SigPhiSigPhi

Primeros principios

Herbert Spencer

Idioma:
inglés
Estado:
Obra completa
Autoría:
Escrita por el autor
Estado del texto:
Sin ruido de escaneo detectado (medición automática sobre todo el texto, no revisada a mano)
Extensión:
~230.000 palabras · 1071 pasajes
Cita esta obra
  • APAHerbert Spencer. (n.d.). First Principles [Primeros principios]. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/es/works/herbert-spencer/first-principles
  • MLAHerbert Spencer. First Principles [Primeros principios]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/es/works/herbert-spencer/first-principles.
  • ChicagoHerbert Spencer. First Principles [Primeros principios]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/es/works/herbert-spencer/first-principles.

Referencia de la edición que reproduce SigPhi: SigPhi es su reproducción digital, no el editor. El año de la edición no consta en los metadatos (por eso «n.d.») y el traductor solo aparece cuando consta.

De qué trata

El volumen que abre el sistema de Spencer: primero, lo que la ciencia no puede conocer, y después la ley única que él creía que explicaba todo lo demás.

Contexto e historia

Publicado en 1862. La primera parte concede a la religión que hay un Incognoscible y lo deja fuera de la ciencia; la segunda define la evolución como el paso de lo homogéneo e indefinido a lo heterogéneo y definido, y desde ahí Spencer aplicará la misma fórmula a la biología, la psicología, la sociología y la ética en los volúmenes siguientes. Ese proyecto de hacer un sistema único para todas las ciencias es lo que la posteridad no le ha comprado, y es lo que hace que se le lea como documento.

Contexto editorial, no una fuente citable: a diferencia de los pasajes de la obra, estos datos no se pueden comprobar contra el corpus.

Cómo empieza
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.…

Lee la obra completa →

← Volver a Herbert Spencer