嗔秤戻幣�哉膵�云利匈嬉蝕湊蛸賜�塋床四衲���萩晦編報炎嘔囚^泡仟 ̄云利匈��
three dialogues-及3何蛍
酔楯荷恬: 梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈 梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈 梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何! 泌惚云慕短嗤堋響頼���誅卒亮茂�俊彭堋響��辛聞喘貧圭 "辺茄欺厘議箝誓匂" 孔嬬 才 "紗秘慕禰" 孔嬬��
secure the reality of external things。
。 But what will you say�察�Hylas�察�if it shall appear
that the case is the same with regard to all other sensible
qualities�察�and that they can no more be supposed to exist without
the mind�察�than heat and cold��
。 Then indeed you will have done something to the
purpose�察�but that is what I despair of seeing proved。
。 Let us examine them in order。 What think you of
�察�do they exist without the mind�察�or no��
。 Can any man in his senses doubt whether sugar is
sweet�察�or wormwood bitter��
。 Inform me�察�Hylas。 Is a sweet taste a particular kind
of pleasure or pleasant sensation�察�or is it not�拭。�180��
。 It is。
。 And is not bitterness some kind of uneasiness or
pain��
。 I grant it。
。 If therefore sugar and wormwood are unthinking
corporeal substances existing without the mind�察�how can sweetness
and bitterness�察�that is�察�Pleasure and pain�察�agree to them��
。 Hold�察�Philonous�察�I now see what it was delude time。
You asked whether heat and cold�察�sweetness at were not particular
sorts of pleasure and pain�察�to which simply�察�that they were。
Whereas I should have thus distinguished�此�those qualities�察�as
perceived by us�察�are pleasures or pair existing in the external
objects。 We must not therefore conclude absolutely�察�that there is
no heat in the fire�察�or sweetness in the sugar�察�but only that
heat or sweetness�察�as perceived by us�察�are not in the fire or
sugar。 What say you to this��
。 I say it is nothing to the purpose。 Our discourse
proceeded altogether concerning sensible things�察�which you
defined to be�察 � Whatever other qualities�察�therefore�察�you speak of as
distinct from these�察�I know nothing of them�察�neither do they at
all belong to the point in dispute。 You may�察�indeed�察�pretend to
have discovered certain qualities which you do not perceive�察�and
assert those insensible qualities exist in fire and sugar。 But
what use can be made of this to your present purpose�察�I am at a
loss to conceive。 Tell me then once more�察�do you acknowledge that
heat and cold�察�sweetness and bitterness ��meaning those qualities
which are perceived by the senses���察�do not exist without the
mind��
。 I see it is to no purpose to hold out�察�so I give up
the cause as to those mentioned qualities。 Though I profess it
sounds oddly�察�to say that sugar is not sweet。
。 But�察�for your farther satisfaction�察�take this along
with you�此�that which at other times seems sweet�察�shall�察�to a
distempered palate�察�appear bitter。 And�察�nothing can be plainer
than that divers persons perceive different tastes in the same
food�察�since that which one man delights in�察�another abhors。 And
how could this be�察�if the taste was something really inherent in
the food��
。 I acknowledge I know not how。
。 In the next place�察 �are to be considered。
And�察�with regard to these�察�I would fain know whether what hath
��181�� been said of tastes doth not exactly agree to them�拭�Are
they not so many pleasing or displeasing sensations��
。 They are。
。 Can you then conceive it possible that they should
exist in an unperceiving thing��
。 I cannot。
。 Or�察�can you imagine that filth and ordure affect
those brute animals that feed on them out of choice�察�with the
same smells which we perceive in them��
。 By no means。
。 May we not therefore conclude of smells�察�as of the
other forementioned qualities�察�that they cannot exist in any but
a perceiving substance or mind��
。 I think so。
。 Then as to �察�what must we think of them�此�are
they accidents really inherent in external bodies�察�or not��
。 That they inhere not in the sonorous bodies is plain
from hence�此�because a bell struck in the exhausted receiver of an
air´pump sends forth no sound。 The air�察�therefore�察�must be
thought the subject of sound。
。 What reason is there for that�察�Hylas��
。 Because�察�when any motion is raised in the air�察�we
perceive a sound greater or lesser�察�according to the air's
motion�察�but without some motion in the air�察�we never hear any
sound at all。
。 And granting that we never hear a sound but when
some motion is produced in the air�察�yet I do not see how you can
infer from thence�察�that the sound itself is in the air。
。 It is this very motion in the external air that
produces in the mind the sensation of 。 For�察�striking on
the drum of the ear�察�it causeth a vibration�察�which by the
auditory nerves being communicated to the brain�察�the soul is
thereupon affected with the sensation called 。
。 What� �is sound then a sensation��
。 I tell you�察�as perceived by us�察�it is a particular
sensation in the mind。
。 And can any sensation exist without the mind��
