Beyond Good and Evil | Progressively Translated Ukrainian A1-B2 Books

Beyond Good and Evil | Progressively Translated Ukrainian A1-B2 Books

Discover the advantages of this innovative translation method, designed to cater to your learning needs. You can select your preferred difficulty level, ensuring a well-balanced challenge that isn't too overwhelming. This technique sharpens your comprehension skills by encouraging you to derive meaning from context, minimizing the need for direct translations. While some words are purposefully obscured to promote contextual guessing, looking up unclear terms is always an option. With this method, language learning becomes both accessible and enjoyable, blending challenge with support. Explore translated classics and experience the excitement of learning through literature.

PREFACE
SUPPOSINGthatTruthisawoman—whatthen?
Istherenotgroundforsuspecting
що
that
allphilosophers,insofarastheyhavebeendogmatists,havefailedto
зрозуміти
understand
women—thattheterribleseriousness
і
and
clumsyimportunitywithwhichtheyhave
зазвичай
usually
paidtheiraddressestoTruth,havebeenunskilled
і
and
unseemlymethodsforwinninga
жінки
woman
?
Certainlyshehasneverallowedherselftobewon;
і
and
atpresenteverykindofdogmastandswithsad
і
and
discouragedmien—IF,indeed,itstandsatall!
Fortherearescofferswhomaintainthatithasfallen,thatalldogmaliesontheground—naymore,thatitisatitslastgasp.
Але
But
tospeakseriously,therearegoodgroundsforhopingthatalldogmatizinginphilosophy,whateversolemn,whateverconclusive
і
and
decidedairsithasassumed,
може
may
havebeenonlyanoblepuerilism
і
and
tyronism;
andprobablythe
час
time
isathandwhenit
буде
will
beonceandagainunderstoodWHAThas
насправді
actually
sufficedforthebasisof
таких
such
imposingandabsolutephilosophicaledificesasthedogmatistshavehithertoreared:
можливо
perhaps
somepopularsuperstitionofimmemorialtime(suchasthesoul-superstition,which,inthe
формі
form
ofsubject-
andego-superstition,hasnot
ще
yet
ceaseddoingmischief):
perhaps
деякі
some
playuponwords,adeceptiononthepartof
граматики
grammar
,oranaudaciousgeneralizationof
дуже
very
restricted,verypersonal,veryhuman—all-too-humanfacts.
The
філософія
philosophy
ofthedogmatists,itistobehoped,was
лише
only
apromiseforthousandsofyearsafterwards,aswasastrologyin
ще
still
earliertimes,intheserviceofwhich
ймовірно
probably
morelabour,gold,acuteness,
і
and
patiencehavebeenspent
ніж
than
onanyactualsciencehitherto:
we
зобов'язані
owe
toit,andtoits"super-terrestrial"pretensionsinAsiaandEgypt,thegrand
стилем
style
ofarchitecture.
Itseemsthatinordertoinscribethemselvesuponthe
серце
heart
ofhumanitywitheverlastingclaims,
всі
all
greatthingshavefirstto
блукати
wander
abouttheearthas
величезні
enormous
andawe-inspiringcaricatures:
dogmatic
філософія
philosophy
hasbeenacaricatureofthiskind—forinstance,theVedanta
доктрина
doctrine
inAsia,andPlatonisminEurope.
Letusnotbeungratefultoit,
хоча
although
itmustcertainlybeconfessed
що
that
theworst,themosttiresome,andthemostdangerousoferrorshithertohasbeenadogmatisterror—namely,Plato's
винахід
invention
ofPureSpiritandtheGoodinItself.
Але
But
nowwhenithasbeensurmounted,
коли
when
Europe,ridofthisnightmare,
може
can
againdrawbreathfreely
і
and
atleastenjoyahealthier—sleep,
ми
we
,WHOSEDUTYISWAKEFULNESSITSELF,aretheheirsofallthe
сили
strength
whichthestruggleagainstthiserrorhasfostered.
