偶然、愛、論理:哲学的試論
- 言語:
- 英語
- 状態:
- 完全な作品
- 著者性:
- 著者自身による
- テキストの状態:
- 良好なテキスト
- 分量:
- 約 92,800 語 · 441 節
この作品を引用
- APAチャールズ・サンダース・パース. (n.d.). 偶然、愛、論理:哲学的試論. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/charles-peirce/chance-love-and-logic-philosophical-essays
- MLAチャールズ・サンダース・パース. "偶然、愛、論理:哲学的試論." SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/charles-peirce/chance-love-and-logic-philosophical-essays.
- Chicagoチャールズ・サンダース・パース. 偶然、愛、論理:哲学的試論. SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/ja/works/charles-peirce/chance-love-and-logic-philosophical-essays.
何についての本か
『偶然・愛・論理』、哲学論集。
背景と歴史
パースを一般の読者の手の届くところに置いた死後の論集(一九二三年)である。プラグマティズムが生まれる二つの論文「信念の確定」と「観念を明晰にする方法」を収め、偶然を宇宙の実在的な特徴とみる宇宙論の論考も入っている。パースは生前ほとんど発表せず、貧しく死んだ。評価は後から来た。
これは編集上の背景であり、引用できる典拠ではありません。作品本文の一節とは異なり、これらの記述はコーパスで検証できません。
Descartes is the father of modern philosophy, and the spirit of Cartesianism—that which principally distinguishes it from the scholasticism which it displaced—may be compendiously stated as follows: 1. It teaches that philosophy must begin with universal doubt; whereas scholasticism had never questioned fundamentals. 2. It teaches that the ultimate test of certainty is to be found in the individual consciousness; whereas scholasticism had rested on the testimony of sages and of the Catholic Church. 3. The multiform argumentation of the middle ages is replaced by a single thread of inference depending often upon inconspicuous premises. 4. Scholasticism had its mysteries of faith, but undertook to explain all created things. But there are many facts which Cartesianism not only does not explain but renders absolutely inexplicable, unless to say that “God makes them so” is to be regarded as an explanation. In some, or all of these respects, most modern philosophers have been, in effect, Cartesians. Now without wishing to return to scholasticism, it seems to me that modern science and modern logic require us to stand upon a very different platform from this. 1. We cannot begin with complete doubt. We must begin with all the prejudices which we actually have when we enter upon the study of philosophy. These prejudices are not to be dispelled by a maxim, for they are things which it does not occur to us can be questioned. Hence this initial skepticism will be a mere self-deception, and not real doubt; and no one who follows the Cartesian method will ever be satisfied until he has formally recovered all those beliefs which in form he has given up. It is, therefore, as useless a preliminary as going to the North Pole would be in order to get to Constantinople by coming down regularly upon a meridian.…