PREFACE
SUPPOSINGthatTruthisawoman—whatthen?
Istherenotgroundforsuspectingthatallphilosophers,insofarastheyhavebeendogmatists,havefailedtounderstandwomen—thattheterribleseriousnessandclumsyimportunitywithwhichtheyhaveusuallypaidtheiraddressestoTruth,havebeenunskilledandunseemlymethodsforwinningawoman?
Certainlyshehasneverallowedherselftobewon;
andatpresenteverykindofdogmastandswithsadanddiscouragedmien—IF,indeed,itstandsatall!
Fortherearescofferswhomaintainthatithasfallen,thatalldogmaliesontheground—naymore,thatitisatitslastgasp.
Buttospeakseriously,therearegoodgroundsforhopingthatalldogmatizinginphilosophy,whateversolemn,whateverconclusiveanddecidedairsithasassumed,mayhavebeenonlya
고귀한
noblepuerilismandtyronism;andprobablythetimeisathandwhenitwillbeonceandagainunderstoodWHAThasactuallysufficedforthe
기초로
basisofsuchimposingandabsolute철학적
philosophicaledificesasthedogmatistshavehithertoreared:perhapssomepopular
미신
superstitionofimmemorialtime(suchasthesoul-superstition,which,intheformofsubject-andego-superstition,hasnotyetceaseddoingmischief):
perhapssomeplayuponwords,a
속임수
deceptiononthepartofgrammar,oranaudaciousgeneralizationofveryrestricted,verypersonal,veryhuman—all-too-humanfacts.Thephilosophyofthedogmatists,itistobehoped,wasonlyapromiseforthousandsofyearsafterwards,aswasastrologyinstillearliertimes,intheserviceofwhichprobablymorelabour,gold,acuteness,andpatiencehavebeenspentthanonany
실제
actualsciencehitherto:weowetoit,andtoits"super-terrestrial"pretensionsinAsiaandEgypt,thegrandstyleofarchitecture.
Itseemsthatinordertoinscribethemselvesupontheheartofhumanitywitheverlastingclaims,allgreatthingshavefirsttowanderabouttheearthasenormousandawe-inspiringcaricatures:
dogmaticphilosophyhasbeenacaricatureofthiskind—for
들어
instance,theVedantadoctrineinAsia,andPlatonisminEurope.Letusnotbeungratefultoit,althoughitmustcertainlybeconfessedthattheworst,themosttiresome,andthemostdangerousoferrorshithertohasbeenadogmatisterror—namely,Plato'sinventionofPureSpiritandtheGoodinItself.
Butnowwhenithasbeensurmounted,whenEurope,ridofthisnightmare,canagaindrawbreath
자유롭게
freelyandatleastenjoyahealthier—sleep,we,WHOSEDUTYISWAKEFULNESSITSELF,aretheheirsofallthestrengthwhichthestruggleagainstthiserrorhasfostered.Itamountedtotheveryinversionoftruth,andthedenialofthePERSPECTIVE—the
근본적인
fundamentalcondition—oflife,tospeakofSpiritandtheGoodasPlatospokeofthem;indeedonemightask,asaphysician:
"Howdidsuchamaladyattackthatfinestproductofantiquity,Plato?
Hadthe
사악한
wickedSocratesreallycorruptedhim?WasSocratesafterallacorrupterofyouths,anddeservedhishemlock?"
ButthestruggleagainstPlato,or—tospeakplainer,andforthe"people"—thestruggleagainsttheecclesiasticaloppressionofmillenniumsofChristianity(FORCHRISTIANITYISPLATONISMFORTHE"PEOPLE"),producedinEuropeamagnificenttensionofsoul,suchashadnotexistedanywherepreviously;
withsuchatenselystrainedbowonecannowaimatthefurthestgoals.
Asamatteroffact,theEuropeanfeelsthistensionasastateofdistress,andtwiceattemptshavebeenmadeingrandstyletounbendthebow:
oncebymeansofJesuitism,andthesecondtimebymeansofdemocraticenlightenment—which,withtheaidoflibertyofthepressandnewspaper-reading,might,infact,bringitaboutthatthespiritwouldnotsoeasilyfinditselfin"distress"!
