This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
William James (1904)
Classics in the History of Psychology An internet educational resource developed by Christopher D. Green York University, Toronto, Ontario (Return to Classics Index)
A World of Pure Experience William James (1904) First published in Journal of 5"0# hilosophy, sycholo!y, and "cientific #ethods, $, 533 543, 5!1
It is di$$i%ult not to noti%e a %urious unrest in the philosophi% atmosphere o$ the time, al&a's loosenin( o$ old landmar)s, a so$tenin( o$ oppositions, a mutual borro&in( $rom one another re$le%tin( on the part o$ s'stems an%ientl' %losed, and an interest in ne& su((estions, ho&e*er *a(ue, as i$ the one thin( sure &ere the inade+ua%' o$ the extant s%hool solutions# ,he dissatis$a%tion &ith these seems due $or the most part to a $eelin( that the' are too abstra%t and a%ademi%# -i$e is %on$used and superabundant, and &hat the 'oun(er (eneration appears to %ra*e is more o$ the temperament o$ li$e in its philosoph', e*en thou(h it &ere at some %ost o$ lo(i%al ri(or and o$ $ormal purit'# ,rans%endental idealism is in%linin( to let the &orld &a( in%omprehensibl', in spite o$ its .bsolute /ub0e%t and his unit' o$ purpose# 1er)ele'an idealism is abandonin( the prin%iple o$ parsimon' and dabblin( in panps'%hi% spe%ulations# 2mpiri%ism $lirts &ith teleolo('3 and, stran(est o$ all, natural realism, so lon( de%entl' buried, raises its head abo*e the tur$, and $inds (lad hands outstret%hed $rom the most unli)el' +uarters to help it to its $eet a(ain# We are all biased b' our personal $eelin(s, I )no&, and I am personall' dis%ontented &ith extant solutions3 so I seem to read the si(ns o$ a (reat unsettlement, as i$ the uphea*al o$ more real %on%eptions and more $ruit$ul methods &ere imminent, as i$ a true lands%ape mi(ht result, less %lipped, strai(ht ed(ed and arti$i%ial# I$ philosoph' be reall' on the e*e o$ an' %onsiderable rearran(ement, the time should be propitious $or an' one &ho has su((estions o$ his o&n to brin( $or&ard# For man' 'ears past m' mind has been (ro&in( into a %ertain t'pe o$ %eltanschauun!# Ri(htl' or &ron(l', I ha*e, 41, (ot to the point &here I %an hardl' see thin(s in an' other pattern# I propose, there$ore, to des%ribe the pattern as %learl' as I %an %onsistentl' &ith (reat bre*it', and to thro& m' des%ription into the bubblin( *at o$ publi%it' &here, 0ostled b' ri*als and torn b' %riti%s, it &ill e*entuall' either disappear $rom noti%e, or else, i$ better lu%) be$all it, +uietl' subside to the pro$undities, and ser*e as a possible $erment o$ ne& (ro&ths or a nu%leus o$ ne& %r'stalli4ation# I. Radical Empiricism I (i*e the name o$ 5radi%al empiri%ism5 to m' %eltanschauun!# 2mpiri%ism is )no&n as the opposite o$ rationalism# Rationalism tends to emphasi4e uni*ersals and to ma)e &holes prior to parts in the order o$ lo(i% as &ell as in that o$ bein(# 2mpiri%ism, on the %ontrar', la's the explanator' stress upon the part, the element, the indi*idual, and treats the &hole as a %olle%tion and the uni*ersal as an abstra%tion# 6' des%ription o$ thin(s, a%%ordin(l', starts &ith the parts and ma)es o$ the &hole a bein( o$ the se%ond order# It is essentiall' a mosai% philosoph', a philosoph' o$ plural $a%ts, li)e that o$ 7ume and his des%endants, &ho re$er these
and then spa%e ad0a%en%' and distan%e# . a . in spite o$ the $a%t that %on0un%ti*e and dis0un%ti*e relations present themsel*es as bein( $ull' %o ordinate parts o$ experien%e. similarit' and di$$eren%e.bsolute 6ind that %reates them as its ob0e%ts# 1ut it di$$ers $rom the 7umian t'pe o$ empiri%ism in one parti%ular &hi%h ma)es me add the epithet radi%al# .$a%ts neither to /ubstan%es in &hi%h the' inhere nor to an . or /el*es3 &hereas. and are immediatel' %ons%ious o$ %ontinuin( ea%h other# . stri*in(s. li)e. the terms o$ &hi%h seem in man' %ases a%tuall' to %ompenetrate and su$$use ea%h other5s bein(# 9hilosoph' has al&a's turned on (rammati%al parti%les# With. ea%h &ith its o&n (rade o$ unit'# . be%ause. the ori(inal pla%in( o$ thin(s (ettin( %orre%ted. intelle%tual %ate(ories and po&ers. $rom. %on0un%tion as &ell as separation. to&ards. the resolution o$ the %ausal tie into habitual se+uen%e. 7ume5s statement that &hate*er thin(s &e distin(uish are as 5loose and separate5 as i$ the' had 5no manner o$ %onne%tion#5 James 6ill5s denial that similars ha*e an'thin( 5reall'5 in %ommon. is in%idental to this most intimate o$ all relations. near. purposes. or o$ a%ti*it' &ith no purpose. as bein( true in some supernal &a'. the results &ould ha*e %alled $or no su%h arti$i%ial %orre%tion# )adical e'piricis'. Con unc!i"e Rela!ions Relations are o$ di$$erent de(rees o$ intima%'# 6erel' to be 5&ith5 one another in a uni*erse o$ dis%ourse is the most external relation that terms %an ha*e. the' $ail to %onne%t minds into an' re(ular s'stem# :auses and purposes obtain onl' amon( spe%ial series o$ $a%ts# . $or. as i$ the unit' o$ thin(s and their *ariet' belon(ed to di$$erent orders o$ truth and *italit' alto(ether# II. treatin( them as rationalism al&a's tends to treat them. tenden%'. the relation experien%ed bet&een terms that $orm states o$ mind. in the $inal philosophi% arran(ement# 8o&. the relations that connect e&periences 'ust the'selves be e&perienced relations. does full *ustice to con*unctive relations. i$ 'ou should li)en the uni*erse o$ absolute idealism to an a+uarium. &e %an ima(ine a uni*erse o$ &ithness but no nextness3 or one o$ nextness but no li)eness. substan%es. has al&a's sho&n a tenden%' to do a&a' &ith the %onne%tions o$ thin(s. &ithout. ea%h at its $a%e *alue. o$ ea%h and all these (rades# Whether or not it possibl' en0o's some still more absolute (rade o$ union does not appear upon the sur$a%e# . next.$ter them. an empiri%ism must neither admit into its %onstru%tions an' element that is not dire%tl' experien%ed. ordinar' empiri%ism.a)en as it does appear. $ul$ilments or disappointments. a(ainst. m' these &ords desi(nate t'pes o$ %on0un%ti*e relation arran(ed in a rou(hl' as%endin( order o$ intima%' and in%lusi*eness# A priori. &hether term or relation. are examples o$ &hat I mean# . b' one or another o$ its parts. resistan%e. John 6ill5s a%%ount o$ both ph'si%al thin(s and sel*es as %omposed o$ dis%ontinuous possibilities.he or(ani4ation o$ the /el$ as a s'stem o$ memories. nor ex%lude $rom them an' element that is dire%tl' experien%ed# For su%h a philosoph'. but a real pla%e must be $ound $or e*er' )ind o$ thin( experien%ed.he sel$ relation seems extremel' limited and does not lin) t&o di$$erent sel*es to(ether# ri'a facie. i$ empiri%ism had onl' been radi%al and ta)en e*er'thin( that %omes &ithout dis$a*or.o be radi%al. and the %ausal order (enerall'# Finall'.he natural result o$ su%h a &orld pi%ture has been the e$$orts o$ rationalism to %orre%t its in%oheren%ies b' the addition o$ transexperiential a(ents o$ uni$i%ation. or o$ purpose &ith no e(o# . and to insist most on the dis0un%tions# 1er)ele'5s nominalism. and seems to in*ol*e nothin( &hate*er as to $arther %onse+uen%es# /imultaneit' and time inter*al %ome next. ho&e*er.he uni*erse o$ human experien%e is. as I understand it.hese &ould be uni*erses. and the (eneral pul*eri4ation o$ all 2xperien%e b' asso%iation and the mind dust theor'. throu(h. 2lements ma' indeed be redistributed. t'in( terms into series in*ol*in( %han(e.hen relations o$ a%ti*it'. or o$ li)eness &ith no a%ti*it'. %arr'in( the possibilit' o$ man' in$eren%es# . and any kind of relation e&perienced 'ust be accounted as (real( as any thin! else in the syste'. our uni*erse is to a lar(e extent %haoti%# 8o one sin(le t'pe o$ %onne%tion runs throu(h all the experien%es that %ompose it# I$ &e ta)e spa%e relations.
