,,philosophical ,,/udies ,by ,g4 ,e4 ,,moore1 ,litt4,d4 ,hon4 ,,ll4,d4 7,/4 ,&rews71 ,f4,b4,a4 ,lectur] 9 ,moral ,sci5ce 9 ! ,univ]sity ( ,cambridge ,au?or ( ,pr9cipia ,e?ica ,,london ,,r\tl$ge ,,kegan ,,paul ,,ltd ,,broadway ,,h\se3 #fh-gd ,,c>t] ,,lane1 ,e4,c4#d #aibb ,,cont5ts ,i4 ,,! ,,refutation ,,( ,,idealism ,,ii4 ,,! ,,nature ,,& ,,reality ,,( ,,objects ,,( ,,p]ception ,,iii4 ,,william ,,james' ,,pragmatism ,,iv4 ,,hume',s ,,philosophy ,v4 ,,! ,,/atus ,,( ,,s5se-,,data ,,vi4 ,,! ,,conception ,,( ,,reality ,,vii4 ,,"s ,,judgm5ts ,,( ,,p]ception ,,viii4 ,,! ,,conception ,,( ,,intr9sic ,,value ,,ix4 ,,ext]nal ,,& ,,int]nal ,,relations ,x4 ,,! ,,nature ,,( ,,moral ,,philosophy ,^? ( ! pap]s 9 ?is volume1 :i* h be5 previ\sly publi%$1 orig9ally appe>$ z foll[s3-- ,i4 ,! ,refutation ( ,idealism 9 ,m9d1 ,n4,s4 ,vol4 xii1 #aijc4 ,,ii4 ,! ,nature & ,reality ( ,objects ( ,p]ception 9 ,proce$+s ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society1 #aije-f4 ,,iii4 ,pr(essor ,james' ',pragmatism' 9 ,proce$+s ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society1 #aijg-h4 ,,iv4 ,hume's ,philosophy 9 ,! ,new ,qu>t]ly1 ,novemb]1 #aiji4 ,v4 ,! ,/atus ( ,s5se-,data 9 ,proce$+s ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society1 #aiac-ad4 ,,vi4 ,! ,conception ( ,reality 9 ,proce$+s ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society1 #aiag-ah4 ,,vii4 ,"s ,judgm5ts ( ,p]ception 9 ,proce$+s ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society1 #aiah-ai4 ,,ix4 ,ext]nal & ,int]nal ,relations 9 ,proce$+s ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society1 #aiai-bj4 ,,preface ,all ! pap]s conta9$ 9 ?is volume1 except ! two e?ical ones 7,,viii & ,x71 h be5 previ\sly publi%$2 & ( ^? :i* h be5 previ\sly publi%$ all1 except t on ,ext]nal & ,int]nal ,relations 7,,ix71 are "h re-pr9t$ )\t *ange4 ,!y 7 writt5 at v>i\s dates betwe5 #aijc & #aiba1 & all are "h pr9t$ 9 ! ord] 9 :i* !y 7 writt51 except t ,,viii on ,! ,conception ( ,intr9sic ,value1 :i* 0 writt5 e>li] ?an ,,vi & ,,vii1 has be5 mov$ out ( its prop] place 9 ord] to br+ x ne>] to ,,ix & ,x1 to bo? ( :i* x is closely relat$ 9 subject4 ,all1 except ,,iv & ,x1 7 prim>ily int5d$ = an audi5ce famili> ) ! writ+s ( philosoph]s2 b ,i hope t !y may nev]!less prove intelligible ev5 to ^? :o h read little or no philosophy1 s9ce ,i make little use ( te*nical t]ms1 &1 :]e ,i h done s1 h done my be/ to expla9 9 ord9>y language exactly :at ,i mean by !m4 ,! tone ( ,x is some:at diff]5t f t ( ! re/1 because x 0 writt5 z a lecture = ! ,leice/] ,philosophical ,society1 ) reg>d to :i* ,i 0 in=m$ t ,i mu/ n assume any previ\s acqua9tance ) philosophy 9 mo/ ( ! audi5ce4 ,x accord+ly be>s m>ks ?r\gh\t ( ! k9d ( audi5ce = :i* x 0 int5d$4 ,an att5tive read] w easily discov] t "s ( ! views express$ 9 "s ( ! pap]s are inconsi/5t ) views express$ 9 o!rs4 ,! fact is t "s ( ! views express$ 9 "s ( ! e>li] ones are views ) :i* ,i no long] agree2 & ,i feel t "s apology is ne$$ = nev]!less republi%+ !m exactly z !y /ood4 ,9 all cases1 except "o1 my excuse is t ! mi/ak5 views 9 "q are s emb$d$ 9 ! =m & sub/ance ( ! pap]s 9 :i* !y occur1 t x w\ld h be5 impossible to correct !m )\t practically sub/itut+ new pap]s = ! old ones2 & t1 9 spite ( ^! mi/akes1 ! old pap]s1 z !y /&1 /ill seem to me1 on ! :ole1 to say ?+s :i* are wor? say+ 9 a =m :i*1 h[ev] defective x may be1 ,i d\bt my own ability to improve ^u4 ,! only case 9 :i* ,i d\bt :e!r ?is excuse applies is t ( ! fir/ pap]--,! ,refutation ( ,idealism4 ,?is pap] n[ appe>s to me to be v confus$1 z well z to embody a good _m d[n-"r mi/akes2 s ,i am d\btful :e!r ,i ought to h includ$ x4 ,b 9 ?is case ,i h ano!r excuse3 namely t x is a pap] to :i* a good _m allusions h be5 made by contempor>y writ]s on philosophy2 & ,i 0 told t1 = "s read]s at all ev5ts1 x w\ld be a conv5i5ce t x %\ld be re-pr9t$ along ) ! re/1 if only = ! sake ( ref]5ce4 ,i said above t ! only "o ( ! previ\sly publi%$ pap]s1 9 :i* *anges h be5 made1 is ,,ix on ,ext]nal & ,int]nal ,relations4 ,9 ?is case ! *anges are n due to any *ange 9 my views1 b to ! fact t1 9 t "p ( ! pap] 9 :i* symbols are us$1 ,i tri$1 :5 x 0 fir/ publi%$ 9 ! ,proce$+s ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society1 to use ! symbols adopt$ by ,:itehead & ,russell 9 ,pr9cipia ,ma!matica1 & us$ !m also )\t giv+ an explanation ( _! mean+ :i* w\ld be suffici5t = read]s n acqua9t$ ) t "w4 ,! symbols 9 "q are symbols :i* x is difficult = pr9t]s to reproduce2 & ,i h1 !re=e1 ?\ght x bett]1 on ?is occasion1 to use ano!r set ( symbols1 :i* seem to me to be adequate = ! limit$ purpose ,i _h 9 view4 ,i h tri$ to give an explanation ( _! mean+1 :i* w enable anyone to und]/& !m2 & ,i h tak5 ! opportunity ( rewrit+ "s ( ! p>ts ( ! pap] 9 :i* !y occur 9 a way :i* w1 ,i hope1 make "s po9ts cle>] ?an !y orig9ally 74 ,i h to ?ank ! ,committee ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society = p]mission to repr9t ! l>ge numb] ( pap]s 7viz41 ,,ii1 ,,iii1 ,v1 ,,vi1 ,,vii & ,,ix71 :i* orig9ally appe>$ 9 ! ,proce$+s ( t ,society2 & ! ,editor ( ! ,new ,qu>t]ly = p]mission to repr9t ! article on ,hume's ,philosophy 7,,iv71 :i* appe>$ 9 t ,j\rnal 9 ,novemb]1 #aiji4 ,g4 ,e4 ,,moore4 ,,cambridge1 ,janu>y1 #aibb4 ,philosophical ,/udies ,,! ,,refutation ,,( ,,idealism ,mod]n ,idealism1 if x ass]ts any g5]al conclusion ab\t ! univ]se at all1 ass]ts t x is spiritual4 ,!re are two po9ts ab\t ?is ass]tion to :i* ,i