。 No�察�certainly。
。 How then can sound�察�being a sensation�察�exist in the
air�察�if by the you mean a senseless substance existing
without the mind��
。 You must distinguish�察�Philonous�察�between sound as it
is ��182�� perceived by us�察�and as it is in itself�察�or ��which is
the same thing�� between the sound we immediately perceive�察�and
that which exists without us。 The former�察�indeed�察�is a particular
kind of sensation�察�but the latter is merely a vibrative or
undulatory motion the air。
。 I thought I had already obviated that distinction��
by answer I gave when you were applying it in a like case before。
But�察�to say no more of that�察�are you sure then that sound is
really nothing but motion��
。 I am。
。 Whatever therefore agrees to real sound�察�may with
truth be attributed to motion��
。 It may。
。 It is then good sense to speak of as of a
thing that is �察。察。察 �
。 see you are resolved not to understand me。 Is it
not evident those accidents or modes belong only to sensible
sound�察�or the common acceptation of the word�察�but not
to in the real and philosophic sense�察�which�察�as I just
now told you�察�is nothing but a certain motion of the air��
。 It seems then there are two sorts of sound the
one vulgar�察�or that which is heard�察�the other philosophical and
real��
。 Even so。
。 And the latter consists in motion��
。 I told you so before。
。 Tell me�察�Hylas�察�to which of the senses�察�think you��
the idea of motion belongs�拭�to the hearing��
。 No�察�certainly�察�but to the sight and touch。
。 It should follow then�察�that�察�according to you�察�real
sounds may possibly be �察�but never 。
。 Look you�察�Philonous�察�you may�察�if you please�察�make a
jest of my opinion�察�but that will not alter the truth of things。
I own�察�indeed�察�the inferences you draw me into sound something
oddly�察�but common language�察�you know�察�is framed by�察�and for the
use of the vulgar�此�we must not therefore wonder if expressions
adapted to exact philosophic notions seem uncouth and out of the
way。
。 Is it come to that�拭�I assure you�察�I imagine myself
to have gained no small point�察�since you make so light of
departing from common phrases and opinions�察�it being a main part
of our inquiry�察�to examine whose notions are widest of the ��183��
common road�察�and most repugnant to the general sense of the
world。 But�察�can you think it no more than a philosophical
paradox�察�to say that �察�and that the
idea of them is obtained by some other sense�拭�And is there
nothing in this contrary to nature and the truth of things��
。 To deal ingenuously�察�I do not like it。 And�察�after the
concessions already made�察�I had as well grant that sounds too
have no real being without the mind。
。 And I hope you will make no difficulty to
acknowledge the same of 。
。 Pardon me�此�the case of colours is very different。 Can
anything be plainer than that we see them on the objects��
。 The objects you speak of are�察�I suppose�察�corporeal
Substances existing without the mind��
。 They are。
。 And have true and real colours inhering in them��
。 Each visible object hath that colour which we see in
it。
。 How� �is there anything visible but what we perceive
by sight��
。 There is not。
。 And�察�do we perceive anything by sense which we do
not perceive immediately��
。 How often must I be obliged to repeat the same thing��
I tell you�察�we do not。
。 Have patience�察�good Hylas�察�and tell me once more��
whether there is anything immediately perceived by the senses��
except sensible qualities。 I know you asserted there was not�察�but
I would now be informed�察�whether you still persist in the same
opinion。
。 I do。
。 Pray�察�is your corporeal substance either a sensible
quality�察�or made up of sensible qualities��
。 What a question that is� �who ever thought it was��
。 My reason for asking was�察�because in saying�察。察�you make
visible objects to be corporeal substances�察�which implies either
that corporeal substances are sensible qualities�察�or else that
there is something besides sensible qualities perceived by sight��
but�察�as this point was formerly agreed between us�察�and is still
maintained by you�察�it is a clear consequence�察�that your
is nothing distinct from 。 ��184��
。 You may draw as many absurd consequences as you
please�察�and endeavour to perplex the plainest things�察�but you
shall never persuade me out of my senses。 I clearly understand my
own meaning。
。 I wish you would make me understand it too。 But��
since you are unwilling to have your notion of corporeal
substance examined�察�I shall urge that point no farther。 Only be
pleased to let me know�察�whether the same colours which we see
exist in external bodies�察�or
酔楯荷恬: 梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈 梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈 梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何!
梁椣戻幣�� 梁心弌傍議揖扮窟燕得胎��傍竃徭失議心隈才凪万弌誌育断蛍�輌臆惨軼僑〃�燕慕得珊辛參資誼持蛍才将刮襲潜��範寔亟圻幹慕得 瓜寡追葎娼得辛參資誼寄楚署衛、持蛍才将刮襲潜填��