Itamountedtotheveryinversionoftruth,
і
and
thedenialofthePERSPECTIVE—thefundamentalcondition—of
життя
life
,tospeakofSpirit
і
and
theGoodasPlatospokeof
них
them
;
indeedonemightask,asa
лікар
physician
:
"Howdidsuchamaladyattackthatfinest
продукт
product
ofantiquity,Plato?
Hadthe
злий
wicked
Socratesreallycorruptedhim?
WasSocratesafterallacorrupterofyouths,
і
and
deservedhishemlock?"
Butthe
боротьба
struggle
againstPlato,or—tospeakplainer,
і
and
forthe"people"—thestruggle
проти
against
theecclesiasticaloppressionofmillenniumsofChristianity
Для
(FOR
CHRISTIANITYISPLATONISMFORTHE"PEOPLE"),producedinEuropeamagnificenttensionof
душі
soul
,suchashadnotexisted
ніде
anywhere
previously;
withsuchatenselystrainedbowone
можна
can
nowaimatthefurthestgoals.
Asamatteroffact,theEuropeanfeels
цю
this
tensionasastateofdistress,
і
and
twiceattemptshavebeenmadeingrand
стилі
style
tounbendthebow:
одного разу
once
bymeansofJesuitism,andthe
другого
second
timebymeansofdemocraticenlightenment—which,withtheaidof
свободи
liberty
ofthepressandnewspaper-reading,might,infact,bringitabout
що
that
thespiritwouldnotso
легко
easily
finditselfin"distress"!
(TheGermansinventedgunpowder—allcreditto
них
them
!
buttheyagainmadethingssquare—theyinventedprinting.)
Але
But
we,whoareneitherJesuits,nordemocrats,noreven
досить
sufficiently
Germans,weGOODEUROPEANS,
і
and
free,VERYfreespirits—wehaveitstill,allthedistressof
духу
spirit
andallthetensionofits
лука
bow
!
Andperhapsalsothearrow,the
обов'язок
duty
,and,whoknows?
THEGOALTOAIMAT....
Розділ
CHAPTER
I.PREJUDICESOFPHILOSOPHERS
1.
TheWilltoTruth,whichistotemptustomanya
небезпечних
hazardous
enterprise,thefamousTruthfulnessofwhich
всі
all
philosophershavehithertospokenwithrespect,whatquestionshas
ця
this
WilltoTruthnotlaidbeforeus!
What
дивні
strange
,perplexing,questionablequestions!
Itis
вже
already
alongstory;
yetitseemsasifitwere
ледве
hardly
commenced.
Isitany
дивно
wonder
ifweatlastgrowdistrustful,lose
терпіння
patience
,andturnimpatientlyaway?
Що
That
thisSphinxteachesusatlasttoaskquestionsourselves?
Хто
WHO
isitreallythatputsquestionstoushere?
WHAT
насправді
really
isthis"WilltoTruth"in
нас
us
?
Infactwemadea
довго
long
haltatthequestionastothe
походження
origin
ofthisWill—untilatlastwecametoanabsolutestandstill
перед
before
ayetmorefundamentalquestion.
Weinquired
про
about
theVALUEofthisWill.
Grantedthatwe
хочемо
want
thetruth:
WHYNOTRATHERuntruth?
А
And
uncertainty?
Evenignorance?
The
проблема
problem
ofthevalueoftruthpresenteditself
перед
before
us—orwasitwewhopresentedourselves
перед
before
theproblem?
WhichofusistheOedipus
тут
here
?
WhichtheSphinx?
Itwould
здається
seem
tobearendezvousofquestions
та
and
notesofinterrogation.
Andcoulditbebelieved
що
that
itatlastseemstousasifthe
проблема
problem
hadneverbeenpropounded
раніше
before
,asifwewerethefirsttodiscernit,getasightofit,
і
and
RISKRAISINGit?
Forthereis
ризик
risk
inraisingit,perhapsthereis
немає
no
greaterrisk.
2.
"HOWCOULDanythingoriginateoutofitsopposite?
For
наприклад
example
,truthoutoferror?
чи
or
theWilltoTruthoutofthewillto
обману
deception
?
orthegenerousdeedoutofselfishness?