wi% to call att5tion4 ,^! po9ts are t1 :atev] be its exact mean+1 x is c]ta9ly meant to ass]t 7#a7 t ! univ]se is v diff]5t inde$ f :at x seems1 & 7#b7 t x has q a l>ge numb] ( prop]ties :i* x does n seem to h4 ,*airs & tables & m\nta9s seem to be v diff]5t f u2 b1 :5 ! :ole univ]se is decl>$ to be spiritual1 x is c]ta9ly meant to ass]t t !y are f> m l u ?an we ?9k4 ,! ideali/ means to ass]t t !y are 9 "s s5se nei!r lifeless nor unconsci\s1 z !y c]ta9ly seem to be2 & ,i d n ?9k 8 language is s grossly deceptive1 b t we may assume him to believe t !y really are v diff]5t inde$ f :at !y seem4 ,& secondly :5 he decl>es t !y are spiritual1 he means to include 9 t t]m q a l>ge numb] ( diff]5t prop]ties4 ,:5 ! :ole univ]se is decl>$ to be spiritual1 x is meant n only t x is 9 "s s5se consci\s1 b t x has :at we recognise 9 ourselves z ! high] =ms ( consci\sness4 ,t x is intellig5t2 t x is purposeful2 t x is n me*anical2 all ^! diff]5t ?+s are commonly ass]t$ ( x4 ,9 g5]al1 x may be said1 ?is phrase 'reality is spiritual' excites & expresses ! belief t ! :ole univ]se possesses all ! qualities ! possession ( :i* is held to make u s sup]ior to ?+s :i* seem to be inanimate3 at lea/1 if x does n possess exactly ^? :i* we possess1 x possesses n "o only1 b sev]al o!rs1 :i*1 by ! same e?ical /&>d1 w\ld be judg$ equal to or bett] ?an our own4 ,:5 we say x is spiritual we mean to say t x has q a numb] ( excell5t qualities1 diff]5t f any :i* we commonly attribute ei!r to />s or planets or to cups & sauc]s4 ,n[ :y ,i m5tion ^! two po9ts is t :5 engag$ 9 ! intricacies ( philosophic discussion1 we are apt to ov]look ! va/ness ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 ?is ideali/ic view & ! ord9>y view ( ! _w1 & to ov]look ! numb] ( diff]5t propositions :i* ! ideali/ mu/ prove4 ,x is1 ,i ?9k1 ow+ to ! va/ness ( ?is diff]5ce & ow+ to ! numb] ( diff]5t excell5ces :i* ,ideali/s attribute to ! univ]se1 t x seems su* an int]e/+ & important "q :e!r ,idealism be true or n4 ,b1 :5 we beg9 to argue ab\t x1 ,i ?9k we are apt to =get :at a va/ numb] ( argum5ts ?is int]e/+ "q mu/ involve3 we are apt to assume1 t if "o or two po9ts be made on ei!r side1 ! :ole case is won4 ,i say ?is le/ x %\ld be ?\ght t any ( ! argum5ts :i* w be advanc$ 9 ?is pap] w\ld be suffici5t to disprove1 or any refutation ( !m suffici5t to prove1 ! truly int]e/+ & important proposition t reality is spiritual4 ,= my own "p ,i wi% x to be cle>ly und]/ood t ,i d n suppose t any?