(TheGermansinventedgunpowder—allcredittothem!
buttheyagainmadethingssquare—theyinventedprinting.)
Butwe,whoareneitherJesuits,nordemocrats,norevensufficientlyGermans,weGOODEUROPEANS,andfree,VERYfreespirits—wehaveitstill,allthedistressofspiritandallthe
긴장
tensionofitsbow!Andperhapsalsothe
화살표
arrow,theduty,and,whoknows?THEGOALTOAIMAT....
장
CHAPTERI.PREJUDICESOFPHILOSOPHERS1.
TheWilltoTruth,whichistotemptustomanya
위험한
hazardousenterprise,thefamousTruthfulnessofwhichallphilosophershavehithertospokenwithrespect,whatquestionshasthisWilltoTruthnotlaidbeforeus!Whatstrange,perplexing,questionablequestions!
Itisalreadyalongstory;
yetitseemsasifitwerehardlycommenced.
Isitanywonderifweatlastgrowdistrustful,losepatience,andturnimpatientlyaway?
ThatthisSphinxteachesusatlasttoaskquestionsourselves?
WHOisitreallythatputsquestionstoushere?
WHATreallyisthis"WilltoTruth"inus?
InfactwemadealonghaltatthequestionastotheoriginofthisWill—untilatlastwecametoanabsolutestandstillbeforeayetmore
근본적인
fundamentalquestion.WeinquiredabouttheVALUEofthisWill.
Grantedthatwewantthetruth:
WHYNOTRATHERuntruth?
And
불확실성
uncertainty?Evenignorance?
Theproblemofthevalueoftruthpresenteditselfbeforeus—orwasitwewhopresentedourselvesbeforetheproblem?
WhichofusistheOedipushere?
WhichtheSphinx?
Itwouldseemtobearendezvousofquestionsandnotesofinterrogation.
Andcoulditbebelievedthatitatlastseemstousasiftheproblemhadneverbeenpropoundedbefore,asifwewerethefirsttodiscernit,getasightofit,andRISKRAISINGit?
Forthereisriskinraisingit,perhapsthereisnogreaterrisk.
2.
"HOWCOULDanythingoriginateoutofitsopposite?
Forexample,truthoutoferror?
ortheWilltoTruthoutofthewilltodeception?
orthegenerousdeedoutofselfishness?
orthepuresun-brightvisionofthewisemanoutofcovetousness?
Suchgenesisisimpossible;
whoeverdreamsofitisafool,nay,worsethanafool;
thingsofthehighestvaluemusthaveadifferentorigin,anoriginofTHEIRown—inthistransitory,seductive,illusory,paltryworld,inthis
혼란
turmoilofdelusionandcupidity,theycannothavetheirsource.ButratherinthelapofBeing,intheintransitory,intheconcealedGod,inthe'Thing-in-itself—THEREmustbetheirsource,andnowhereelse!"—Thismodeof
추론
reasoningdisclosesthetypicalprejudicebywhichmetaphysiciansofalltimescanberecognized,thismodeofvaluationisatthebackofalltheirlogicalprocedure;throughthis"belief"oftheirs,theyexertthemselvesfortheir"knowledge,"forsomethingthatisintheendsolemnlychristened"theTruth."
The
근본적인
fundamentalbeliefofmetaphysiciansisTHEBELIEFINANTITHESESOFVALUES.Itneveroccurredeventothewariestofthemtodoubthereontheverythreshold(wheredoubt,however,wasmostnecessary);
thoughtheyhadmadea
엄숙한
solemnvow,"DEOMNIBUSDUBITANDUM."Foritmaybedoubted,firstly,whetherantithesesexistatall;
andsecondly,whetherthepopularvaluationsandantithesesofvalueuponwhichmetaphysicianshavesettheirseal,arenotperhapsmerelysuperficialestimates,merelyprovisionalperspectives,besidesbeingprobablymadefromsomecorner,perhapsfrombelow—"frogperspectives,"asitwere,toborrowanexpressioncurrentamongpainters.
