any Agent to do or forbear any particular Action, according to the determination or thought of the mind, whereby either of them is preferr’d to the other; where either of them is not in the Power of the Agent to be produced by him according to his Volition, there he is not at Liberty, that Agent is under Necessity. So that Liberty cannot be, where there is no Thought, no Volition, no Will; but there may be Thought, there may be Will, there may be Volition, where there is no Liberty. A little Consideration of an obvious instance or two may make this clear.

§ 9. A Tennis-ball, whether in motion by the stroke of a Racket, or lying still at rest, is not by any one taken to be a free Agent. If we enquire into the Reason, we shall find it is, because we conceive not a Tennis-ball to think, and consequently not to have any Volition, or preference of Motion to rest, or vice versâ; and therefore has not Liberty, is not a free Agent; but all its both Motion and Rest, come under our Idea of Necessary, and are so call’d. Likewise a Man falling into the Water, (a Bridge breaking under him,) has not herein liberty, is not a free Agent. For though he has Volition, though he prefers his not falling to falling; yet the forbearance of that Motion not being in his Power, the Stop or Cessation of that Motion follows not upon his Volition; and therefore therein he is not free. So a Man [244]striking himself, or his Friend, by a Convulsive motion of his Arm, which it is not in his Power, by Volition or the direction of his Mind to stop, or forbear; no Body thinks he has in this Liberty; every one pities him, as acting by Necessity and Constraint.

§ 10. Again, suppose a Man be carried, whilst fast asleep, into a Room, where is a Person he longs to see and speak with; and be there locked fast in, beyond his Power to get out: he awakes, and is glad to find himself in so desirable Company, which he stays willingly in, i. e. preferrs his stay to going away. I ask, Is not this stay voluntary? I think, no Body will doubt it: and yet being locked fast in, ’tis evident he is not at liberty not to stay, he has not freedom to be gone. […]

§ 11. […] Voluntary then is not opposed to Necessary; but to Involuntary. For a Man may preferr what he can do, to what he cannot do; the State he is in, to its absence or change, though Necessity has made it in it self unalterable.

§ 12. As it is in the motions of the Body, so it is in the Thoughts of our Minds: where any one is such, that we have power to take it up, or lay it by, according to the preference of the Mind, there we are at liberty. A waking Man being under the necessity of having some Ideas constantly in his Mind, is not at liberty to think, or not to think; no more than he is at liberty, whether his Body shall touch any other, or no: But whether he will remove his Contemplation from one Idea to another, is many times in his choice; and then he is in respect of his Ideas, as much at liberty, as he is in respect of Bodies he rests on: He can at pleasure remove himself from one to another. […]

[246]§ 13. Where-ever Thought is wholly wanting, or the power to act or forbear according to the direction of Thought, there Necessity takes place. This in an Agent capable of Volition, when the beginning or continuation of any Action is contrary to that preference of his Mind, is called Compulsion; when the hind’ring or stopping any Action is contrary to his Volition, it is called Restraint. […]

§ 14. If this be so, (as I imagine it is,) I leave it to be considered, whether it may not help to put an end to that long agitated, and, I think, unreasonable, because unintelligible, Question, viz. Whether Man’s Will be free, or no. For if I mistake not, it follows, from what I have said, that the Question it self is altogether improper; and it is as insignificant to ask, whether Man’s Will be free, as to ask, whether his Sleep be Swift, or his Vertue square: Liberty being as little applicable to the Will, as swiftness of Motion is to Sleep, or squareness to Vertue. Every one would laugh at the absurdity of such a Question, as either of these: because it is obvious, that the modifications of motion belong not to sleep, nor the difference of Figure to Vertue: and when any one well considers it, I think he will as plainly perceive, that Liberty, which is but a power, belongs only to Agents, and cannot be an attribute or modification of the Will, which is also but a Power.