his imper$e%t intima%'.here is no other nature. the transition $rom the one to the other is continuous# :ontinuit' here is a de$inite sort o$ experien%e3 0ust as de$inite as is the discontinuity. the latter al&a's tendin( to i(nore it undul'# Radi%al empiri%ism. no other &hatness than this absen%e o$ brea) and this sense o$ %ontinuit' in that most intimate o$ all %on0un%ti*e relations. and both the earlier and the later experien%e are o$ thin(s dire%tl' li*ed# . at the %onta%t ho& %an the' be t&o? I$.%r'stal (lobe in &hi%h (old$ish are s&immin(.he %on0un%ti*e relation that has (i*en most trouble to philosoph' is the co. that itsel$ is a third thin(.5 0ust as the &hatness o$ separation and dis%ontinuit' is real %ontent in the %ontrasted %ase# 9ra%ti%all' to experien%e one5s personal %ontinuum in this li*in( &a' is to )no& the ori(inals o$ the ideas o$ %ontinuit' and sameness. 'ou &ould ha*e to %ompare the empiri%ist uni*erse to somethin( more li)e one o$ those dried human heads &ith &hi%h the . the same ob0e%ts )no&n and the same purposes $ollo&ed). 'ou put a relation o$ transition bet&een them. b' &hi%h one experien%e passes into another &hen both belon( to the same sel$# 6' experien%es and 'our experien%es are 5&ith5 ea%h other in *arious external &a's.n in$inite series is in*ol*ed. neither less nor more3 and to ta)e it at its $a%e *alue means $irst o$ all to ta)e it 0ust as &e $eel it. $or this is the strate(i% point. to pass $rom a thin( li*ed to another thin( onl' %on%ei*ed. on the %ontrar'.'a)s o$ 1orneo de%) their lod(es# .nd this &hatness is real empiri%al 5%ontent. beads. in*ol*in( &ords that dri*e us to in*ent se%ondar' %on%eptions in order to neutrali4e their su((estions and to ma)e our a%tual experien%e a(ain seem rationall' possible# What I do $eel simpl' &hen a later moment o$ m' experien%e su%%eeds an earlier one is that thou(h the' are t&o moments. and loose appendi%es o$ e*er' des%ription $loat and dan(le $rom it. and the rationalist remed'in( the looseness b' their . and not to %on$use oursel*es &ith abstra%t tal) about it. so to %all it.he s)ull $orms a solid nu%leus3 but innumerable $eathers. to o&n all that the' %an e*er mean# 1ut all experien%es ha*e their %onditions3 and o*er subtle intelle%ts. and a(rees that there appear to be a%tual $or%es at &or) &hi%h tend. ob0e%t. strin(s. but mine pass into mine.bsolutes or /ubstan%es.hou(h the $un%tions exerted b' m' experien%e and b' 'ours ma' be the same (e. ha*e ended b' substitutin( a lot o$ stati% ob0e%ts o$ %on%eption $or the dire%t per%eptual experien%es# >/ameness. and the chan!e itself is one of the thin!s i''ediately e&perienced# 5:han(e5 in this %ase means %ontinuous as opposed to dis%ontinuous transition# 1ut %ontinuous transition is one sort o$ a %on0un%ti*e relation3 and to be a radi%al empiri%ist means to hold $ast to this %on0un%ti*e relation o$ all others.e&perience &hi%h I $ind it impossible to a*oid &hen I see) to ma)e the transition $rom an experien%e o$ m' o&n to one o$ 'ours# In this latter %ase I ha*e to (et on and o$$ a(ain. 'et the sameness has in this %ase to be as%ertained expressl' (and o$ten &ith di$$i%ult' and un%ertainl') a$ter the brea) has been $elt3 &hereas in passin( $rom one o$ m' o&n moments to another the sameness o$ ob0e%t and interest is unbro)en. and 'ours pass into 'ours in a &a' in &hi%h 'ours and mine ne*er pass into one another# Within ea%h o$ our personal histories. thin)in( about the $a%ts here. terminatin(. and as)in( ho& the' are possible. in a nu%leus o$ %ommon per%eption. lea*es.conscious transition.he result is that $rom di$$i%ult' to di$$i%ult'. is the $a%t that ordinar' empiri%ism o*er emphasi4es a(ainst rationalism. this bare relation o$ +ithness bet&een some parts o$ the sum total o$ experien%e and other parts.. >must be a star) numeri%al identit'3 it %an5t run on $rom next to next# :ontinuit' %an5t mean mere absen%e o$ (ap3 $or i$ 'ou sa' t&o thin(s are in immediate %onta%t.> and so on# . to ma)e the unit' (reater# . as time (oes on.he holdin( $ast to this relation means ta)in( it at its $a%e *alue. and the brea) is positi*el' experien%ed and noted# . interest and purpose are continuous or 'ay be continuous#<1= 9ersonal histories are pro%esses o$ %han(e in time. the empiri%ists lea*in( thin(s permanentl' dis0oined. and. i$ a hole be made. the position throu(h &hi%h. the passin( o$ one experien%e into another &hen the belon( to the same sel$# . it is true. the plain %on0un%ti*e experien%e has been dis%redited b' both s%hools. sub0e%t. seem to ha*e nothin( to do &ith one another# 2*en so m' experien%es and 'ours $loat and dan(le. to )no& &hat the &ords stand $or %on%retel'. and needs to be related or hit%hed to its terms# . on the other hand. all the %orruptions o$ diale%ti%s and all the metaph'si%al $i%tions pour into our philosoph'# . or &hate*er other $i%titious a(en%ies o$ union ma' ha*e emplo'ed# From all &hi%h arti$i%ialit' &e %an be sa*ed b' . but $or the most part out o$ si(ht and irrele*ant and unima(inable to one another# . is $air to both the unit' and the dis%onne%tion# It $inds no reason $or treatin( either as illusor'# It allots to ea%h its de$inite sphere o$ des%ription.> the' ha*e said.!. sa*e that the' terminate in it.