чи
or
thepuresun-brightvisionofthewisemanoutofcovetousness?
Такий
Such
genesisisimpossible;
whoeverdreamsofitisafool,nay,
гірший
worse
thanafool;
thingsofthehighest
цінність
value
musthaveadifferent
походження
origin
,anoriginofTHEIRown—in
цьому
this
transitory,seductive,illusory,paltry
світі
world
,inthisturmoilofdelusion
і
and
cupidity,theycannothavetheirsource.
Але
But
ratherinthelapofBeing,intheintransitory,intheconcealedGod,inthe'Thing-in-itself—THEREmustbetheir
джерело
source
,andnowhereelse!"—Thismodeof
міркування
reasoning
disclosesthetypicalprejudicebywhichmetaphysiciansof
всіх
all
timescanberecognized,
цей
this
modeofvaluationisatthebackof
всіх
all
theirlogicalprocedure;
through
цій
this
"belief"oftheirs,theyexertthemselvesfortheir"knowledge,"for
чогось
something
thatisintheend
урочисто
solemnly
christened"theTruth."
Thefundamental
віра
belief
ofmetaphysiciansisTHE
Віра
BELIEF
INANTITHESESOFVALUES.
Itneveroccurred
навіть
even
tothewariestofthemtodoubt
тут
here
ontheverythreshold(wheredoubt,
однак
however
,wasmostnecessary);
thoughtheyhadmadeasolemnvow,"DEOMNIBUSDUBITANDUM."
Foritmaybedoubted,firstly,
чи
whether
antithesesexistatall;
та
and
secondly,whetherthepopularvaluations
та
and
antithesesofvalueupon
яких
which
metaphysicianshavesettheirseal,arenotperhaps
лише
merely
superficialestimates,merelyprovisionalperspectives,besidesbeingprobablymadefromsomecorner,perhapsfrombelow—"frogperspectives,"asitwere,toborrowan
вираз
expression
currentamongpainters.
In
незважаючи
spite
ofallthevaluewhichmaybelongtothetrue,thepositive,
і
and
theunselfish,itmightbe
можливо
possible
thatahigherand
більш
more
fundamentalvalueforlife
цілому
generally
shouldbeassignedtopretence,tothewilltodelusion,toselfishness,
і
and
cupidity.
Itmightevenbe
можливо
possible
thatWHATconstitutesthe
цінність
value
ofthosegoodandrespectedthings,consists
саме
precisely
intheirbeinginsidiously
пов'язані
related
,knotted,andcrochetedtothese
злих
evil
andapparentlyopposedthings—perhaps
навіть
even
inbeingessentiallyidenticalwith
ними
them
.
Perhaps!
Butwhowishestoconcernhimselfwith
такі
such
dangerous"Perhapses"!
Forthatinvestigationonemust
чекати
await
theadventofa
нового
new
orderofphilosophers,suchas
будуть
will
haveothertastesandinclinations,thereverseof
тих
those
hithertoprevalent—philosophersofthedangerous"Perhaps"inevery
сенсі
sense
oftheterm.
Andtospeakinallseriousness,Isee
такі
such
newphilosophersbeginningtoappear.
3.
Havingkeptasharpeyeonphilosophers,
і
and
havingreadbetweentheirlines
довго
long
enough,Inowsaytomyself
що
that
thegreaterpartofconsciousthinkingmustbecountedamongtheinstinctivefunctions,
і
and
itissoeveninthe
випадку
case
ofphilosophicalthinking;
onehas
тут
here
tolearnanew,asonelearnedanew
про
about
heredityand"innateness."
As
мало
little
astheactof
народження
birth
comesintoconsiderationinthe
весь
whole
processandprocedureofheredity,justas
мало
little
is"being-conscious"OPPOSEDtotheinstinctiveinanydecisive
сенсі
sense
;
thegreaterpartoftheconsciousthinkingofaphilosopheris
таємно
secretly
influencedbyhisinstincts,
і
and
forcedintodefinitechannels.