§ 15. Such is the difficulty of explaining, and giving clear notions of internal Actions by sounds, that I must here warn my Reader that Ordering, Directing, Chusing, Preferring, etc. [248]which I have made use of, will not distinctly enough express Volition, unless he will reflect on what he himself does, when he wills. For example, Preferring which seems perhaps best to express the Act of Volition, does it not precisely. For though a Man would preferr flying to walking, yet who can say he ever wills it? Volition, ’tis plain, is an Act of the Mind knowingly exerting that Dominion it takes it self to have over any part of the Man, by employing it in, or witholding it from any particular Action. And what is the Will, but the Faculty to do this? […]

[…]

§ 21. To return then to the Enquiry about Liberty, I think the Question is not proper, whether the Will be free, but whether a Man be free. Thus, I think,

1. That so far as any one can, by the direction or choice of his Mind, preferring the existence of any Action, to the non-existence of that Action, and, vice versâ, make it to exist, or not exist, so far he is free. […] For such a preferring of Action to its absence, is the willing of it: and we can scarce tell how to imagine any Being freer, than to be able to do what he wills. […]

§ 22. […] Concerning a Man’s Liberty there yet […] is raised this farther Question, Whether a Man be free to will; which, I think, is what is meant, when it is disputed, Whether the will be free. And as to that I imagine,

§ 23. 2. That Willing, or Volition being an Action, and Freedom consisting in a power of acting, or not acting, a Man in respect of willing, or the Act of Volition, when any Action in his [250]power is once proposed to his Thoughts, as presently to be done, cannot be free. […] For it is unavoidably necessary to prefer the doing, or forbearance, of an Action in a Man’s power, which is once so proposed to his thoughts: a Man must necessarily will the one, or the other of them, […].

[…]

§ 29. […] To the Question, what is it determines the Will? The true and proper Answer is, The mind. For that which determines the general power of directing, to this or that particular direction, is nothing but the Agent it self Exercising the power it has, that particular way. If this Answer satisfies not, ’tis plain the meaning of the Question, what determines the Will? is this, What moves the mind, in every particular instance, to determine its general power of directing, to this or that particular Motion or Rest? And to this I answer, The motive, for continuing in the same State or Action, is only the present satisfaction in it; The motive to change, is always some uneasiness: nothing setting us upon the change of State, or upon any new Action, but some uneasiness. This is the great motive that works on the Mind to put it upon Action, which for shortness sake we will call determining of the Will, which I shall more at large explain.

§ 30. But in the way to it, it will be necessary to premise, that […] the will or power of Volition is conversant about nothing, but our own Actions; terminates there; and reaches no farther; and that Volition is nothing, but that particular determination of the mind, whereby, barely by a thought, the mind endeavours to give rise, continuation, or stop to any Action, [252]which it takes to be in its power. This well considered plainly shews, that the Will is perfectly distinguished from Desire, which in the very same Action may have a quite contrary tendency from that which our Wills sets us upon. […]

§ 31. To return then to the Enquiry, what is it that determines the Will in regard to our Actions? And that […] is not, as is generally supposed, the greater good in view: But some (and for the most part the most pressing) uneasiness a Man is at present under. […]

[…]

§ 33. Good and Evil, present and absent, ’tis true, work upon the mind: But that which immediately determines the Will, from time to time, to every voluntary Action, is the uneasiness of desire, fixed on some absent good, either negative, as indolency to one in pain; or positive, as enjoyment of pleasure. […]

[…]