+ ,i %all say has ! smalle/ t5d5cy to prove t reality is n spiritual3 ,i d n believe x possible to refute a s+le "o ( ! _m important propositions conta9$ 9 ! ass]tion t x is s4 ,reality may be spiritual1 = all ,i "k2 & ,i dev\tly hope x is4 ,b ,i take ',idealism' to be a wide t]m & to include n only ?is int]e/+ conclusion b a numb] ( argum5ts :i* are suppos$ to be1 if n suffici5t1 at lea/ necess>y1 to prove x4 ,inde$ ,i take x t mod]n ,ideali/s are *iefly di/+ui%$ by c]ta9 argum5ts :i* !y h 9 common4 ,t reality is spiritual has1 ,i believe1 be5 ! t5et ( _m !ologians2 & yet1 = believ+ t alone1 !y %\ld h>dly be call$ ,ideali/s4 ,!re are besides1 ,i believe1 _m p]sons1 n improp]ly call$ ,ideali/s1 :o hold c]ta9 *>act]i/ic propositions1 )\t v5tur+ to ?9k !m q suffici5t to prove s gr& a conclusion4 ,x is1 !re=e1 only ) ,ideali/ic argum5ts t ,i am conc]n$2 & if any ,ideali/ holds t no argum5t is necess>y to prove t reality is spiritual1 ,i %all c]ta9ly n h refut$ him4 ,i %all1 h[ev]1 attack at lea/ "o argum5t1 :i*1 to ! be/ ( my belief1 is consid]$ necess>y to _! position by all ,ideali/s4 ,& ,i wi% to po9t out a c]ta9 advantage :i* ?is proc$ure gives me--an advantage :i* ju/ifies ! ass]tion t1 if my argum5ts are s\nd1 !y w h refut$ ,idealism4 ,if ,i c refute a s+le proposition :i* is a necess>y & ess5tial /ep 9 all ,ideali/ic argum5ts1 !n1 no matt] h[ good ! re/ ( ^! argum5ts may be1 ,i %all h prov$ t ,ideali/s h no reason :atev] = _! conclusion4 ,suppose we h a *a9 ( argum5t :i* takes ! =m3 ,s9ce ,a is ,b1 & ,b is ,c1 & ,c is ,d1 x foll[s ,a is ,d4 ,9 su* an argum5t1 ?\gh ',b is ,c' & ',c is ,d' may bo? be p]fectly true1 yet if ',a is ,b' be false1 we h no m reason = ass]t+ ,a is ,d ?an if all ?ree 7 false4 ,x does n1 inde$1 foll[ t ,a is ,d is false2 nor does x foll[ t no o!r argum5ts w\ld prove x to be true4 ,b x does foll[ t1 s f> z ?is argum5t goes1 x is ! b>e/ supposition1 )\t ! lea/ bit ( evid5ce4 ,i propose to attack a proposition :i* seems to me to /& 9 ?is relation to ! conclusion ',reality is spiritual4' ,i d n propose to dispute t ',reality is spiritual2' ,i d n d5y t !re may be reasons = ?9k+ t x is3 b ,i d propose to %[ t "o reason ^u :i*1 to ! be/ ( my judgm5t1 all o!r argum5ts ev] us$ by ,ideali/s dep5d is false4 ,^! o!r argum5ts may1 = all ,i %all say1 be em95tly +5i\s & true2 !y are v _m & v>i\s1 & diff]5t ,ideali/s use ! mo/ diff]5t argum5ts to prove ! same mo/ important conclusions4 ,"s ( ^! may be suffici5t to prove t ,b is ,c & ,c is ,d2 b if1 z ,i %all try to %[1 _! ',a is ,b' is false ! conclusion ,a is ,d rema9s a pleasant supposition4 ,i d n d5y t to sugge/ pleasant & plausible suppositions may be ! prop] function ( philosophy3 b ,i am assum+ t ! "n ,idealism c only be prop]ly appli$ :]e !re is a c]ta9 am\nt ( argum5t1 int5d$ to be cog5t4 ,! subject ( ?is pap] is1 !re=e1 q un9t]e/+4 ,ev5 if ,i prove my po9t1 ,i %all h prov$ no?