І
And
behindalllogicanditsseemingsovereigntyof
руху
movement
,therearevaluations,ortospeakmoreplainly,physiologicaldemands,forthemaintenanceofadefinitemodeof
життя
life
Forexample,thatthecertainis
коштує
worth
morethantheuncertain,
що
that
illusionislessvaluable
ніж
than
"truth"suchvaluations,inspiteoftheirregulative
значення
importance
forUS,mightnotwithstandingbe
лише
only
superficialvaluations,specialkindsofniaiserie,suchasmaybenecessaryforthemaintenanceofbeingssuchasourselves.
Supposing,ineffect,
що
that
manisnotjustthe"measureofthings."
4.
Thefalsenessofanopinionisnotforusanyobjectiontoit:
itis
тут
here
,perhaps,thatournew
мова
language
soundsmoststrangely.
The
питання
question
is,howfaran
думка
opinion
islife-furthering,life-preserving,species-preserving,
можливо
perhaps
species-rearing,andwearefundamentallyinclinedtomaintain
що
that
thefalsestopinions(to
яких
which
thesyntheticjudgmentsapriori
належать
belong)
,arethemostindispensableto
нас
us
,thatwithoutarecognitionoflogicalfictions,
без
without
acomparisonofrealitywiththe
чисто
purely
IMAGINEDworldoftheabsolute
і
and
immutable,withoutaconstantcounterfeitingofthe
світу
world
bymeansofnumbers,
людина
man
couldnotlive—thattherenunciationoffalseopinionswouldbearenunciationoflife,anegationoflife.
TORECOGNISEUNTRUTHASACONDITIONOF
Життя
LIFE
;
thatiscertainlytoimpugnthetraditionalideasofvalueinadangerous
чином
manner
,andaphilosophywhichventuresto
зробити
do
so,hastherebyaloneplaceditself
за
beyond
goodandevil.
5.
Що
That
whichcausesphilosopherstoberegardedhalf-distrustfullyandhalf-mockingly,isnottheoft-repeated
відкриття
discovery
howinnocenttheyare—how
часто
often
andeasilytheymakemistakesandlosetheir
шлях
way
,inshort,howchildishandchildliketheyare,—but
що
that
thereisnotenoughhonestdealingwith
ними
them
,whereastheyallraisea
гучний
loud
andvirtuousoutcrywhenthe
проблема
problem
oftruthfulnessisevenhintedatintheremotestmanner.
They
всіх
all
poseasthoughtheirrealopinionshadbeendiscovered
і
and
attainedthroughtheself-evolvingofa
холодної
cold
,pure,divinelyindifferentdialectic(in
відміну
contrast
toallsortsofmystics,who,fairer
і
and
foolisher,talkof"inspiration"),whereas,infact,aprejudicedproposition,
ідея
idea
,or"suggestion,"whichis
як правило
generally
theirheart'sdesireabstracted
і
and
refined,isdefendedbythemwithargumentssoughtout
після
after
theevent.
Theyarealladvocateswhodonotwishtoberegardedassuch,
як правило
generally
astutedefenders,also,oftheirprejudices,whichtheydub"truths,"—and
Дуже
VERY
farfromhavingtheconsciencewhich
сміливо
bravely
admitsthistoitself,
дуже
very
farfromhavingthe
хороший
good
tasteofthecouragewhichgoesso
далеко
far
astoletthisbeunderstood,
можливо
perhaps
towarnfriendorfoe,
або
or
incheerfulconfidenceandself-ridicule.
На
The
spectacleoftheTartufferyof
старого
old
Kant,equallystiffand
пристойний
decent
,withwhichheenticesusinto
на
the
dialecticby-waysthatlead(more
правильно
correctly
mislead)tohis"categoricalimperative"—makesusfastidiousones
посміхатися
smile
,wewhofindnosmallamusementinspyingout
на
the
subtletricksofoldmoralists
і
and
ethicalpreachers.
Or,still
більше
more
so,thehocus-pocusinmathematical
формі
form
,bymeansofwhichSpinozahas,asitwere,cladhisphilosophyinmail
і
and
mask—infact,the"loveofHISwisdom,"totranslatethe
термін
term
fairlyandsquarely—inordertherebytostrike
жаху
terror
atonceintotheheartoftheassailantwhoshoulddaretocasta
погляд
glance
onthatinvinciblemaiden,thatPallasAthene:—howmuchofpersonaltimidity
і
and
vulnerabilitydoesthismasqueradeofasicklyreclusebetray!