i$ 'ou as) me &hat hall I mean b' m' ima(e. that %on0un%tions and separations are. to ma)e our merel' experien%ed dis0un%tions more trul' real# Failin( thus. are &hat impart to the ima(e. also. #$e Co%ni!i"e Rela!ion . spe%ial experien%es o$ %on0un%tion.hrou(hout the histor' o$ philosoph' the sub0e%t and its ob0e%t ha*e been treated as absolutel' dis%ontinuous entities3 and thereupon the presen%e o$ the latter to the $ormer. as a sort o$ intermediar'# :ommon sense theories le$t the (ap untou%hed.ll the &hile. or it ma' ha*e a *er' dim ima(e o$ the hall. be it &hat it ma'. i$ su$$i%ientl' prolon(ed# . or it ma' ha*e a %lear ima(e. so that a brie$ des%ription o$ that t'pe &ill put the present reader su$$i%ientl' at m' point o$ *ie&.bsolute in to per$orm the saltator' a%t# . but su%h intrinsi% di$$eren%es in the ima(e ma)e no di$$eren%e in its %o(niti*e $un%tion# :ertain e&trinsic phenomena. i$ I %an lead 'ou to the hall. to ha*e led hither and to be . i$ &e ta)e experien%es at their $a%e *alue. to &hi%h the said %on0un%ti*e transitions +ould lead. &e ou(ht to let the ori(inall' (i*en %ontinuities stand on their o&n bottom# We ha*e no ri(ht to be lopsided or to blo& %apri%iousl' hot and %old# III. I am un%ertain &hether the 7all I see be &hat I had in mind or not3 'ou &ould ri(htl' den' that I had 5meant5 that parti%ular hall at all. and brou(ht an .o dis%uss all the &a's in &hi%h one experien%e ma' $un%tion as the )no&er o$ another. has assumed a paradoxi%al %hara%ter &hi%h all sorts o$ theories had to be in*ented to o*er%ome# Representati*e theories put a mental 5representation.he $irst (reat pit$all $rom &hi%h su%h a radi%al standin( b' experien%e &ill sa*e us is an arti$i%ial %on%eption o$ the relations bet+een kno+er and kno+n# . must be a%%ounted e+uall' real3 and se%ond.5 or 5%ontent5 into the (ap. I ha*e (i*en some a%%ount in t&o arti%les#<3= . and ma)e him see &hat the a%tual meanin(s o$ the m'sterious %o(niti*e relation ma' be# /uppose me to be sittin( here in m' librar' at :ambrid(e. in*o)in(. &ith de$inite tra%ts o$ %on0un%ti*e transitional experien%e bet&een them3 or (3) the )no&n is a possible experien%e either o$ that sub0e%t or another. %o ordinate phenomena &hi%h.he resemblan%e &ould %ount in that %ase as %oin%idental merel'.a %ouple o$ simple re$le%tions@ $irst. in the *er' bosom o$ the $inite experien%e.5 5ima(e. $or all sorts o$ thin(s o$ a )ind resemble one another in this &orld &ithout bein( held $or that reason to ta)e %o(ni4an%e o$ one another# Bn the other hand.his is the t'pe o$ %ase in &hi%h the mind en0o's dire%t 5a%+uaintan%e5 &ith a present ob0e%t# In the other t'pes the mind has 5)no&led(e about5 an ob0e%t not immediatel' there# B$ t'pe A. &ould be in%ompatible &ith the limits o$ this essa'# I ha*e 0ust treated o$ t'pe 1. its )no&in( o$$i%e# For instan%e. then &e ou(ht to stand read' to per$orm the %on*erse a%t# We ou(ht to in*o)e hi(her prin%iples o$ disunion. and I %all tell 'ou nothin(3 or i$ I $ail to point or lead 'ou to&ards the 7ar*ard .rans%endentalist theories le$t it impossible to tra*erse b' $inite )no&ers. or the 5apprehension5 b' the $ormer o$ the latter. &hen union is re+uired. de%larin( our mind able to %lear it b' a sel$ trans%endin( leap# . e*er' %on0un%tion re+uired to ma)e the relation intelli(ible is (i*en in $ull# 2ither the )no&er and the )no&n are@<A= (1) the sel$ same pie%e o$ experien%e ta)en t&i%e o*er in di$$erent %ontexts3 or the' are (A) t&o pie%es o$ actual experien%e belon(in( to the same sub0e%t. trans%endental prin%iples to o*er%ome the separateness &e ha*e assumed.elta3 or i$.5 and to be thin)in( trul' o$ the latter ob0e%t# 6' mind ma' ha*e be$ore it onl' the name. the )ind o$ )no&led(e %alled per%eption# . bein( led b' 'ou. e*en thou(h m' mental ima(e mi(ht to some de(ree ha*e resembled it# . the simplest sort o$ %on%eptual )no&led(e. ho&e*er imper$e%t it ma' ha*e been.'pe 3 %an al&a's $ormall' and h'potheti%all' be redu%ed to t'pe A. and tell 'ou o$ its histor' and present uses3 i$ in its presen%e I $eel m' idea. at ten minutes5 &al) $rom 56emorial 7all. that i$ &e insist on treatin( thin(s as reall' separate &hen the' are (i*en as %ontinuousl' 0oined. at all e*ents.
the $irst experien%e kno+s that last one# Where the' do not.hese are &hat the unions are +orth. e*en althou(h at the outset nothin( &as there in us but a $lat pie%e o$ substanti*e experien%e li)e an' other. as the' de*elop to&ards their terminus. or $orms )no&led(e 5about5 an ob0e%t# It %onsists in intermediar' experien%es (possible. >e*en thou(h the' be $eelin(s o$ %ontinuousl' (ro&in( $ul$ilment. to dereali4e the &hole experien%ed &orld b'. o*er the head o$ their distin%tness# . $or into it m' idea has passed b' %on0un%ti*e experien%es o$ sameness and $ul$illed intention# 8o&here is there 0ar. in lo(i%al predi%ation throu(h the %opula 5is. onl' separate the )no&er $rom the )no&n. su%h that. i$ not a%tual) o$ %ontinuousl' de*elopin( pro(ress. and. &ith no sel$ trans%enden%' about it. &hereas &hat &e ha*e in )no&led(e is a )ind o$ immediate tou%h o$ the one b' the other. but denotin( de$initel' $elt transitions. put into experiential terms# Whene*er su%h is the se+uen%e o$ our experien%es &e ma' $reel' sa' that &e had the terminal ob0e%t 5in mind5 $rom the outset. there is experien%e $rom point to point o$ one dire%tion $ollo&ed. a leapin( o$ the %hasm as b' li(htnin(. &ith an ans&erin( term o$ the others3 &h' then m' soul &as propheti%. b' in$erior relations bare li)eness or su%%ession. these are all that +e can ever practically 'ean b' union. the result is that their startin!. $inall'. ta)en in no trans%endental sense. the' %ould onl' re*eal themsel*es to us b' 0ust su%h %on0un%ti*e results# .point thereby beco'es a kno+er and their ter'inus an ob*ect 'eant or kno+n# . &e had su%h an .ll these dead intermediaries o$ 'ours are out o$ ea%h other. &hether in personal identit'. &ith %on0un%ti*el' transitional experien%es bet&een# . &hether in this matter o$ a )no&led(e about that terminates in an a%+uaintan%e. &e mi(ht be entitled to brand all our empiri%al unions as a sham# 1ut unions b' %ontinuous transition are the onl' ones &e )no& o$. and m' idea must be. inter*ene.bsolute read'. a painted %able &ill hold a painted ship# In a &orld &here both the terms and their distin%tions are a$$airs o$ experien%e. that is the &hole o$ its nature. b' %ontinuit'# Is it not time to repeat &hat -ot4e said o$ substan%es. lies all that the kno+in! of a percept by an idea can possibly contain or si!nify# Where*er su%h transitions are $elt.5 or else&here# I$ an'&here there &ere more absolute unions reali4ed. an 5apprehension5 in the et'molo(i%al sense o$ the &ord. %alled %o(ni4ant o$ realit'# . &here the )no&led(e is %on%eptual in t'pe. but e*er' later moment %ontinues and %orroborates an earlier one# In this %ontinuin( and %orroboratin(. o$ $ul$ilment. that to act like one is to be one? /hould &e not sa' here that to be experien%ed as %ontinuous is to be reall' %ontinuous. there %an be no preten%e o$ )no&in(# In this latter %ase the extremes &ill be %onne%ted.bsolute.he &hole +uestion o$ ho& 5one5 thin( %an )no& 5another5 &ould %ease to be a real one at all in a &orld &here otherness itsel$ &as an illusion#<4= /o mu%h $or the essentials o$ the %o(niti*e relation. i$ &e ha*e no transphenomenal . an a%t b' &hi%h t&o terms are smitten into one.hat is &hat &e 'ean here b' the ob0e%t5s bein( 5in mind#5 B$ an' deeper more real &a' o$ bein( in mind &e ha*e no positi*e %on%eption. in a &orld &here experien%e and realit' %ome to the same thin(? In a pi%ture (aller' a painted hoo) &ill ser*e to han( a painted %hain b'.hat per%ept &as &hat I 'eant. on the other hand. %on0un%tions that are experien%ed must be at least as real as an'thin( else# .he' &ill be 5absolutel'5 real %on0un%tions. &hen the sensible . not one o$ our opponents5 theories o$ )no&led(e %ould remain standin( an' better than ours %ould3 $or the distin%tions as &ell as the %on0un%tions o$ experien%e &ould impartiall' $all its pre'# . i$ %onne%ted at all. or b' 5&ithness5 alone# Cno&led(e o$ sensible realities thus %omes to li$e inside the tissue o$ experien%e# It is made3 and made b' relations that unroll themsel*es in time# Whene*er %ertain intermediaries are (i*en. and &e ha*e no ri(ht to dis%redit our a%tual experien%e b' tal)in( o$ su%h a &a' at all# I )no& that man' a reader &ill rebel at this# >6ere intermediaries. at a stro)e# I$. and b' %ommon %onsent &ould be. so that ea%h term o$ the one %ontext %orresponds seriall'. or &here e*en as possibles the' %an not. as I &al). and no m'ster' sa*e the m'ster' o$ %omin( into existen%e and o$ bein( (raduall' $ollo&ed b' other pie%es o$ substanti*e experien%e. and outside o$ their termini still#> 1ut do not su%h diale%ti% di$$i%ulties remind us o$ the do( droppin( his bone and snappin( at its ima(e in the &ater? I$ &e )ne& an' more real )ind o$ union aliunde. and $inall' o$ one pro%ess $ul$illed.> he &ill sa'.hat is all that )no&in( (in the simple %ase %onsidered) %an be )no&n as.no& ter'inated3 i$ the asso%iates o$ the ima(e and o$ the $elt hall run parallel.