+ ab\t ! ,univ]se 9 g5]al4 ,^u ! important "q :e!r ,reality is or is n spiritual my argum5t w n h ! remote/ be>+4 ,i %all only attempt to arrive at ! tru? ab\t a matt]1 :i* is 9 itself q trivial & insignificant1 & f :i*1 s f> z ,i c see & c]ta9ly s f> z ,i %all say1 no conclusions c be drawn ab\t any ( ! subjects ab\t :i* we mo/ want to "k4 ,! only importance ,i c claim = ! subject ,i %all inve/igate is t x seems to me to be a matt] ^u :i* n ,ideali/s only1 b all philosoph]s & psy*ologi/s also1 h be5 9 error1 & f _! errone\s view ( :i* !y h inf]r$ 7validly or invalidly7 _! mo/ /rik+ & int]e/+ conclusions4 ,& t x has ev5 ?is importance ,i _c hope to prove4 ,if x has ?is importance1 x w inde$ foll[ t all ! mo/ /rik+ results ( philosophy--,s5sationalism4 ,agno/icism & ,idealism alike--h1 = all t has hi!rto be5 urg$ 9 _! fav\r1 no m f\ndation ?an ! supposition t a *im]a lives 9 ! moon4 ,x w foll[ t1 unless new reasons nev] urg$ hi!rto c be f\nd1 all ! mo/ important philosophic doctr9es h z little claim to ass5t z ! mo/ sup]/iti\s beliefs ( ! l[e/ savages4 ,^u ! "q :at we h reason to believe 9 ! mo/ int]e/+ matt]s1 ,i d !re=e ?9k t my results w h an important be>+2 b ,i _c too cle>ly insi/ t ^u ! "q :e!r ^! beliefs are true !y w h none :atev]4 ,! trivial proposition :i* ,i propose to dispute is ?is3 t esse is p]cipi4 ,?is is a v ambigu\s proposition1 b1 9 "s s5se or o!r1 x has be5 v widely held4 ,t x is1 9 "s s5se1 ess5tial to ,idealism1 ,i mu/ = ! pres5t m]ely assume4 ,:at ,i propose to %[ is t1 9 all ! s5ses ev] giv5 to x1 x is false4 ,b1 fir/ ( all1 x may be useful to po9t out briefly 9 :at relation ,i conceive x to /& to ,ideali/ic argum5ts4 ,t :]ev] y c truly pr$icate esse y c truly pr$icate p]cipi1 9 "s s5se or o!r1 is1 ,i take x1 a necess>y /ep ,9 all argum5ts1 prop]ly to be call$ ,ideali/ic1 &1 :at is m1 9 all argum5ts hi!rto (f]$ = ! ,ideali/ic conclusion4 ,if esse is p]cipi1 ?is is at once equival5t to say+ t :atev] is1 is exp]i5c$2 & ?is1 aga91 is equival5t1 9 a s5se1 to say+ t :atev] is1 is some?+ m5tal4 ,b ?is is n ! s5se 9 :i* ! ,ideali/ conclusion mu/ ma9ta9 t ,reality is m5tal4 ,! ,ideali/ conclusion is t esse is p]cip]e2 & h5ce1 :e!r esse be p]cipi or n1 a fur!r & diff]5t discussion is ne$$ to %[ :e!r or n x is also p]cip]e4 ,& aga91 ev5 if esse be p]cip]e1 we ne$ a va/ quantity ( fur!r argum5t to %[ t :at has esse has also ^? high] m5tal qualities :i* are d5ot$ by spiritual4 ,?is is :y ,i said t ! "q ,i %\ld discuss1 namely1 :e!r or n esse is p]cipi1 mu/ be utt]ly insuffici5t ei!r to prove or to disprove t reality is spiritual4 ,b1 on ! o!r h&1 ,i believe t e argum5t ev] us$ to %[ t reality is spiritual has inf]r$ ?is 7validly or invalidly7 f 'esse is p]cip]e' z "o ( its premisses2 & t ?is aga9 has nev] be5 pret5d$ to be prov$ except by use ( ! premiss t esse is p]cipi4 ,! type ( argum5t us$ = ! latt] purpose is famili> en\gh4 ,x is said t s9ce :atev] is1 is exp]i5c$1 & s9ce "s ?