6.
Ithas
поступово
gradually
becomecleartomewhat
кожна
every
greatphilosophyuptillnowhasconsistedof—namely,theconfessionofitsoriginator,andaspeciesofinvoluntaryandunconscious
автобіографія
auto-biography
;
andmoreoverthatthemoral(orimmoral)
мета
purpose
ineveryphilosophyhasconstitutedthetruevitalgermoutofwhichthe
вся
entire
planthasalwaysgrown.
Дійсно
Indeed
,tounderstandhowtheabstrusestmetaphysicalassertionsofaphilosopherhavebeenarrivedat,itis
завжди
always
well(andwise)tofirst
запитати
ask
oneself:
"Whatmoralitydothey(ordoeshe)aimat?"
Відповідно
Accordingly
,Idonotbelieve
що
that
an"impulsetoknowledge"isthefatherofphilosophy;
але
but
thatanotherimpulse,hereaselsewhere,has
тільки
only
madeuseofknowledge
І
(and
mistakenknowledge!)
asan
інструмент
instrument
.
Butwhoeverconsidersthefundamentalimpulsesofmanwithaviewtodetermininghow
далеко
far
theymayhavehereactedasINSPIRINGGENII
Чи
(or
asdemonsandcobolds),willfind
що
that
theyhaveallpracticedphilosophyatone
час
time
oranother,andthat
кожен
each
oneofthemwouldhavebeenonly
дуже
too
gladtolookuponitselfastheultimateendof
існування
existence
andthelegitimateLORD
над
over
alltheotherimpulses.
For
кожен
every
impulseisimperious,andas
Такий
SUCH
,attemptstophilosophize.
Tobe
звичайно
sure
,inthecaseofscholars,inthe
випадку
case
ofreallyscientificmen,it
може
may
beotherwise—"better,"ifyouwill;
therethere
може
may
reallybesucha
річ
thing
asan"impulsetoknowledge,"somekindofsmall,independentclock-work,which,
коли
when
wellwoundup,worksawayindustriouslytothatend,
Без
WITHOUT
therestofthescholarlyimpulsestakinganymaterialpart
ньому
therein
.
Theactual"interests"ofthe
вченого
scholar
,therefore,aregenerallyin
зовсім
quite
anotherdirection—inthefamily,
можливо
perhaps
,orinmoney-making,orinpolitics;
itis,infact,
майже
almost
indifferentatwhatpointof
дослідження
research
hislittlemachineisplaced,
і
and
whetherthehopefulyoung
робітник
worker
becomesagoodphilologist,a
грибів
mushroom
specialist,orachemist;
heisnotCHARACTERISEDbybecomingthis
або
or
that.
Inthephilosopher,onthe
навпаки
contrary
,thereisabsolutelynothingimpersonal;
і
and
aboveall,hismoralityfurnishesadecided
і
and
decisivetestimonyasto
Хто
WHO
HEIS,—thatistosay,inwhat
порядку
order
thedeepestimpulsesofhisnaturestandtoeachother.
7.
Howmaliciousphilosophers
можуть
can
be!
Iknowof
нічого
nothing
morestingingthanthe
жарт
joke
EpicurustookthelibertyofmakingonPlato
та
and
thePlatonists;
hecalledthemDionysiokolakes.
Initsoriginal
сенсі
sense
,andonthefaceofit,the
слово
word
signifies"FlatterersofDionysius"—consequently,tyrants'accessories
і
and
lick-spittles;
besidesthis,however,itisasmuchasto
сказати
say
,"TheyareallACTORS,thereis
нічого
nothing
genuineaboutthem"(forDionysiokolaxwasapopularnameforanactor).
І
And
thelatterisreally
на
the
malignantreproachthatEpicuruscastuponPlato:
hewasannoyedbythegrandiosemanner,themiseenscene
стиль
style
ofwhichPlatoandhisscholarsweremasters—ofwhichEpicuruswasnotamaster!