Inspiteofallthevaluewhichmaybelongtothetrue,thepositive,andtheunselfish,itmightbepossiblethatahigherandmore
근본적인
fundamentalvalueforlifegenerallyshouldbeassignedtopretence,tothewilltodelusion,toselfishness,andcupidity.ItmightevenbepossiblethatWHATconstitutesthevalueofthosegoodandrespectedthings,consistspreciselyintheirbeinginsidiouslyrelated,knotted,andcrochetedtotheseevilandapparentlyopposedthings—perhapseveninbeing
본질적으로
essentiallyidenticalwiththem.Perhaps!
Butwhowishestoconcernhimselfwithsuchdangerous"Perhapses"!
Forthatinvestigationonemustawaittheadventofaneworderofphilosophers,suchaswillhaveothertastesandinclinations,thereverseofthosehithertoprevalent—philosophersofthedangerous"Perhaps"ineverysenseoftheterm.
Andtospeakinallseriousness,Iseesuchnewphilosophersbeginningtoappear.
3.
Havingkeptasharpeyeonphilosophers,andhavingreadbetweentheirlineslongenough,Inowsaytomyselfthatthegreaterpartofconsciousthinkingmustbecountedamongtheinstinctivefunctions,anditissoeveninthecaseof
철학적
philosophicalthinking;onehasheretolearnanew,asonelearnedanewaboutheredityand"innateness."
Aslittleastheactofbirthcomesintoconsiderationinthewholeprocessandprocedureofheredity,justaslittleis"being-conscious"OPPOSEDtotheinstinctiveinany
결정적인
decisivesense;thegreaterpartoftheconsciousthinkingofaphilosopherissecretlyinfluencedbyhisinstincts,andforcedintodefinitechannels.
Andbehindalllogicanditsseeming
주권
sovereigntyofmovement,therearevaluations,ortospeakmoreplainly,physiologicaldemands,forthemaintenanceofadefinitemodeoflifeForexample,thatthecertainisworthmorethantheuncertain,thatillusionislessvaluablethan"truth"suchvaluations,inspiteoftheirregulativeimportanceforUS,mightnotwithstandingbeonlysuperficialvaluations,specialkindsofniaiserie,suchasmaybenecessaryforthemaintenanceofbeingssuchasourselves.Supposing,ineffect,thatmanisnotjustthe"measureofthings."
4.
Thefalsenessofanopinionisnotforusanyobjectiontoit:
itishere,perhaps,thatournewlanguagesoundsmoststrangely.
Thequestionis,howfaranopinionislife-furthering,life-preserving,species-preserving,perhapsspecies-rearing,andweare
근본적으로
fundamentallyinclinedtomaintainthatthefalsestopinions(towhichthesyntheticjudgmentsaprioribelong),arethemostindispensabletous,thatwithoutarecognitionoflogicalfictions,withoutacomparisonofrealitywiththe순전히
purelyIMAGINEDworldoftheabsoluteandimmutable,withoutaconstantcounterfeitingoftheworldbymeansofnumbers,mancouldnotlive—thattherenunciationoffalseopinionswouldbearenunciationoflife,anegationoflife.TORECOGNISEUNTRUTHASACONDITIONOFLIFE;
thatiscertainlytoimpugnthe
전통적인
traditionalideasofvalueinadangerous방식으로
manner,andaphilosophywhichventurestodoso,hastherebyaloneplaceditselfbeyondgoodandevil.5.
Thatwhichcausesphilosopherstoberegardedhalf-distrustfullyandhalf-mockingly,isnottheoft-repeateddiscoveryhowinnocenttheyare—howoftenandeasilytheymakemistakesandlosetheirway,inshort,howchildishandchildliketheyare,—butthatthereisnotenoughhonestdealingwiththem,whereastheyallraisealoudandvirtuousoutcrywhentheproblemoftruthfulnessisevenhintedatintheremotestmanner.