+s are :i* are n exp]i5c$ by ! individual1 ^! mu/ at lea/ =m "p ( "s exp]i5ce4 ,or aga9 t1 s9ce an object necess>ily implies a subject1 & s9ce ! :ole _w mu/ be an object1 we mu/ conceive x to belong to "s subject or subjects1 9 ! same s5se 9 :i* :atev] is ! object ( our exp]i5ce belongs to u4 ,or aga91 t1 s9ce ?\ght ent]s into ! ess5ce ( all reality1 we mu/ conceive beh9d x1 9 x1 or z its ess5ce1 a _s ak9 to ours1 :o ?9k3 t '_s greets _s' 9 its object4 ,into ! validity ( ^! inf]5ces ,i d n propose to ent]3 !y obvi\sly require a great deal ( discussion4 ,i only desire to po9t out t1 h[ev] correct !y may be1 yet if esse is n p]cipi1 !y leave u z f> f a pro( t reality is spiritual1 z if !y 7 all false too4 ,b n[3 ,is esse p]cipi8 ,!re are ?ree v ambigu\s t]ms 9 ?is proposition1 & ,i mu/ beg9 by di/+ui%+ ! diff]5t ?+s t may be meant by "s ( !m4 ,& fir/ ) reg>d to p]cipi4 ,?is t]m ne$ n tr\ble u long at pres5t4 ,x 01 p]haps1 orig9ally us$ to mean 's5sation' only2 b ,i am n go+ to be s unfair to mod]n ,ideali/s--! only ,ideali/s to :om ! t]m %\ld n[ be appli$ )\t qualification--z to hold t1 if !y say esse is p]cipi1 !y mean by p]cipi s5sation only4 ,on ! contr>y ,i q agree ) !m t1 if esse be p]cipi at all1 p]cipi mu/ be und]/ood to include n s5sation only1 b t o!r type ( m5tal fact1 :i* is call$ '?\ght '2 &1 :e!r esse be p]cipi or n1 ,i consid] x to be ! ma9 s]vice ( ! philosophic s*ool1 to :i* mod]n ,ideali/s belong1 t !y h insi/$ on di/+ui%+ 's5sation' & '?\ght' & on emphasis+ ! importance ( ! latt]4 ,aga9/ ,s5sationalism & ,empiricism !y h ma9ta9$ ! true view4 ,b ! di/9ction betwe5 s5sation & ?\ght ne$ n deta9 u "h4 ,=1 9 :atev] respects !y diff]1 !y h at lea/ ?is 9 common1 t !y are bo? =ms ( consci\sness or1 to use a t]m t seems to be m 9 fa%ion j n[1 !y are bo? ways ( exp]i5c+4 ,accord+ly1 :atev] esse is p]cipi may mean1 x does at lea/ ass]t t :atev] is1 is exp]i5c$4 ,& s9ce :at ,i wi% to ma9ta9 is1 t ev5 ?is is untrue1 ! "q :e!r x be exp]i5c$ by way ( s5sation or ?\ght or bo? is = my purpose q irrelevant4 ,if x be n exp]i5c$ at all1 x _c be ei!r an object ( ?\ght or an object ( s5se4 ,x is only if be+ involves 'exp]i5ce' t ! "q1 :e!r x involves s5sation or ?\ght or bo?1 becomes important4 ,i beg1 !re=e1 t p]cipi may be und]/ood1 9 :at foll[s1 to ref] m]ely to :at is common to s5sation & ?\ght4 ,a v rec5t article /ates ! mean+ ( esse is p]cipi ) all desirable cle>ness 9 s f> z p]cipi is conc]n$4 ',i w und]take to %[1' says ,mr4 ,taylor1#a 't :at makes any piece ( fact real c be no?