Він
He
,theoldschool-teacherofSamos,whosatconcealedinhislittle
саду
garden
atAthens,andwrotethreehundredbooks,
можливо
perhaps
outofrageandambitiousenvyofPlato,whoknows!
Greecetooka
сто
hundred
yearstofindout
хто
who
thegarden-godEpicurusreallywas.
Didsheeverfindout?
8.
Thereisapointineveryphilosophyatwhichthe"conviction"ofthephilosopherappearsonthe
сцену
scene
;
or,toputitinthewordsofanancientmystery:.
Adventavitasinus,Pulcheretfortissimus.
9.
You
бажаєте
desire
toLIVE"accordingtoNature"?
Oh,younobleStoics,what
обман
fraud
ofwords!
ImaginetoyourselvesabeinglikeNature,boundlesslyextravagant,boundlesslyindifferent,
без
without
purposeorconsideration,withoutpityor
справедливості
justice
,atoncefruitfulandbarren
і
and
uncertain:
imaginetoyourselves
Байдужість
INDIFFERENCE
asapower—howCOULDyou
жити
live
inaccordancewithsuch
байдужість
indifference
?
Tolive—isnotthat
просто
just
endeavouringtobeotherwise
ніж
than
thisNature?
Isnotlivingvaluing,preferring,beingunjust,beinglimited,endeavouringtobedifferent?
І
And
grantedthatyourimperative,"living
згідно
according
toNature,"meansactuallythesameas"living
згідно
according
tolife"—howcouldyou
зробити
do
DIFFERENTLY?
Whyshouldyou
робити
make
aprincipleoutofwhatyouyourselves
є
are
,andmustbe?
Inreality,
однак
however
,itisquiteotherwise
з
with
you:
whileyoupretendtoreadwithrapturethe
канон
canon
ofyourlawinNature,you
хочете
want
somethingquitethecontrary,you
надзвичайні
extraordinary
stage-playersandself-deluders!
Inyour
гордості
pride
youwishtodictateyourmorals
і
and
idealstoNature,toNatureherself,
і
and
toincorporatethemtherein;
youinsistthatitshallbe
Природа
Nature
"accordingtotheStoa,"
і
and
wouldlikeeverythingtobemadeafteryourown
образ
image
,asavast,eternalglorification
і
and
generalismofStoicism!
With
все
all
yourlovefortruth,youhaveforcedyourselvesso
довго
long
,sopersistently,andwithsuchhypnoticrigidityto
бачити
see
NatureFALSELY,thatistosay,Stoically,
що
that
youarenolongerableto
бачити
see
itotherwise—andtocrown
все
all
,someunfathomablesuperciliousnessgivesyoutheBedlamite
надію
hope
thatBECAUSEyouareabletotyrannizeoveryourselves—Stoicismisself-tyranny—Naturewill
також
also
allowherselftobetyrannizedover:
isnottheStoicaPARTofNature?...
Але
But
thisisanold
і
and
everlastingstory:
whathappenedinoldtimes
зі
with
theStoicsstillhappens
сьогодні
today
,assoonasevera
філософія
philosophy
beginstobelieveinitself.
It
завжди
always
createstheworldinits
власний
own
image;
itcannotdo
інакше
otherwise
;
philosophyisthistyrannical
імпульс
impulse
itself,themostspiritualWillto
Влади
Power
,thewillto"creationoftheworld,"thewilltothecausaprima.
10.
Theeagerness
і
and
subtlety,Ishouldevensaycraftiness,withwhichthe
проблема
problem
of"therealandtheapparentworld"isdealtwithatpresentthroughoutEurope,furnishes
їжу
food
forthoughtandattention;
andhe
хто
who
hearsonlya"WilltoTruth"inthebackground,and
ніщо
nothing
else,cannotcertainlyboastofthesharpestears.