Theyallposeasthoughtheirrealopinionshadbeendiscoveredandattainedthroughtheself-evolvingofacold,pure,divinelyindifferentdialectic(incontrasttoallsortsofmystics,who,fairerandfoolisher,talkof"inspiration"),whereas,infact,aprejudicedproposition,idea,or"suggestion,"whichisgenerallytheirheart'sdesireabstractedandrefined,isdefendedbythemwithargumentssoughtoutaftertheevent.
Theyarealladvocateswhodonotwishtoberegardedassuch,generallyastutedefenders,also,oftheirprejudices,whichtheydub"truths,"—andVERYfarfromhavingtheconsciencewhichbravelyadmitsthistoitself,veryfarfromhavingthegoodtasteofthecouragewhichgoessofarastoletthisbeunderstood,perhapstowarnfriendorfoe,orincheerfulconfidenceandself-ridicule.
ThespectacleoftheTartufferyofoldKant,
똑같이
equallystiffanddecent,withwhichheenticesusintothedialecticby-waysthatlead(morecorrectlymislead)tohis"categoricalimperative"—makesusfastidiousonessmile,wewhofindnosmallamusementinspyingoutthe미묘한
subtletricksofoldmoralistsandethicalpreachers.Or,stillmoreso,thehocus-pocusinmathematicalform,bymeansofwhichSpinozahas,asitwere,cladhisphilosophyinmailandmask—infact,the"loveofHISwisdom,"totranslatethetermfairlyandsquarely—inordertherebytostriketerroratonceintotheheartoftheassailantwhoshoulddaretocastaglanceonthatinvinciblemaiden,thatPallasAthene:—howmuchofpersonaltimidityandvulnerabilitydoesthismasqueradeofasicklyreclusebetray!
6.
Ithasgraduallybecomecleartomewhateverygreatphilosophyuptillnowhasconsistedof—namely,theconfessionofitsoriginator,andaspeciesofinvoluntaryandunconsciousauto-biography;
andmoreoverthatthe
도덕적
moral(orimmoral)purposeineveryphilosophyhasconstitutedthetrue생명
vitalgermoutofwhichtheentireplanthasalwaysgrown.Indeed,tounderstandhowtheabstrusestmetaphysicalassertionsofaphilosopherhavebeenarrivedat,itisalwayswell(andwise)tofirstaskoneself:
"Whatmoralitydothey(ordoeshe)aimat?"
따라서
Accordingly,Idonotbelievethatan"impulsetoknowledge"isthefatherofphilosophy;butthatanotherimpulse,hereaselsewhere,hasonlymadeuseofknowledge(andmistakenknowledge!)
asaninstrument.
Butwhoeverconsidersthe
근본적인
fundamentalimpulsesofmanwithaviewtodetermininghowfartheymayhavehereactedasINSPIRINGGENII(orasdemonsandcobolds),willfindthattheyhaveallpracticedphilosophyatonetimeoranother,andthateachoneofthemwouldhavebeenonlytoogladtolookuponitselfasthe궁극적인
ultimateendofexistenceandthe합법적인
legitimateLORDoveralltheotherimpulses.Foreveryimpulseisimperious,andasSUCH,attemptstophilosophize.
Tobesure,inthecaseofscholars,inthecaseofreallyscientificmen,itmaybeotherwise—"better,"ifyouwill;
theretheremayreallybesuchathingasan"impulsetoknowledge,"somekindofsmall,independentclock-work,which,whenwellwoundup,worksawayindustriouslytothatend,WITHOUTtherestofthescholarlyimpulsestakinganymaterialparttherein.
Theactual"interests"ofthescholar,therefore,aregenerallyinquiteanotherdirection—inthefamily,perhaps,orinmoney-making,orinpolitics;
itis,infact,almostindifferentatwhatpointofresearchhislittlemachineisplaced,andwhetherthehopefulyoungworkerbecomesagoodphilologist,a
버섯
mushroomspecialist,orachemist;heisnotCHARACTERISEDbybecomingthisorthat.