%%ordin( to m' *ie&. &e substitute them al&a's3 and &ith these substitutes &e pass the (reater number o$ our hours# .he' 5represent5 them. o&in( to the 5uni*ersal5 %hara%ter<5= &hi%h the' $re+uentl' possess. thou(h o$ %ourse the $a%ts had al&a's been $amiliar enou(h# What. are substitutes $or nothin( a%tual3 the' end outside the real &orld alto(ether. is. to %arr' out their purpose. depends alto(ether on the )ind o$ transition that obtains# /ome experien%es simpl' abolish their prede%essors &ithout %ontinuin( them in an' &a'# Bthers are $elt to in%rease or to enlar(e their meanin(. mo*in( $rom next to next b' a (reat man' possible paths# 2ither one o$ these paths mi(ht be a $un%tional substitute $or another. it is true. in a s'stem o$ experien%es. in &a'&ard $an%ies. a +uasi %haos# .here is *astl' more dis%ontinuit' in the sum total o$ experien%es than &e %ommonl' suppose# . &hat the %on%ept 5had in mind#5 .he ideas $orm related s'stems.nd this brin(s us to the (eneral +uestion o$ substitution# I&. does the 5substitution5 o$ one o$ them $or another mean? . the' outstrip the tard' %onse%utions o$ the thin(s themsel*es. his o&n bod'. a %ontinuous per%ept3 and e+uall' %ontinuous as a per%ept (thou(ht &e ma' be inattenti*e to it) is the material en*ironment o$ that . the paths that run throu(h %on%eptual experien%es.aine5s brilliant boo) on 5Intelli(en%e. %orrespondin( point $or point to the s'stems &hi%h the realities $orm3 and b' lettin( an ideal term %all up its asso%iates s'stemati%all'.he onl' experien%e that one experien%e %an per$orm is to lead into another experien%e3 and the onl' $ul$ilment &e %an spea) o$ is the rea%hin( o$ a %ertain experien%ed end# When one experien%e leads to (or %an lead to) the same end as another. but in the de$inite pra%ti%al sense o$ bein( its substitute in *arious operations. and in a (eneral &a'. and s&eep us on to&ards our ultimate termini in a $ar more labor sa*in( &a' than the $ollo&in( o$ trains o$ sensible per%eption e*er %ould# Wonder$ul are the ne& %uts and the short %ir%uits &hi%h the thou(ht paths ma)e# 6ost thou(ht paths. and to $ollo& one rather than another mi(ht on o%%asion be an ad*anta(eous thin( to do# . are hi(hl' ad*anta(eous paths to $ollo&# 8ot onl' do the' 'ield in%on%ei*abl' rapid transitions3 but.5 substitution &as $or the $irst time named as a %ardinal lo(i%al $un%tion. and ma' $ul$il their $un%tion better than the' $ul$illed it themsel*es# 1ut to 5$ul$il a $un%tion5 in a &orld o$ pure experien%e %an be %on%ei*ed and de$ined in onl' one possible &a'# I8 su%h a &orld transitions and arri*als (or terminations) are the onl' e*ents that happen. it is true. be%ause it no& pro*es itsel$ to be. and to their %apa%it' $or asso%iation &ith one another in (reat s'stems. are themsel*es experien%es. is rea%hed# . &hether dis0un%ti*e or %on0un%ti*e in %ontent. exa%tl'. sometimes ph'si%al and sometimes mental. not in an' +uasi mira%ulous 5epistemolo(i%al5 sense. the' a(ree in $un%tion# 1ut the &hole s'stem o$ experien%es as the' are immediatel' (i*en presents itsel$ as a +uasi %haos throu(h &hi%h one %an pass out o$ an initial term in man' dire%tions and 'et end in the same terminus. utopias. pro*es its $un%tion o$ )no&in( that per%ept to be true. that is. &e ma' be led to a terminus &hi%h the %orrespondin( real term &ould ha*e led to in %ase &e had operated on the real &orld# . but the per%ept5s existen%e as the terminus o$ the %hain o$ intermediaries creates the $un%tion# Whate*er terminates that %hain &as. throu(h 5thou(hts5 or 5ideas5 that 5)no&5 the thin(s in &hi%h the' terminate. and must in (eneral be a%%ounted at least as real as the terms &hi%h the' relate# What the nature o$ the e*ent %alled 5supersedin(5 si(ni$ies.s a matter o$ $a%t. or to brin( us nearer to their (oal# . &hi%h is the ob0e%t.he to&erin( importan%e $or human li$e o$ this )ind o$ )no&in( lies in the $a%t that an experien%e that )no&s another %an $i(ure as its representative. &hi%h lead us to its asso%iates and results# 1' experimentin( on our ideas o$ realit'. ta)en all to(ether.his is &h' I %alled our experien%es. $i%tions or mista)es# 1ut &here the' do re enter realit' and terminate therein. thou(h the' happen b' so man' sorts o$ path# . experien%e as a &hole is a pro%ess in time. 'u(s!i!u!ion In . &e ma' sa*e oursel*es the trouble o$ experimentin( on the real experien%es &hi%h the' se*erall' mean# .per%ept. &hereb' innumerable parti%ular terms lapse and are superseded b' others that $ollo& upon them b' transitions &hi%h.he per%ept here not onl' verifies the %on%ept.he ob0e%ti*e nu%leus o$ e*er' man5s experien%e.