Inrare
і
and
isolatedcases,itmay
дійсно
really
havehappenedthatsuchaWilltoTruth—acertainextravagant
і
and
adventurouspluck,ametaphysician'sambitionoftheforlornhope—hasparticipatedtherein:
що
that
whichintheend
завжди
always
prefersahandfulof"certainty"toawholecartloadofbeautifulpossibilities;
there
можуть
may
evenbepuritanicalfanaticsof
совісті
conscience
,whoprefertoputtheirlasttrustin
на
a
surenothing,ratherthaninanuncertain
щось
something
.
ButthatisNihilism,
і
and
thesignofadespairing,mortallywearied
душі
soul
,notwithstandingthecourageousbearing
така
such
avirtuemaydisplay.
Itseems,
однак
however
,tobeotherwisewithstronger
і
and
livelierthinkerswhoarestilleagerfor
життя
life
.
Inthattheyside
Проти
AGAINST
appearance,andspeaksuperciliouslyof"perspective,"inthattheyrankthe
довіру
credibility
oftheirownbodies
про
about
aslowasthe
довіру
credibility
oftheocularevidencethat"theearthstandsstill,"
і
and
thus,apparently,allowingwithcomplacencytheirsecurest
володіння
possession
toescape(forwhatdoesoneatpresentbelievein
більш
more
firmlythaninone'sbody?),—whoknowsiftheyarenot
насправді
really
tryingtowinback
щось
something
whichwasformerlyanevensecurer
володіння
possession
,somethingoftheolddomainofthe
віри
faith
offormertimes,perhapsthe"immortalsoul,"
можливо
perhaps
"theoldGod,"inshort,ideasbywhichtheycould
жити
live
better,thatistosay,
більш
more
vigorouslyandmorejoyously,
ніж
than
by"modernideas"?
ThereisDISTRUSTof
цих
these
modernideasinthismodeoflookingatthings,adisbeliefinall
що
that
hasbeenconstructedyesterday
і
and
today;
thereisperhapssomeslightadmixtureofsatietyandscorn,which
може
can
nolongerenduretheBRIC-A-BRACofideasofthemostvaried
походження
origin
,suchasso-calledPositivismatpresentthrowsonthe
ринок
market
;
adisgustofthe
більш
more
refinedtasteatthevillage-fairmotleyness
і
and
patchinessofallthesereality-philosophasters,inwhomthereisnothingeither
нового
new
ortrue,exceptthismotleyness.
Thereinitseemstomethatwe
повинні
should
agreewiththoseskepticalanti-realists
і
and
knowledge-microscopistsofthepresentday;
their
інстинкт
instinct
,whichrepelsthemfromMODERNreality,isunrefuted...
what
робити
do
theirretrogradeby-pathsconcern
нам
us
!
ThemainthingaboutthemisNOT
що
that
theywishtogo"back,"but
що
that
theywishtogetAWAYtherefrom.
A
трохи
little
MOREstrength,swing,courage,andartisticpower,andtheywouldbeOFF—andnot
назад
back
!
11.
Itseemstome
що
that
thereiseverywherean
спроба
attempt
atpresenttodivert
увагу
attention
fromtheactualinfluencewhichKantexercisedonGermanphilosophy,
і
and
especiallytoignoreprudentlythe
цінність
value
whichhesetuponhimself.
KantwasfirstandforemostproudofhisTableofCategories;
з
with
itinhishandhesaid:
"Thisisthemostdifficult
річ
thing
thatcouldeverbeundertakenon
імені
behalf
ofmetaphysics."
Letus
тільки
only
understandthis"couldbe"!
HewasproudofhavingDISCOVEREDanewfacultyinman,thefacultyofsynthetic
судження
judgment
apriori.
Grantingthathedeceivedhimselfin
цьому
this
matter;
thedevelopmentandrapidflourishingofGermanphilosophydependedneverthelessonhis
гордості
pride
,andontheeagerrivalryoftheyounger
покоління
generation
todiscoverifpossiblesomething—atallevents"newfaculties"—ofwhichtobe
ще
still
prouder!—Butletusreflectforamoment—itishightimetodoso.
"HowaresyntheticjudgmentsaprioriPOSSIBLE?"
Kantaskshimself—andwhatis
насправді
really
hisanswer?