Inthephilosopher,onthe
반대로
contrary,thereisabsolutelynothingimpersonal;andaboveall,hismoralityfurnishesadecidedand
결정적인
decisivetestimonyastoWHOHEIS,—thatistosay,inwhatorderthedeepestimpulsesofhisnaturestandtoeachother.7.
Howmaliciousphilosopherscanbe!
IknowofnothingmorestingingthanthejokeEpicurustookthelibertyofmakingonPlatoandthePlatonists;
hecalledthemDionysiokolakes.
Initsoriginalsense,andonthefaceofit,thewordsignifies"FlatterersofDionysius"—consequently,tyrants'accessoriesandlick-spittles;
besidesthis,however,itisasmuchastosay,"TheyareallACTORS,thereisnothing
진정한
genuineaboutthem"(forDionysiokolaxwasapopularnameforanactor).AndthelatterisreallythemalignantreproachthatEpicuruscastuponPlato:
hewasannoyedbythegrandiose
태도
manner,themiseenscenestyleofwhichPlatoandhisscholarsweremasters—ofwhichEpicuruswasnotamaster!He,theoldschool-teacherofSamos,whosatconcealedinhislittlegardenatAthens,andwrotethreehundredbooks,perhapsoutofrageand
야심찬
ambitiousenvyofPlato,whoknows!Greecetookahundredyearstofindoutwhothegarden-godEpicurusreallywas.
Didsheeverfindout?
8.
Thereisapointineveryphilosophyatwhichthe"conviction"ofthephilosopherappearsonthescene;
or,toputitinthewordsofanancientmystery:.
Adventavitasinus,Pulcheretfortissimus.
9.
YoudesiretoLIVE"accordingtoNature"?
Oh,you
고귀한
nobleStoics,whatfraudofwords!ImaginetoyourselvesabeinglikeNature,boundlesslyextravagant,boundlesslyindifferent,withoutpurposeorconsideration,withoutpityorjustice,atoncefruitfulandbarrenanduncertain:
imaginetoyourselvesINDIFFERENCEasapower—howCOULDyoulivein
따라
accordancewithsuchindifference?Tolive—isnotthatjustendeavouringtobeotherwisethanthisNature?
Isnotlivingvaluing,preferring,beingunjust,beinglimited,endeavouringtobedifferent?
Andgrantedthatyourimperative,"livingaccordingtoNature,"meansactuallythesameas"livingaccordingtolife"—howcouldyoudo
다르게
DIFFERENTLY?Whyshouldyoumakeaprincipleoutofwhatyouyourselvesare,andmustbe?
Inreality,however,itisquiteotherwisewithyou:
whileyoupretendtoreadwithrapturethecanonofyourlawinNature,youwantsomethingquitethecontrary,youextraordinarystage-playersandself-deluders!
InyourprideyouwishtodictateyourmoralsandidealstoNature,toNatureherself,andtoincorporatethemtherein;
youinsistthatitshallbeNature"accordingtotheStoa,"andwouldlikeeverythingtobemadeafteryourownimage,asavast,
영원한
eternalglorificationandgeneralismofStoicism!Withallyourlovefortruth,youhaveforcedyourselvessolong,sopersistently,andwithsuchhypnoticrigiditytoseeNatureFALSELY,thatistosay,Stoically,thatyouarenolongerabletoseeitotherwise—andtocrownall,someunfathomablesuperciliousnessgivesyoutheBedlamitehopethatBECAUSEyouareabletotyrannizeoveryourselves—Stoicismisself-tyranny—Naturewillalsoallowherselftobetyrannizedover:
isnottheStoicaPARTofNature?...
Butthisisanoldandeverlastingstory:
whathappenedinoldtimeswiththeStoicsstillhappenstoday,assoonaseveraphilosophybeginstobelieveinitself.
