Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, trusted
17,091
edits
Обновлено английское оглавление
(Актуализировано оформление по правилам альбомов) |
(Обновлено английское оглавление) |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| author = | | author = | ||
| author signed = C.C.M. | | author signed = C.C.M. | ||
| title = Anticipations of Experience | | title = Anticipations of Experience. | ||
| subtitle = | | subtitle = | ||
| untitled = | | untitled = | ||
| source title = Light | | source title = Light | ||
| source details = v. 2, No. 68, April 22, 1882 | | source details = v. 2, No. 68, April 22, 1882, pp. 187-88 | ||
| publication date = 1882-04-22 | | publication date = 1882-04-22 | ||
| original date = | | original date = | ||
| Line 27: | Line 26: | ||
}} | }} | ||
Mr. Podmore’s paper on “Miracles and Prophecy,” published in “{{Style S-Small capitals|Light}}” of April 1st, calls for some reply from those who maintain the intuitive character of the phenomenon which he considers to be wrongly designated Prevision. No doubt there is much that is too indiscriminately so-called. Anticipations not inferable by our ordinary reasoning powers and their data range from vague impressions to the most distinct pictures of scenes and events which are realised in future experience. It is only in regard to the latter, those presentations to an inner sense which apparently differ from objective experience only by removal from their total context therein, that I would defend the term Prevision against Mr. Podmore’s criticism, and in opposition to the alternative hypothesis he puts forward. Some of the difficulty besetting the latter he himself perceives, and states with his usual intelligence and candour. I think I am not too presumptuous in believing that the following additional considerations will clear it altogether out of our way, and leave us free to consider whether the philosophical objections urged by Mr. Podmore have any valid application to true Prevision. | |||
Mr. Podmore supposes “certain higher reasoning faculties, working apart from and above the ordinary consciousness,” which ''infer'' the future in strict analogy to similar operations of our lower intelligence, and that this higher reason translates its results into visions “before it presents them for the comprehension of the understanding which we know.” We are further to suppose that there is “no limit to.... the range of the facts observed,” and that this higher reason “may survey in one extensive glance the whole of the past.” Given the totality of present conditions, it, of course, follows, according to the law of strict phenomenal determination, that the whole series of future experience can be completely and exactly represented. It only remains that the imagination should construct it, or some of it, in accordance with this clue, to present it to our lower consciousness as an “intuition.” But let us appreciate the concession required of us, and then see in what this “magnified counterpart of our known rational faculty” differs, if at all, from the noumenal consciousness which is exempt from the form of time. | Mr. Podmore supposes “certain higher reasoning faculties, working apart from and above the ordinary consciousness,” which ''infer'' the future in strict analogy to similar operations of our lower intelligence, and that this higher reason translates its results into visions “before it presents them for the comprehension of the understanding which we know.” We are further to suppose that there is “no limit to.... the range of the facts observed,” and that this higher reason “may survey in one extensive glance the whole of the past.” Given the totality of present conditions, it, of course, follows, according to the law of strict phenomenal determination, that the whole series of future experience can be completely and exactly represented. It only remains that the imagination should construct it, or some of it, in accordance with this clue, to present it to our lower consciousness as an “intuition.” But let us appreciate the concession required of us, and then see in what this “magnified counterpart of our known rational faculty” differs, if at all, from the noumenal consciousness which is exempt from the form of time. | ||