Primers principis
- Idioma:
- anglès
- Completesa:
- Obra completa
- Autoria:
- Escrita per l'autor
- Estat del text:
- Sense soroll d'escaneig detectat (mesura automàtica sobre tot el text, no revisada a mà)
- Extensió:
- ~230.000 paraules · 1.071 passatges
Cita aquesta obra
- APAHerbert Spencer. (n.d.). First Principles [Primers principis]. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ca/works/herbert-spencer/first-principles
- MLAHerbert Spencer. First Principles [Primers principis]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/ca/works/herbert-spencer/first-principles.
- ChicagoHerbert Spencer. First Principles [Primers principis]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ca/works/herbert-spencer/first-principles.
Referència de l’edició reproduïda. SigPhi és la reproducció digital, no l’editor. S’hi inclouen l’any, l’editorial i el traductor quan consten; «n.d.» indica que no consta l’any. La responsabilitat d’un pròleg o d’una nota es determina segons el passatge citat.
De què tracta
El volum que obre el sistema de Spencer: primer, allò que la ciència no pot conèixer, i després la llei única que ell creia que explicava tota la resta.
Context i història
Publicat el 1862. La primera part concedeix a la religió que hi ha un Incognoscible i el deixa fora de la ciència; la segona defineix l'evolució com el pas del que és homogeni i indefinit al que és heterogeni i definit, i des d'aquí Spencer aplicarà la mateixa fórmula a la biologia, la psicologia, la sociologia i l'ètica en els volums següents. Aquell projecte de fer un sistema únic per a totes les ciències és el que la posteritat no li ha comprat, i és el que fa que se'l llegeixi com a document.
Context editorial, no una font citable: a diferència dels passatges de l'obra, aquestes dades no es poden contrastar amb el corpus.
With advancing political opinion has come still greater restriction of imperial power. Belief in the supernatural character of the ruler, long ago repudiated by ourselves for example, has left behind it nothing more than the popular tendency to ascribe unusual goodness, wisdom, and beauty to the monarch. Loyalty, which originally meant implicit submission to the king’s will, now means a merely nominal profession of subordination, and the fulfilment of certain forms of respect. Our political practice, and our political theory, alike utterly reject those regal prerogatives which once passed unquestioned. By deposing some, and putting others in their places, we have not only denied the divine rights of certain men to rule; but we have denied that they have any rights beyond those originating in the assent of the nation. Though our forms of speech and our state-documents still assert the subjection of the citizens to the ruler, our actual beliefs and our daily proceedings implicitly assert the contrary. We obey no laws save those of our own making. We have entirely divested the monarch of legislative power; and should immediately rebel against his or her exercise of such power, even in matters of the smallest concern. In brief, the aboriginal doctrine is all but extinct among us. Nor has the rejection of primitive political beliefs, resulted only in transferring the authority of an autocrat to a representative body. The views entertained respecting governments in general, of whatever form, are now widely different from those once entertained. Whether popular or despotic, governments were in ancient times supposed to have unlimited authority over their subjects. Individuals existed for the benefit of the State; not the State for the benefit of individuals. In our days, however, not only has the national will been in many cases substituted for the will of the king; but the exercise of this national will has been restricted to a much smaller sphere.…