o$ the real ph'si%al &orld. and &e no&here $eel a %ollision &ith &hat &e else&here %ount as truth or $a%t. positi*el' %on0un%ti*e transition in*ol*es neither %hasm nor leap# 1ein( the *er' ori(inal o$ &hat &e mean b' .he paradox o$ sel$ trans%enden%' in )no&led(e %omes ba%) upon us here. and our sense o$ a determinate dire%tion in $allin( $or&ard is all &e %o*er o$ the $uture o$ our path# It is as i$ a di$$erential +uotient should be %ons%ious and treat itsel$ as an ade+uate substitute $or a tra%ed out %ur*e# Bur experien%e. and our radi%all' empiri%al *ie& o$ %on0un%ti*e transitions. but &hi%h &e hold $or true althou(h unterminated per%eptuall'. W$a! )( ec!i"e Reference Is. and li*es in these transitions more than in the 0ourne'5s end# .5 as around the . b' the per%ept5s retroa%ti*e *alidatin( po&er# Just so &e are 5mortal5 all the time. as the result no& sho&s# We &ere virtual )no&ers o$ the 7all lon( be$ore &e &ere %erti$ied to ha*e been its a%tual )no&ers. innumerable thin)ers. that $ind not e*en an e*entual endin( $or themsel*es in the per%eptual &orld there mere da' dreams and 0o's and su$$erin(s and &ishes o$ the indi*idual minds# .s ea%h experien%e runs b' %o(niti*e transition into the next one.he experien%es o$ tenden%' are su$$i%ient to a%t upon &hat more %ould &e ha*e done at those moments e*en i$ the later *eri$i%ation %omes %omplete? . but out o$ them it is probable that to all eternit' no interrelated s'stem o$ an' )ind &ill e*er' be made# . but I thin) that our notions o$ pure experien%e and o$ substitution. ho& %an ob0e%ti*e re$eren%e o%%ur? . I sa' to the %har(e that the ob0e%ti*e re$eren%e &hi%h is so $la(rant a %hara%ter o$ our experien%e in*ol*es a %hasm and a mortal leap# .bod'. upon the $ront ed(e o$ an ad*an%in( &a*e %rest. or indeed o$ )no&in( an'thin(. &e %ommit oursel*es to the %urrent as i$ the port &ere sure# We li*e. be%ause nothin( sa's 5no5 to us. is o$ *ariations o$ rate and o$ dire%tion. Whosoe*er $eels his experien%e to be somethin( substitutional e*en &hile he has it.hese exist +ith one another. as it &ere. and &ith the ob0e%ti*e nu%lei. &ho holds )no&in( to %onsist in a salto 'ortale a%ross an 5epistemolo(i%al %hasm.his notion o$ the purel' substitutional or %on%eptual ph'si%al &orld brin(s us to the most %riti%al o$ all steps in the de*elopment o$ a philosoph' o$ pure experien%e# . inter alia. b' reason o$ the *irtualit' o$ the ine*itable e*ent &hi%h &ill ma)e us so &hen it shall ha*e %ome# 8o& the immensel' (reater part o$ all our )no&in( ne*er (ets be'ond this *irtual sta(e# It ne*er is %ompleted or nailed do&n# I spea) not merel' o$ our ideas o$ imper%eptibles li)e ether &a*es or disso%iated 5ions.nine ti'es out of a hundred. its +ualit' o$ )no&in( that. pursuin( their se*eral lines o$ ph'si%all' true %o(itation.nd. it is onl' &hen our idea o$ the 7all has a%tuall' terminated in the per%ept that &e )no& 5$or %ertain5 that $rom the be(innin( it &as trul' %o(niti*e o$ that# Dntil established b' the end o$ the pro%ess. our practical substitute for kno+in! in the co'pleted sense# . that are non substitutional. as a radi%al empiri%ist.o re%ur to the 6emorial 7all example latel' used.he )e' to this di$$i%ult' lies in the distin%tion bet&een )no&in( as *eri$ied and %ompleted. partl' shared and %ommon and partl' dis%rete. into the per%eptual realit' o$ &hi%h our li$e inserts itsel$ at points dis%rete and relati*el' rare# Round their se*eral ob0e%ti*e nu%lei.5 and postulates realit' existin( else&here# For the trans%endentalist. indeed. are Denk'ittel that &ill %arr' us sa$el' throu(h the pass# &. $loats the *ast %loud o$ experien%es that are &holl' sub0e%ti*e. and the same )no&in( as in transit and on its &a'# . and $orm %on%eptual ob0e%ts merel'. %han(in( b' (radual transition &hen the bod' mo*es# 1ut the distant parts o$ the ph'si%al &orld are at all times absent $rom us.'a)5s head o$ m' late metaphor. and the rest o$ the time are +uite in%on(ruent3 and around all the nu%lei o$ shared 5realit'. i$ )no&led(e be not there.5 su%h an idea presents no di$$i%ult'3 but it seems at $irst si(ht as i$ it mi(ht be in%onsistent &ith an empiri%ism li)e our o&n# 7a*e &e not explained that %on%eptual )no&led(e is made su%h &holl' b' the existen%e o$ thin(s that $all outside o$ the )no&in( experien%e itsel$ b' intermediar' experien%e and b' a terminus that $ul$ils? :an the )no&led(e be there be$ore these elements that %onstitute its bein( ha*e %ome? . ninety.5 or o$ 5e0e%ts5 li)e the %ontents o$ our nei(hbors5 minds3 I spea) also o$ ideas &hi%h &e mi(ht *eri$' i$ &e &ould ta)e the trouble. and there is no %ontradi%tin( truth in si(ht# To continue thinkin! unchallen!ed is.his is &hat. %ould still be doubted3 and 'et the )no&in( reall' &as there. tra%e paths that interse%t one another onl' at dis%ontinuous per%eptual points. ma' be said to ha*e an experien%e that rea%hes be'ond itsel$# From inside o$ its o&n entit' it sa's 5more.
b' $irst ma)in( )no&led(e %onsist in external relations as I ha*e done.nd this %ash *alue. illusions o$ our sensibilit' &hi%h philosophi%al re$le%tion pul*eri4es at a tou%h# :on%eption is our onl' trust&orth' instrument. &hether &e a%)no&led(ed su%h an .bsolute &or)in( hand in hand# :on%eption disinte(rates experien%e utterl'. so lon( as &e don5t di$$er about the nature o$ that exalted *irtue5s $ruits $ruits $or us.his seems to me an ex%ellent pla%e $or appl'in( the pra(mati% method# When a dispute arises.bsolute &ere pro*ed to exist $or other reasons.he latter &ould (ro& neither &orse nor better. a dispute o*er sel$ trans%enden%' is a pure lo(oma%h'# :all our %on%epts o$ e0e%ti*e thin(s sel$ trans%endent or the re*erse. that our ideas are sel$ trans%endent and 5true5 alread'. in the turnin( o$ our expe%tations and pra%ti%al tenden%ies into the ri(ht path3 and the ri(ht path here. puts su%h )no&led(e &ithin our (asp# 2ther &a*es and 'our an(er. and the onl' %omplaint o$ the trans%endentalist5s &ith &hi%h I %ould at all s'mpathi4e &ould be his %har(e that. it &ould still remain true that their puttin( us into possession o$ su%h e$$e%ts +ould be the sole cash.%ontinuit'. it ma)es no di$$eren%e. (enerall' spea)in(. in ad*an%e o$ the experien%es that are to terminate them. value of the self. pro*isionall' at least. %on%eption and the . it is needless to sa'. in*ol*es the %hasm and the leap# :on0un%ti*e transitions are the most super$i%ial o$ appearan%es. 5)no&led(e about5 is the next best thin(. ho&e*er.bsolute or le$t him out# . that ha*e themsel*es to be %on0oined b' ne& lin)s. is verbati' et literati' &hat our empiri%ist a%%ount pa's in# Bn pra(matist prin%iples. be kno+n. are thin(s in &hi%h m' thou(hts &ill ne*er perceptually terminate.o 5$eel5 our motion $or&ard is impossible# 6otion implies terminus3 and ho& %an terminus be $elt be$ore &e ha*e arri*ed? . I sa' then. &ould be the path that led us into the ob0e%t5s nearest nei(hborhood# Where dire%t a%+uaintan%e is la%)in(. is an in%ident o$ the $a%t that so mu%h o$ our experien%e %omes as an insu$$i%ient and %onsists o$ pro%ess and transition# Bur $ields o$ experien%e ha*e no more de$inite boundaries than ha*e our $ields o$ *ie&# 1oth are $rin(ed $ore*er b' a 'ore that %ontinuousl' de*elops. and that %ontinuousl' supersedes them as li$e pro%eeds# . I ha*e )no%)ed the solid bottom out o$ the &hole business. that method %onsists in au(urin( &hat pra%ti%al %onse+uen%es &ould be di$$erent i$ one side rather than the other &ere true# I$ no di$$eren%e %an be thou(ht o$. the dispute is a +uarrel o*er &ords# What then &ould the sel$ trans%enden%' a$$irmed to exist in ad*an%e o$ all experiential mediation or terminations. and an a%+uaintan%e &ith &hat a%tuall' lies about the ob0e%t.transcendency for us# . he &ill still sa'@ the' are third thin(s interposed. in $ull possession o$ their %reed# I ha*e no spa%e $or polemi%s in this arti%le. the barest tenden%' to lea*e the instant.bsolute ta)es up the tas)# /u%h trans%endentalists I must lea*e.hat. and to in*o)e them ma)es our trouble in$initel' &orse# . su%h a %riti% mi(ht sa'. $or example. &ould be a $a%t indi$$erent to our )no&led(e# . to the %hromati% $rin(es and to the hurt$ul &ords and deeds &hi%h are their reall' next e$$e%ts# 2*en i$ our ideas did in themsel*es %arr' the postulated sel$ trans%enden%'. &ere it true? It %ould onl' result in our orientation.as? What &ould it pra%ti%all' result in $or us. so I shall simpl' $ormulate the empiri%ist do%trine as m' h'pothesis. and palmed o$$ a substitute o$ )no&led(e $or the (enuine thin(# Bnl' the admission. are as real here as the terms are. lea*in( it to &or) or not &or) as it ma'# Bb0e%ti*e re$eren%e. it mi(ht &ell appear that his )no&led(e is terminated in innumerable %ases &here ours is still in%omplete# . there$ore. %an brin( solidit' ba%) to )no&led(e in a &orld li)e this. as in the %ase o$ e0e%ts). but m' %on%epts o$ them lead me to their *er' brin). so lon( as &e and the ob0e%t are not 'et $a%e to $a%e (or %an ne*er (et $a%e to $a%e. it ma)es a %ontinuum &here*er it appears# I )no& $ull &ell that su%h brie$ &ords as these &ill lea*e the hardened trans%endentalist unsha)en# :on0un%ti*e experien%es separate their terms. and is most %losel' related to it. humanisti% $ruits# I$ an .he relations. but its dis0un%tions are easil' o*er%ome a(ain &hen the . in &hi%h transitions and terminations are onl' b' ex%eption $ul$illed# .he barest start and sall' $or&ards. and b' then %on$essin( that nine tenths o$ the time these are not a%tuall' but onl' *irtuall' there. o$ %ourse.
