WeRead Powered by ReaderPub
Six metaphysical meditations / cover

Six metaphysical meditations /

Chapter 37: ANSWER.
Open in WeRead

Explore more books like this:

About This Book

A sequence of six reflections subjects customary opinions to radical, systematic doubt to discover indubitable truths. The thinker discards sensory and speculative certainties via skeptical scenarios, arriving at a foundational assertion of self-awareness as a thinking substance. From clear and distinct perceptions the argument moves to proofs for a benevolent deity as guarantor of truth, and to arguments distinguishing immaterial mind from extended body, illustrated by analytic examples such as the wax experiment and the hypothesis of a deceiving intellect. The work progresses from methodological skepticism to metaphysical claims about knowledge, God, and the real distinction between mind and body.

OBJECT. XIII.

* As for Example, When lately I set my self to examine Whether any Thing Do Exist, and found, that from my setting my self to examine such a Thing, it evidently follows, That I my self Exist, I could not but Judge, what I so clearly understood, to be true, not that I was forced thereto by any outward Impulse, but because a strong Propension in my Will did follow this Great Light in my Understanding, so that I believed it so much the more Freely and Willingly, by how much the Less indifferent I was thereunto.

This expression, Great Light in the Understanding, is Metaphorical, and therefore not to be used in Argumentation; And every one, that Doubts not of his Opinion, Pretends such a Light, and has no less a Propension in his Will to Affirm what he doubts not, than He that really and truely knows a Thing. Wherefore this Light may be the cause of Defending and Holding an Opinion Obstinately, but never of knowing an Opinion Truly.

Moreover not only the Knowledge of Truth, but Belief or Giving Assent, are not the Acts of the Will; for Whatever is proved by strong Arguments, or Credibly told, we Believe whether we will or no.

’Tis true, To Affirm or Deny Propositions, to Defend or Oppose Propositions, are the Acts of the Will; but it does not from thence Follow that the Internal Assent depends on the Will. Wherefore the following Conclusion (so that in the abuse of our Freedom of Will that Privation consists which Constitutes Error) is not fully Demonstrated.

ANSWER.

’Tis not much matter, Whether this expression, Great Light, be Argumentative or not, so it be explicative, as really it is, For all men know, that by light in the understanding is meant clearness of knowledge, which every one has not, that thinks he has; and this hinders not but this light in the Understanding may be very different from an obstinate Opinion taken up without clear perception.

But when ’tis here said, That we assent to things clearly perceived whether we will or no, ’tis the same, as if it were said, that willing or nilling, we desire Good clearly known; whereas the word Nilling, finds no room in such Expressions, for it implies, that we will and nill the same thing.