§ 35. […] that good, the greater good, though apprehended and acknowledged to be so, does not determine the will, until our desire, raised proportionably to it, makes us uneasy in the want of it. […] Let a man be ever so well perswaded of the advantages of virtue, that it is as necessary to a Man, who has any great aims in this World, or hopes in the next, as food to life: yet till he hungers and thirsts after righteousness; till he feels an uneasiness in the want of it, his will will not be determin’d to any action in pursuit of this confessed greater good; but any other uneasiness he feels in himself, shall take place, and carry [254]his will to other actions. On the other side, let a Drunkard see, that his Health decays, his Estate wastes; Discredit and Diseases, and the want of all things, even of his beloved Drink, attends him in the course he follows: yet the returns of uneasiness to miss his Companions; the habitual thirst after his Cups, at the usual time, drives him to the Tavern, though he has in his view the loss of health and plenty, and perhaps of the joys of another life: the least of which is no inconsiderable good, but such as he confesses, is far greater, than the tickling of his palate with a glass of Wine, or the idle chat of a soaking Club. ’Tis not for want of viewing the greater good: for he sees, and acknowledges it, and in the intervals of his drinking hours, will take resolutions to pursue the greater good; but when the uneasiness to miss his accustomed delight returns, the greater acknowledged good loses its hold, and the present uneasiness determines the will to the accustomed action […].

[…]

§ 41. If it be farther asked, what ’tis moves desire? I answer happiness and that alone. Happiness and Misery are the names of two extremes, the utmost bounds whereof we know not. […] But of some degrees of both, we have very lively impressions, made by several instances of Delight and Joy on the one side; and Torment and Sorrow on the other; which, for shortness sake, I shall comprehend under the names of Pleasure and Pain […].

§ 42. […] Now because Pleasure and Pain are produced in us, by the operation of certain Objects, either on our Minds or [256]our Bodies; and in different degrees: therefore what has an aptness to produce Pleasure in us, is that we call Good, and what is apt to produce Pain in us, we call Evil, for no other reason, but for its aptness to produce Pleasure and Pain in us, wherein consists our Happiness and Misery. […]

§ 43. Though this be that, which is called good and evil; and all good be the proper object of Desire in general; yet all good, even seen, and confessed to be so, does not necessarily move every particular Man’s desire; but only that part, or so much of it, as is consider’d, and taken to make a necessary part of his happiness. […]

§ 44. This, I think, any one may observe in himself, and others, that the greater visible good does not always raise Men’s desires in proportion to the greatness, it appears, and is acknowledged to have: Though every little trouble moves us, and sets us on work to get rid of it. The reason whereof is evident from the nature of our happiness and misery it self. All present pain, whatever it be, makes a part of our present misery: But all absent good does not at any time make a necessary part of our present happiness, nor the absence of it make a part of our misery. If it did, we should be constantly and infinitely miserable; there being infinite degrees of happiness, which are not in our possession. All uneasiness therefore being removed, a moderate portion of good serves at present to content Men; and a few degrees of Pleasure in a succession of ordinary Enjoyments make up a happiness, wherein they can be satisfied. […]

[258][…]

§ 46. […] by a due consideration and examining any good proposed, it is in our power, to raise our desires, in a due proportion to the value of that good, whereby in its turn, and place, it may come to work upon the will, and be pursued. […]

§ 47. […] the mind having in most cases, as is evident in Experience, a power to suspend the execution and satisfaction of any of its desires, and so all, one after another, is at liberty to consider the objects of them; examine them on all sides, and weigh them with others. In this lies the liberty Man has; and from the not using of it right comes all that variety of mistakes, errors, and faults which we run into, in the conduct of our lives, and our endeavours after happiness; whilst we precipitate the determination of our wills, and engage too soon before due Examination. […]

§ 48. […] were we determined by any thing but the last result of our own Minds, judging of the good or evil of any action, we were not free, the very end of our Freedom being, that we might attain the good we chuse. […]

[…]

§ 51. As therefore the highest perfection of intellectual nature, lies in a careful and constant pursuit of true and solid happiness; so the care of our selves, that we mistake not imaginary for real happiness, is the necessary foundation of our liberty. The stronger ties, we have, to an unalterable pursuit of happiness in general, which is our greatest good, and which as such our desires always follow, the more are we free from any [260]necessary determination of our will to any particular action, and from a necessary compliance with our desire, set upon any particular, and then appearing preferable good, till we have duly examin’d, whether it has a tendency to, or be inconsistent with our real happiness; and therefore till we are as much inform’d upon this enquiry, as the weight of the matter, and the nature of the case demands, we are by the necessity of prefering and pursuing true happiness as our greatest good, obliged to suspend the satisfaction of our desire in particular cases.