o me the de%isi*e reason in $a*or o$ our minds meetin( in so'e %ommon ob0e%ts at least is that. &hen &al)in( throu(h the streets o$ -ondon.he trans%endentalist in all his parti%ular )no&led(es is as liable to this redu%tion as I am@ his . as 'et undi$$erentiated into thin( and thou(ht. ma' al&a's hope# &I. $or example. o$ %ourse. 'ou and I. o$ all thin(s. out o$ &hi%h in stri%t lo(i% onl' a Fod %ould %ompose a uni*erse e*en o$ dis%ourse# 8o d'nami% %urrents run bet&een m' ob0e%ts and 'our ob0e%ts# 8e*er %an our minds meet in the sa'e# . are &holl' out o$ %onne%tion &ith ea%h other# Bur li*es are a %on(eries o$ solipsisms. in $a%t. need he +uarrel &ith an a%%ount o$ )no&in( that merel' lea*es it liable to this ine*itable %ondition? Wh' insist that )no&in( is a stati% relation out o$ time &hen it pra%ti%all' seems so mu%h a $un%tion o$ our a%ti*e li$e? For a thin( to be *alid. are 5expressi*e. li)e an' one else.he' are o$ one stu$$ &ith .he %ontent o$ ea%h is &holl' immanent.he morro& ma' redu%e it to 5opinion#5 .oes :ons%iousness 2xist?5 .5 and the %ontent %orre%ted or %on$irmed# While still pure. and this %an be easil' sho&n# For the 1er)ele'an s%hool. b' an inner li$e li)e mine# . should )no&in( be exempt? Wh' should it not be ma)in( itsel$ *alid li)e e*er'thin( else? . is the same as to ma)e itsel$ *alid# When the &hole uni*erse seems onl' to be ma)in( itsel$ *alid and to be still in%omplete (else &h' its %easeless %han(in(?) &h'. &hether an instin%ti*e belie$ runs be$ore it or not# 1ut &hat is 5'our bod'5 here but a per%ept in 'y $ield? It is onl' as animatin( that ob0e%t. 'y ob0e%t. that his spirit and the spirits o$ his $ello& &a'$arers had absolutel' di$$erent to&ns in *ie&# . the empiri%al philosopher.he in%redibilit' o$ su%h a philosoph' is $la(rant# It is 5%old.5 so I deem it a%tuated as m' o&n is. it is impossible to subs%ribe to the idealism o$ the 2n(lish s%hool# Radi%al empiri%ism has.his ar(ument $rom analo(' is m' reason. &ords and %ondu%t (enerall'. a simple that./o the notion o$ a )no&led(e still in transitu and on its &a' 0oins hands here &ith that notion o$ a 5pure experien%e5 &hi%h I tried to explain in m' <essa'= entitled 5. #$e Con!erminousness of *ifferen! +inds With transition and prospe%t thus enthroned in pure experien%e. and unnatural5 in a supreme de(ree3 and it ma' be doubted &hether e*en 1er)ele' himsel$. reall' belie*ed. and $or me to spea) o$ 'ou is $oll'# 6'riads o$ su%h uni*erses e*en no& ma' %oexist. sa's -ot4e. but some dupli%ate bod' o$ 'our o&n &ith &hi%h that has nothin( to do. &e belon( to di$$erent uni*erses. and there are no transitions &ith &hi%h the' are %onsubstantial and throu(h &hi%h their bein(s ma' unite# Eour 6emorial 7all and mine. more a$$inities &ith natural realism than &ith the *ie&s o$ 1er)ele' or o$ 6ill. strained. 'our mind and m' mind meet and ma' be %alled %onterminous# Eour mind a%tuates that bod' and mine sees it3 m' thou(hts pass into it as into their harmonious %o(niti*e $ul$ilment3 'our emotions and *olitions pass into it as %auses into their e$$e%ts# 1ut that per%ept han(s to(ether &ith all our other ph'si%al per%epts# . an' experien%e mine. I ha*e no moti*e $or assumin( that 'our mind exists at all# Wh' do I postulate 'our mind? 1e%ause I see 'our bod' a%tin( in a %ertain &a'# Its (estures.hat some parts o$ it ma' be alread' *alid or *eri$ied be'ond dispute. irrele*ant to one another3 m' %on%ern is solel' &ith the uni*erse &ith &hi%h m' o&n li$e is %onne%ted# In that per%eptual part o$ m' uni*erse &hi%h I %all your bod'. and onl' *irtuall' %lassi$iable as ob0e%ti*e $a%t or as some one5s opinion about $a%t# . $a%ial mo*ements.he instant $ield o$ the present is al&a's experien%ed in its 5pure5 state# plain un+uali$ied a%tualit'. e*en &hen both are per%epts. &ho too) it so reli(iousl'. unless I ma)e that supposition. then. ideas (the *erbal e+ui*alent o$ &hat I term experien%es) are dis%ontinuous# . or present. o$ &hat I &rite about in these *er' lines passes $or 5truth#5 .his is as true &hen the $ield is %on%eptual as &hen it is per%eptual# 56emorial 7all5 is 5there5 in m' idea as mu%h as &hen I stand be$ore it# I pro%eed to a%t on its a%%ount in either %ase# Bnl' in the later experien%e that supersedes the present one is this na-f immedia%' retrospe%ti*el' split into t&o parts.bsolute does not sa*e him# Wh'. a 5%ons%iousness5 and its 5%ontent. that I ha*e an' o%%asion to thin) o$ 'ou at all# I$ the bod' that 'ou a%tuate be not the *er' bod' that I see there.