"BYMEANSOFAMEANS(faculty)"—but
жаль
unfortunately
notinfivewords,
але
but
socircumstantially,imposingly,andwithsuchdisplayofGermanprofundityandverbalflourishes,
що
that
onealtogetherlosessightofthecomicalniaiserieallemandeinvolvedinsuchananswer.
Peoplewerebesidethemselveswithdelight
більше
over
thisnewfaculty,andthejubilationreachedits
апогею
climax
whenKantfurtherdiscoveredamoralfacultyinman—foratthat
час
time
Germanswerestillmoral,notyetdabblinginthe"Politicsofhardfact."
Thencamethe
медовий місяць
honeymoon
ofGermanphilosophy.
AlltheyoungtheologiansoftheTubingeninstitutionwent
негайно
immediately
intothegroves—allseekingfor"faculties."
І
And
whatdidtheynotfind—inthatinnocent,rich,
і
and
stillyouthfulperiodoftheGerman
духу
spirit
,towhichRomanticism,themalicious
фея
fairy
,pipedandsang,whenonecouldnotyet
відрізнити
distinguish
between"finding"and"inventing"!
Перш
Above
allafacultyforthe"transcendental";
Schellingchristenedit,intellectualintuition,
і
and
therebygratifiedthemostearnestlongingsofthenaturallypious-inclinedGermans.
One
можна
can
donogreaterwrongto
на
the
wholeofthisexuberant
і
and
eccentricmovement(whichwas
насправді
really
youthfulness,notwithstandingthatitdisguiseditselfsoboldly,inhoary
і
and
senileconceptions),thantotakeit
серйозно
seriously
,oreventreatitwithmoralindignation.
Досить
Enough
,however—theworldgrewolder,
і
and
thedreamvanished.
A
час
time
camewhenpeoplerubbedtheirforeheads,
і
and
theystillrubthem
сьогодні
today
.
Peoplehadbeendreaming,
і
and
firstandforemost—oldKant.
"Bymeansofameans(faculty)"—hehadsaid,
або
or
atleastmeantto
сказати
say
.
But,isthat—ananswer?
An
пояснення
explanation
?
Orisitnotrather
просто
merely
arepetitionofthe
питання
question
?
Howdoesopiuminduce
сон
sleep
?
"Bymeansofameans(faculty),"
саме
namely
thevirtusdormitiva,repliesthe
лікар
doctor
inMoliere,.
Butsuchreplies
належать
belong
totherealmofcomedy,
і
and
itishightimeto
замінити
replace
theKantianquestion,"HowaresyntheticjudgmentsaPRIORIpossible?"
byanother
питання
question
,"Whyisbeliefin
такі
such
judgmentsnecessary?"—ineffect,itishigh
час
time
thatweshouldunderstand
що
that
suchjudgmentsmustbebelievedtobetrue,forthe
заради
sake
ofthepreservationofcreatureslikeourselves;
хоча
though
theystillmightnaturallybefalsejudgments!
Або
Or
,moreplainlyspoken,and
грубо
roughly
andreadily—syntheticjudgmentsapriori
повинні
should
not"bepossible"atall;
wehave
не
no
righttothem;
inourmouthstheyarenothingbutfalsejudgments.
Тільки
Only
,ofcourse,thebeliefintheirtruthisnecessary,asplausible
віра
belief
andocularevidencebelongingto
на
the
perspectiveviewoflife.
І
And
finally,tocalltomindtheenormous
вплив
influence
which"Germanphilosophy"—Ihopeyouunderstandits
право
right
toinvertedcommas(goosefeet)?—hasexercisedthroughoutthewholeofEurope,thereis
немає
no
doubtthatacertainVIRTUSDORMITIVAhadashareinit;
thankstoGermanphilosophy,itwasadelighttothenobleidlers,thevirtuous,themystics,theartiste,thethree-fourthsChristians,
і
and
thepoliticalobscurantistsofallnations,to
знайти
find
anantidotetothestilloverwhelmingsensualismwhichoverflowedfromthe
минулого
last
centuryintothis,inshort—"sensusassoupire."...