[…]

53. […] the forbearance of a too hasty compliance with our desires, the moderation and restraint of our Passions, so that our Understandings may be free to examine, and reason unbiassed give its judgment, being that, whereon a right direction of our conduct to true Happiness depends; ’tis in this we should employ our chief care and endeavours. In this we should take pains to suit the relish of our Minds to the true intrinsick good or ill, that is in things; and not permit an allow’d or supposed possible great and weighty good to slip out of our thoughts, without leaving any relish, any desire of it self there, till, by a due consideration of its true worth, we have formed appetites in our Minds suitable to it, and made our selves uneasie in the want of it, or in the fear of losing it. […]

[…]

§ 55. […] I think, that the Philosophers of old did in vain enquire, whether Summum bonum consisted in Riches, or [262]bodily Delights, or Virtue, or Contemplation: And they might have as reasonably disputed, whether the best Relish were to be found in Apples, Plumbs, or Nuts; and have divided themselves into Sects upon it. For as pleasant Tastes depend not on the things themselves, but on their agreeableness to this or that particular Palate, wherein there is great variety: So the greatest Happiness consists, in the having those things, which produce the greatest Pleasure; and in the absence of those, which cause any disturbance, any pain. Now these, to different Men, are very different things. […]

§ 56. These things duly weigh’d, will give us, as I think, a clear view into the state of humane Liberty. Liberty ’tis plain consists in a Power to do, or not to do; to do, or forbear doing as we will. This cannot be deny’d. But this seeming to comprehend only the actions of a Man consecutive to volition, it is farther enquired, whether he be at Liberty to will, or no? and to this it has been answered, that in most cases a Man is not at Liberty to forbear the act of volition; he must exert an act of his will, whereby the action proposed, is made to exist, or not to exist. But yet there is a case wherein a Man is at Liberty in respect of willing, and that is the chusing of a remote Good as an end to be pursued. Here a Man may suspend the act of his choice from being determined for or against the thing proposed, till he has examined, whether it be really of a nature in it self and consequences to make him happy, or no. For when he has once chosen it, and thereby it is become a part of his [264]Happiness, it raises desire, and that proportionably gives him uneasiness, which determines his will, and sets him at work in pursuit of his choice on all occasions that offer. And here we may see how it comes to pass, that a Man may justly incur punishment, though it be certain that in all the particular actions that he wills, he does, and necessarily does will that, which he then judges to be good. For though his will be always determined by that, which is judg’d good by his Understanding, yet it excuses him not: Because, by a too hasty choice of his own making, he has imposed on himself wrong measures of good and evil; which however false and fallacious, have the same influence on all his future conduct, as if they were true and right. He has vitiated his own Palate, and must be answerable to himself for the sickness and death that follows from it. The eternal Law and Nature of things must not be alter’d to comply with his ill-order’d choice. If the neglect or abuse of the Liberty he had, to examine what would really and truly make for his Happiness, misleads him, the miscarriages that follow on it, must be imputed to his own election. He had a Power to suspend his determination: It was given him, that he might examine, and take care of his own Happiness, and look that he were not deceived. […]

What has been said, may also discover to us the Reason, why Men in this World prefer different things, and pursue Happiness by contrary Courses. But yet since Men are always constant, and in earnest, in matter of Happiness and Misery, the Question still remains, How Men come often to prefer the [266]worse to the better; and to chuse that, which, by their own Confession, has made them miserable.

[…]

§ 58. […] as to present Happiness and Misery, when that alone comes into consideration, and the consequences are quite removed, a Man never chuses amiss; he knows what best pleases him, and that, he actually prefers. Things in their present enjoyment are what they seem; the apparent and real good are, in this case, always the same. For the Pain or Pleasure being just so great, and no greater, than it is felt, the present Good or Evil is really so much as it appears. And therefore were every Action of ours concluded within it self, and drew no Consequences after it, we should undoubtedly never err in our choice of good; we should always infallibly prefer the best. […]

[…]

§ 61. […] But because not only present Pleasure and Pain, but that also which is apt by its efficacy, or consequences, to bring it upon us at a distance, is a proper Object of our desires, and apt to move a Creature, that has foresight; therefore things also that draw after them Pleasure and Pain, are considered as Good and Evil.