he per%ept o$ ea%h o$ us. a 5mind5 or 5personal %ons%iousness5 is the name $or a series o$ experien%es run to(ether b' %ertain de$inite transitions.he next thin( be'ond m' per%ept is not 'our mind. &hi%h &ould still be there. as i$ it &ere a third external thin(. &hi%h (thou(ht trans$eren%e apart) is not supposed to be the %ase# In point o$ $a%t the ultimate %ommon barrier %an al&a's be pushed. it &ould be an ultimate barrier bet&een them unless indeed the' $lo&ed o*er it and be%ame 5%o %ons%ious5 o*er a still lar(er part o$ their %ontent.bolishin( an' number o$ %ontexts &ould not destro' the experien%e itsel$ or its other %ontexts.part $rom %olor blindness and su%h possibilities. that the same man %an5t be tall in relation to one nei(hbor. put out a %andle. but more per%epts o$ m' o&n into &hi%h m' $irst per%ept de*elops. not merel' a(ainst it. 'our hand la's hold o$ one end o$ a rope and m' hand la's hold o$ the other end# We pull a(ainst ea%h other# :an our t&o hands be mutual ob0e%ts in this experien%e.his is enou(h $or m' present point@ the %ommon sense notion o$ minds sharin( the same ob0e%t o$$ers no spe%ial lo(i%al or epistemolo(i%al di$$i%ulties o$ its o&n3 it stands or $alls &ith the (eneral possibilit' o$ thin(s bein( in %on0un%ti*e relation &ith other thin(s at all# In prin%iple.it3 and i$ it be our %ommon possession. b' both minds.he %rux is al&a's the old Free) one. 'ou point to 'y 6emorial 7all &ith your hand &hi%h . the' must be so li)e&ise# For instan%e. lea*in( m' $lan) $or the time exposed# 1ut i$ m' reader &ill onl' allo& that the same 5no+5 both ends his past and be(ins his $uture3 or that. the same dollar (oes into his po%)et that %ame out o$ mine3 he &ill also in %onsisten%' ha*e to allo& that the same ob0e%t ma' %on%ei*abl' pla' a part in. in m' arti%le on 5:ons%iousness. &hether &hen 'ou and I are said to )no& the 5same5 6emorial 7all. $or example. 0ust as the same point. the' must be pro*ed to be positi*el' some&here else# 1ut no other lo%ation %an be assi(ned $or them. but b' insertin( themsel*es into it and %oales%in( &ith it. an' more than abolishin( some o$ the point5s linear %ontinuations &ould destro' the others. as bein( related to the rest o$.5 to sho& that it %an). an' number o$ other&ise entirel' di$$erent minds# . &hen he bu's an a%re o$ land $rom his nei(hbor. &hen I am present. t&o ha&sers ma' embra%e the same pile. as he sees the sur$a%e o$ the 7all. l'in( at their interse%tion. our minds do terminate at or in a numeri%all' identi%al per%ept# Bb*iousl'. and the rope not be mutual also? What is true o$ the rope is true o$ an' other per%ept# Eour ob0e%ts are o*er and o*er a(ain the same as mine# I$ I as) 'ou +here some ob0e%t o$ 'ours is. the interior o$ the 7all. as a plain matter o$ $a%t. $or su%h is the sort o$ %on0un%ti*e union that appears to be experien%ed &hen a per%eptual terminus 5$ul$ils#5 2*en so. or $our times. i$ one or se*eral o$ the minds &ere destro'ed# I %an see no $ormal ob0e%tion to this supposition5s bein( literall' true# Bn the prin%iples &hi%h I am de$endin(. and 'et neither one o$ them tou%h an' other part ex%ept that pile. the same#<!= 9ra%ti%all'. so I pass on. $or instan%e. $arther than an' . i$ the' be not identi%all' &here mine are. and an ob0e%ti*e realit' is a series o$ similar experien%es )nit b' di$$erent transitions# I$ one and the same experien%e %an $i(ure t&i%e. or the inner stru%ture o$ its bri%)s and mortar# I$ our minds &ere in a literal sense conterminous. 'y %andle ipso facto (oes out# It is onl' as alterin( m' ob0e%ts that I (uess 'ou to exist# I$ 'our ob0e%ts do not %oales%e &ith m' ob0e%ts. let natural realism pass $or possible# Eour mind and mine 'ay terminate in the same per%ept. on%e in a mental and on%e in a ph'si%al %ontext (as I ha*e tried. or destro' the point itsel$# I &ell )no& the subtle diale%ti% &hi%h insists that a term ta)en in another relation must needs be an intrinsi%all' di$$erent term# . %an be %ontinued into man' di$$erent lines# . b' runnin( into as man' di$$erent mental %ontexts. then. or an' number o$ times. $or example. neither %ould (et be'ond the per%ept &hi%h the' had in %ommon. it is the same a%re that su%%essi*el' $i(ures in the t&o estates3 or that &hen I pa' him a dollar. our minds meet in a &orld o$ ob0e%ts &hi%h the' share in %ommon. one does not see &h' it mi(ht not $i(ure thri%e. so their pla%e must be &hat it seems to be. but a +uestion o$ empiri%al $a%t solel'. $or that &ould ma)e him tall and short at on%e# In this essa' I %an not stop to re$ute this diale%ti%. our old 6emorial 7all. the' do not# . and short in relation to another. &e see the 7all in di$$erent perspe%ti*es# Eou ma' be on one side o$ it and I on another# . then. is moreo*er onl' his pro*isional terminus# . see# I$ 'ou alter an ob0e%t in 'our &orld. o$ &hat the other ha&ser is atta%hed to# It is there$ore not a $ormal +uestion.
the' &ould ha*e to %ount as the same# &II. our )no&led(e is onl' spe%iousl' %ompleted. permissible in lo(i%. and o$ the rea%tions then%e &hi%h those impressions ma' pro*o)e $rom 'ou# In (eneral terms. it sta's and %ounts as separateness to the end# 1ut the metaphor ser*es to s'mboli4e the $a%t that 2xperien%e itsel$. $or &hi%h beddin( o$ the /ubstan%es.o our minds ha*e no ob0e%t in %ommon a$ter all? Eet. %ontinue the experiential tissue.a%tual per%ept o$ either. &hether (eometri%al or %ausal. and it is throu!h that spa%e that 'our and m' mental inter%ourse &ith ea%h other has al&a's to be %arried on. or . Conclusion With this &e ha*e the outlines o$ a philosoph' o$ pure experien%e be$ore us# .he re%epta%le o$ %ertain o$ our experien%es bein( thus %ommon. and &here ea%h o$ us be(ins to &or) i$ he &ishes to ma)e the 7all %han(e be$ore the other5s e'es# Just so it is &ith our bodies# . ta)en at lar(e. then. so that. &e point to an identi%al spot# . trans%endental 2(os. until at last it resol*es itsel$ into the mere notion o$ imper%eptibles li)e atoms or either. I %alled it a mosai% philosoph'# In a%tual mosai%s the pie%es are held to(ether b' their beddin(. onl' a *irtual )no&led(e o$ those remoter ob0e%ts &hi%h %on%eption %arries out# Is natural realism. b' the mediation o$ impressions &hi%h I %on*e' thither. &hether %on0un%ti*e or dis0un%ti*e. it is in that same pla%e that the ne&l' %on%ei*ed or per%ei*ed %onstituents ha*e to be lo%ated. and o*er &hi%h the' 0oin# . re$uted then b' empiri%al $a%t? . &ere li)e the thin line o$ $lame ad*an%in( a%ross the dr' autumnal $ield &hi%h the $armer pro%eeds to burn# In this line &e li*e prospe%ti*el' as &ell as retrospe%ti*el'# It is 5o$5 the past. %an no. inasmu%h as it %omes expressl' as the past5s %ontinuation3 it is 5o$5 the $uture in so $ar as the $uture. or shrin) ba%). &here then do 'ou $eel it? Eour inner a%tuations o$ 'our bod' meet m' $in(er there@ it is there that 'ou resist its push.he per%epts themsel*es ma' be sho&n to di$$er3 but i$ ea%h o$ us be as)ed to point out &here his per%ept is. 'ou $rom &ithin and I $rom &ithout. &here &e do terminate in per%epts. or s&eep the $in(er aside &ith 'our hand# Whate*er $arther )no&led(e either o$ us ma' a%+uire o$ the real %onstitution o$ the bod' &hi%h &e thus $eel. throu(h &hi%h.here5 $or me means &here I pla%e m' $in(er# I$ 'ou do not $eel m' $in(er5s %onta%t to be 5there5 in m' sense. o$ the 7all ori(inate or terminate in that spot &herein our hands meet.hat bod' o$ 'ours &hi%h 'ou a%tuate and $eel $rom &ithin must be in the same spot as the bod' o$ 'ours &hi%h I see or tou%h $rom &ithout# 5. be denied# -i$e is in the transitions as mu%h as in the terms %onne%ted3 o$ten. as i$ our spurts and sallies $or&ard &ere the real $irin( line o$ the battle. so $ar as those experien%es &ent. there is in (eneral no separateness needin( to be o*er%ome b' an external %ement3 and &hate*er separateness is a%tuall' experien%ed is not o*er%ome. %an (ro& b' its ed(es# . in theoreti% stri%tness. the experien%es themsel*es mi(ht some da' be%ome %ommon also# I$ that da' e*er did %ome. &hen it %omes. bein(. &hate*er di$$erin( %ontents our minds ma' e*entuall' $ill a pla%e &ith. there &ould be an end.bsolutes o$ other philosophies ma' be ta)en to stand# In radi%al empiri%ism there is no beddin(3 it is as i$ the pie%es %lun( to(ether b' their ed(es.t the outset o$ m' essa'. to our dis%ussions about truth# 8o points o$ di$$eren%e appearin(. b' &hi%h it %an be sho&n that the pla%e o%%upied b' 'our per%ept o$ 6emorial 7all di$$ers $rom the pla%e o%%upied b' mine# . a pie%e o$ %ommon propert' in &hi%h. the transitions experien%ed bet&een them $ormin( their %ement# B$ %ourse su%h a metaphor is misleadin(. indeed. $or in a%tual experien%e the more substanti*e and the more transiti*e parts run into ea%h other %ontinuousl'. &ill ha*e %ontinued it# . it seems to be there more emphati%all'. &hen I pla%e it on 'our bod'. the' %ertainl' ha*e "pace in %ommon# Bn pra(mati% prin%iples &e are obli(ed to predi%ate sameness &here*er &e %an predi%ate no assi(nable point o$ di$$eren%e# I$ t&o named thin(s ha*e e*er' +ualit' and $un%tion indis%ernible. I %ontend.ll the relations. our thou(hts &ould terminate in a %omplete empiri%al identit'. so $ar as I )no&. the' must be &ritten do&n as numeri%all' one thin( under t&o di$$erent names# 1ut there is no test dis%o*erable.hat one moment o$ it proli$erates into the next b' transitions &hi%h. and are at the same time in the same pla%e. the pla%e itsel$ is a numeri%all' identi%al %ontent o$ the t&o minds.