Italwayscreatestheworldinitsownimage;
itcannotdootherwise;
philosophyisthistyrannical
충동
impulseitself,themostspiritualWilltoPower,thewillto"creationoftheworld,"thewilltothecausaprima.10.
Theeagernessandsubtlety,Ishouldevensaycraftiness,withwhichtheproblemof"therealandtheapparentworld"isdealtwithatpresentthroughoutEurope,furnishesfoodforthoughtandattention;
andhewhohearsonlya"WilltoTruth"inthebackground,andnothingelse,cannotcertainlyboastofthesharpestears.
Inrareandisolatedcases,itmayreallyhavehappenedthatsuchaWilltoTruth—acertainextravagantandadventurouspluck,ametaphysician's
야망
ambitionoftheforlornhope—hasparticipatedtherein:thatwhichintheendalwaysprefersahandfulof"certainty"toawholecartloadofbeautifulpossibilities;
theremayevenbepuritanicalfanaticsofconscience,whoprefertoputtheirlasttrustinasurenothing,ratherthaninanuncertainsomething.
ButthatisNihilism,andthesignofadespairing,mortallyweariedsoul,notwithstandingthecourageousbearingsuchavirtuemaydisplay.
Itseems,however,tobeotherwisewithstrongerandlivelierthinkerswhoarestilleagerforlife.
InthattheysideAGAINSTappearance,andspeaksuperciliouslyof"perspective,"inthattheyrankthecredibilityoftheirownbodiesaboutaslowasthecredibilityoftheocularevidencethat"theearthstandsstill,"andthus,apparently,allowingwithcomplacencytheirsecurestpossessiontoescape(forwhatdoesoneatpresentbelieveinmorefirmlythaninone'sbody?),—whoknowsiftheyarenotreallytryingtowinbacksomethingwhichwasformerlyanevensecurerpossession,somethingoftheolddomainofthefaithofformertimes,perhapsthe"immortalsoul,"perhaps"theoldGod,"inshort,ideasbywhichtheycouldlivebetter,thatistosay,morevigorouslyandmorejoyously,thanby"modernideas"?
ThereisDISTRUSTofthesemodernideasinthismodeoflookingatthings,adisbeliefinallthathasbeenconstructedyesterdayandtoday;
thereisperhapssomeslightadmixtureofsatietyandscorn,whichcannolongerenduretheBRIC-A-BRACofideasofthemostvariedorigin,suchasso-calledPositivismatpresentthrowsonthemarket;
a
혐오
disgustofthemorerefinedtasteatthevillage-fairmotleynessandpatchinessofallthesereality-philosophasters,inwhomthereisnothingeithernewortrue,exceptthismotleyness.Thereinitseemstomethatweshouldagreewiththose
회의적인
skepticalanti-realistsandknowledge-microscopistsofthepresentday;theirinstinct,whichrepelsthemfromMODERNreality,isunrefuted...
whatdotheirretrogradeby-pathsconcernus!
ThemainthingaboutthemisNOTthattheywishtogo"back,"butthattheywishtogetAWAYtherefrom.
AlittleMOREstrength,swing,courage,and
예술적
artisticpower,andtheywouldbeOFF—andnotback!11.
ItseemstomethatthereiseverywhereanattemptatpresenttodivertattentionfromtheactualinfluencewhichKantexercisedonGermanphilosophy,andespeciallytoignoreprudentlythevaluewhichhesetuponhimself.
KantwasfirstandforemostproudofhisTableofCategories;
withitinhishandhesaid:
"Thisisthemostdifficultthingthatcouldeverbeundertakenonbehalfofmetaphysics."
Letusonlyunderstandthis"couldbe"!
HewasproudofhavingDISCOVEREDanewfacultyinman,thefacultyofsyntheticjudgmentapriori.
Grantingthathedeceivedhimselfinthismatter;
thedevelopmentandrapidflourishingofGermanphilosophydependedneverthelessonhispride,andontheeagerrivalryoftheyoungergenerationtodiscoverifpossiblesomething—atallevents"newfaculties"—ofwhichtobestillprouder!—Butletusreflectforamoment—itishightimetodoso.