§ 62. The wrong Judgment that misleads us, and makes the Will often fasten on the worse side, lies in misreporting upon the various Comparisons of these. […]

§ 63. […] when we compare present Pleasure or Pain with future, (which is usually the case in most important [268]determinations of the Will) we often make wrong Judgments of them, taking our measures of them in different positions of distance. Objects, near our view, are apt to be thought greater, than those of a larger size, that are more remote: And so it is with Pleasures and Pains, the present is apt to carry it, and those at a distance have the disadvantage in the Comparison. […] The future loses its just proportion, and what is present, obtains the preference as the greater. […]

§ 64. The cause of our judging amiss, when we compare our present Pleasure or Pain with future, seems to me to be the weak and narrow Constitution of our Minds. We cannot well enjoy two Pleasures at once, much less any Pleasure almost, whilst Pain possesses us. […] at any rate, we desire to be rid of the present Evil, which we are apt to think nothing absent can equal; because under the present Pain we find not our selves capable of any the least degree of Happiness. […] our whole Endeavours and Thoughts are intent, to get rid of the present Evil, before all things, as the first necessary condition to our Happiness, let what will follow. Nothing, as we passionately think, can exceed, or almost equal, the uneasiness that sits so heavy upon us. And because the abstinence from a present Pleasure, that offers it self, is a Pain, nay, oftentimes a very great one, the desire being inflamed by a near and tempting Object; ’tis no wonder that that operates after the same manner Pain does, [270]and lessens in our Thoughts, what is future; and so forces us, as it were, blindfold into its embraces.

[…]

§ 68. […] But, which way ever it be, either by placing it where really it is not, or by neglecting the means, as not necessary to it, when a Man misses his great end Happiness, he will acknowledge he judg’d not right. That which contributes to this mistake is the real or suppos’d unpleasantness of the actions, which are the way to this end; it seeming so preposterous a thing to Men, to make themselves unhappy in order to Happiness, that they do not easily bring themselves to it.

§ 69. The last enquiry therefore concerning this matter is, Whether it be in a Man’s power to change the pleasantness, and unpleasantness, that accompanies any sort of action? and to that, it is plain in many cases he can. Men may and should correct their palates, and give relish to what either has, or they suppose has none. The relish of the mind is as various as that of the Body, and like that too may be alter’d; and ’tis a mistake to think, that Men cannot change the displeasingness, or indifferency, that is in actions, into pleasure and desire, if they will do but what is in their power. A due consideration will do it in some cases; and practice, application, and custom in most. […]

§ 70. […] But whatever false notions, or shameful neglect of what is in their power, may put Men out of their way to [272]Happiness, and distract them, as we see, into so different courses of life, this yet is certain, that Morality, established upon its true Foundations, cannot but determine the Choice in any one, that will but consider: and he that will not be so far a rational Creature, as to reflect seriously upon infinite Happiness and Misery, must needs condemn himself, as not making that use of his Understanding he should. The Rewards and Punishments of another Life, which the Almighty has established, as the Enforcements of his Law, are of weight enough to determine the Choice, against whatever Pleasure or Pain this Life can shew, when the eternal State is considered but in its bare possibility, which no Body can make any doubt of. He that will allow exquisite and endless Happiness to be but the possible consequence of a good Life here, and the contrary state the possible Reward of a bad one, must own himself to judge very much amiss, if he does not conclude, That a vertuous Life, with the certain expectation of everlasting Bliss, which may come, is to be preferred to a vicious one, with the fear of that dreadful state of Misery, which ’tis very possible may overtake the guilty; or at best the terrible uncertain hope of Annihilation. […]

[…]