e&e'5s "tudies in 0o!ical Theory# /u%h propositions are redu%ible to the / is 9 $orm3 and the 5terminus5 that *eri$ies and $ul$ils is the /9 in %ombination# B$ %ourse per%epts ma' be in*ol*ed in the mediatin( experien%es.5 e*en no&.hese are the main $eatures o$ a philosoph' o$ pure experien%e# It has innumerable other aspe%ts and arouses innumerable +uestions. the be'ond and its )no&er are entities split o$$ $rom ea%h other# .r# 9rin%e5s and 9ro$essor /tron(5s sense o$ the term that is. as I said at the outset o$ this essa'. trains o$ experien%e.hese relations o$ %ontinuous transition experien%ed are &hat ma)e our experien%es %o(niti*e# In the simplest and %ompletest %ases the experien%es are %o(niti*e o$ one another# When one o$ them terminates a pre*ious series o$ them &ith a sense o$ $ul$ilment. &e li*e on spe%ulati*e in*estments. unnoti%ed apparentl' b' an' one else. or on our prospe%ts onl'# 1ut li*in( on thin(s in posse is as (ood as li*in( in the a%tual. earlier in m' arti%le.his t'pe has been thorou(hl' and. o$ the postulation %onsists. o$ %ourse. as &ell as to /#7#7od(son5s #etaphysics of /&perience. it must be a thin( in itsel$ in . ether &a*es.he /tream o$ . and i$ then the' add their stron(er *oi%es to m' $eebler one.he uni*erse %ontinuall' (ro&s in +uantit' b' ne& experien%es that (ra$t themsel*es upon the older mass3 but these *er' ne& experien%es o$ten help the mass to a more %onsolidated $orm# . so lon( as our %redit remains (ood# It is e*ident that $or the most part it is (ood. as $ast as *eri$i%ations %ome. the publi%ation o$ this essa' &ill ha*e been &orth &hile# . and that the uni*erse seldom protests our dra$ts# In this sense &e at e*er' moment %an %ontinue to belie*e in an existin( beyond# It is onl' in spe%ial %ases that our %on$ident rush $or&ard (ets rebu)ed# . but the points I ha*e tou%hed on seem enou(h to ma)e an enterin( &ed(e# In m' o&n mind su%h a philosoph' harmoni4es best &ith a radi%al pluralism. al&a's in our philosoph' be itsel$ o$ an experiential nature# I$ not a $uture experien%e o$ our o&n or a present one o$ our nei(hbor. and &ith the 5humanism5 latel' sprun( upon us b' the Bx$ord and the :hi%a(o s%hools#<G= I %an not. on%e separate. is *eri$ied3 the truth is 5salted do&n#5 6ainl'. %h# HII and HIII# A# For bre*it'5s sa)e I alto(ether omit mention o$ the t'pe %onstituted b' )no&led(e o$ the truth o$ (eneral propositions# . in su%h a %ase. into &hi%h I %annot enter no&# . both $rom the %ommon sense and $rom the idealism that ha*e made our philosophi% lan(ua(e.hou(ht> and on the /el$ in m' o&n rinciples of sycholo!y. it. in the *irtualit' o$ &hi%h the 5truth. in point o$ $a%t.he &orld is in so $ar $orth a pluralism o$ &hi%h the unit' is not $ull' experien%ed as 'et# 1ut. and i$ it is e*er to (ro& into a respe%table s'stem.his opens the %hapter o$ the relations o$ radi%al empiri%ism to pansp'%hism. or in the 5satis$a%toriness5 o$ the 9 in its ne& position# 3# . or &hate*er else the ph'si%al s'mbols ma' be#<"= .oo!no!es 1# . ha*e latel' (ained . moralism and theism. that it is almost di$$i%ult to state it as it is to thin) it out %learl'. so $ar as I %an see. or b' turnin( or %han(in( in the dire%tion o$ &hi%h it is the (oal# 9endin( that a%tualit' o$ union. &e sa'.he be'ond %an in an' %ase exist simultaneousl' $or it %an be experien%ed to have e&isted simultaneousl' &ith the experien%e that pra%ti%all' postulates it b' loo)in( in its dire%tion. *ol I#. that the unit' o$ the &orld is on the &hole under(oin( in%rease# . ho&e*er.he be'ond must. be sure that all these do%trines are its ne%essar' and indispensable allies# It presents so man' points o$ di$$eren%e.he ps'%holo(' boo)s ha*e o$ late des%ribed the $a%ts here &ith approximate ade+ua%'# I ma' re$er to the %hapters on 5. run into one another3 and that is &h' I said. that man' minds are.he )no&led(e.hese arti%les and their do%trine. ho&e*er. it &ill ha*e to be built up b' the %ontributions o$ man' %o operatin( minds# It seems to me. is &hat those other experien%es 5had in *ie . &ith no*elt' and indeterminism. elu%idated in . it must be an experien%e for itsel$ &hose relation to other thin(s &e translate into the a%tion o$ mole%ules. satis$a%toril'. no& turnin( in a dire%tion that points to&ards radi%al empiri%ism# I$ the' are %arried $arther b' m' &ords..
but this is no pla%e $or ar(uin( that point out# 5# B$ &hi%h all that need be said in this essa' is that it also %an be %on%ei*ed as $un%tional. B%tober.$a*orable %omment $rom 9ro$essor /tron(# . and be(in to a%t &here.i%)inson /# 6iller has independentl' thou(ht out the same results. 1904# <Reprinted in The #eanin! of Truth.hese &ould exist &here. and de$ined in terms o$ transitions. and &here &e per%ei*e the sensible phenomena explained thereb' G# I ha*e said somethin( o$ this latter allian%e in an arti%le entitled >7umanism and .ruth. pp# 51 101# :$# also >humanism and . pp# A44 A!5#= . et%#.r# . as I belie*e 9ro$essor /tron( %alls the medium o$ intera%tion bet&een 5thin(s in themsel*es5) in %ommon# .ruth Bn%e 6ore. not pro$essin( to )no& his absolute aliunde. or o$ the possibilit' o$ su%h# !# . &hi%h /tron( a%%ordin(l' dubs the James 6iller theor' o$ %o(nition# 4# 6r# 1radle'.> belo&. ne*ertheless dereali4es 2xperien%e b' alle(in( it to be e*er'&here in$e%ted &ith sel$ %ontradi%tion# 7is ar(uments seem almost purel' *erbal.he notions that our ob0e%ts are inside o$ our respe%ti*e heads is not seriousl' de$ensible. so I pass it b'# "# Bur minds and these e0e%ti*e realities &ould still ha*e spa%e (or pseudo spa%e. &e lo%ate the mole%ules.> in 6ind.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.