"HowaresyntheticjudgmentsaprioriPOSSIBLE?"
Kantaskshimself—andwhatisreallyhisanswer?
"BYMEANSOFAMEANS(faculty)"—butunfortunatelynotinfivewords,butsocircumstantially,imposingly,andwithsuchdisplayofGermanprofundityand
언어적
verbalflourishes,thatonealtogetherlosessightofthecomicalniaiserieallemandeinvolvedinsuchananswer.Peoplewerebesidethemselveswithdelightoverthisnewfaculty,andthejubilationreacheditsclimaxwhenKantfurtherdiscovereda
도덕적
moralfacultyinman—foratthattimeGermanswerestill도덕적
moral,notyetdabblinginthe"Politicsofhardfact."ThencamethehoneymoonofGermanphilosophy.
AlltheyoungtheologiansoftheTubingeninstitutionwentimmediatelyintothegroves—allseekingfor"faculties."
Andwhatdidtheynotfind—inthatinnocent,rich,andstill
젊은
youthfulperiodoftheGermanspirit,towhichRomanticism,the악의적인
maliciousfairy,pipedandsang,whenonecouldnotyetdistinguishbetween"finding"and"inventing"!Aboveallafacultyforthe"transcendental";
Schellingchristenedit,intellectual
직관
intuition,andtherebygratifiedthemost진지한
earnestlongingsofthenaturallypious-inclinedGermans.Onecandonogreaterwrongtothewholeofthisexuberantandeccentricmovement(whichwasreallyyouthfulness,notwithstandingthatitdisguiseditselfsoboldly,inhoaryandsenileconceptions),thantotakeitseriously,oreventreatitwith
도덕적
moralindignation.Enough,however—theworldgrewolder,andthedreamvanished.
Atimecamewhenpeoplerubbedtheirforeheads,andtheystillrubthemtoday.
Peoplehadbeendreaming,andfirstandforemost—oldKant.
"Bymeansofameans(faculty)"—hehadsaid,oratleastmeanttosay.
But,isthat—ananswer?
Anexplanation?
Orisitnotrather
단순히
merelyarepetitionofthequestion?Howdoesopiuminducesleep?
"Bymeansofameans(faculty),"
즉
namelythevirtusdormitiva,repliesthedoctorinMoliere,.Butsuchrepliesbelongtotherealmofcomedy,anditishightimetoreplacetheKantianquestion,"HowaresyntheticjudgmentsaPRIORIpossible?"
byanotherquestion,"Whyisbeliefinsuchjudgmentsnecessary?"—ineffect,itishightimethatweshouldunderstandthatsuchjudgmentsmustbebelievedtobetrue,forthesakeofthepreservationofcreatureslikeourselves;
thoughtheystillmight
자연스럽게
naturallybefalsejudgments!Or,moreplainlyspoken,androughlyandreadily—syntheticjudgmentsapriorishouldnot"bepossible"atall;
wehavenorighttothem;
inourmouthstheyarenothingbutfalsejudgments.
Only,ofcourse,thebeliefintheirtruthisnecessary,asplausiblebeliefandocularevidencebelongingtothe
관점
perspectiveviewoflife.Andfinally,tocalltomindthe
엄청난
enormousinfluencewhich"Germanphilosophy"—Ihopeyouunderstanditsrighttoinvertedcommas(goosefeet)?—hasexercisedthroughoutthewholeofEurope,thereisnodoubtthatacertainVIRTUSDORMITIVAhadashareinit;thankstoGerman
철학
philosophy,itwasadelighttothe고귀한
nobleidlers,thevirtuous,themystics,theartiste,thethree-fourthsChristians,andthepoliticalobscurantistsofallnations,tofindanantidotetothestilloverwhelmingsensualismwhichoverflowedfromthelastcenturyintothis,inshort—"sensusassoupire."...