+ b its pres5ce z an insep>able aspect ( a s5ti5t exp]i5ce4' ,i am glad to ?9k t ,mr4 ,taylor has be5 9 "t to supply me ) s def9ite a /atem5t t ?is is ! ultimate premiss ( ,idealism4 ,my pap] w at lea/ refute ,mr4 ,taylor's ,idealism1 if x refutes any?+ at all3 = ,i %all und]take to %[ t :at makes a ?+ real _c possibly be its pres5ce z an insep>able aspect ( a s5i5t exp]i5ce4 ,b ,mr4 ,taylor's /atem5t ?\gh cle>1 ,i ?9k1 ) reg>d to ! mean+ ( p]cipi is highly ambigu\s 9 o!r respects4 ,i w leave x = ! pres5t to consid] ! next ambiguity 9 ! /atem5t3 ,esse is p]cipi4 ,:at does ! copula mean8 ,:at c be meant by say+ t ,esse is p]cipi8 ,!re are j ?ree mean+s1 "o or o!r ( :i* su* a /atem5t mu/ h1 if x is to be true2 & ( ^! !re is only "o :i* x c h1 if x is to be important4 7#a7 ,! /atem5t may be meant to ass]t t ! ^w 'esse' is us$ to signify no?+ ei!r m or less ?an ! ^w 'p]cipi'3 t ! two words are precise synonyms3 t !y are m]ely diff]5t names = "o & ! same ?+3 t :at is meant by esse is absolutely id5tical ) :at is meant by p]cipi4 ,i ?9k ,i ne$ n prove t ! pr9ciple esse is p]cipi is n ?us int5d$ m]ely to def9e a ^w2 nor yet t1 if x 71 x w\ld be an extremely bad def9ition4 ,b if x does n mean ?is1 only two alt]natives rema94 ,! second is 7#b7 t :at is meant by esse1 ?\gh n absolutely id5tical ) :at is meant by p]cipi1 yet includes ! latt] z a "p ( its mean+4 ,if ?is 7 ! mean+ ( 'esse is p]cipi1' !n to say t a ?+ 0 real w\ld n be ! same ?+ z to say t x 0 exp]i5c$4 ,t x 0 real w\ld mean t x 0 exp]i5c$ & some?+ else besides3 'be+ exp]i5c$' w\ld be analytically ess5tial to reality1 b w\ld n be ! :ole mean+ ( ! t]m4 ,f ! fact t a ?+ 0 real we %\ld be able to inf]1 by ! law ( contradiction1 t x 0 exp]i5c$2 s9ce ! latt] w\ld be "p ( :at is meant by ! =m]4 ,b1 on ! o!r h&1 f ! fact a ?+ 0 exp]i5c$ we %\ld n be able to inf] t x 0 real2 s9ce x w\ld n foll[ f ! fact t x _h "o ( ! attributes ess5tial to reality1 t x also _h ! o!r or o!rs4 ,n[1 if we und]/& esse is p]cipi 9 ?is second s5se1 we mu/ di/+ui% ?ree diff]5t ?+s :i* x ass]ts4 ,fir/ ( all1 x gives a def9ition ( ! ^w 'reality1' ass]t+ t ^w /&s = a complex :ole1 ( :i* :at is meant by 'p]cipi' =ms a "p4 ,& secondly x ass]ts t 'be+ exp]i5c$' =ms a "p ( a c]ta9 :ole4 ,bo? ^! propositions may be true1 & at all ev5ts ,i d n wi% to dispute !m4 ,i d n1 inde$1 ?9k t ! ^w 'reality' is commonly us$ to include 'p]cipi'3 b ,i d n wi% to argue ab\t ! mean+ ( words4 ,& t _m ?+s :i* are exp]i5c$ are also some?+ else--t to be exp]i5c$ =ms "p ( c]ta9 :oles1 is1 ( c\rse1 indisputable4 ,b :at ,i wi% to po9t out is1 t nei!r ( ^! propositions is ( any importance1 unless we add to !m a ?ird4 ,t 'real' is a conv5i5t "n = a union ( attributes :i* sometimes occurs1 x c\ld n be wor? any "o's :ile to ass]t3 no inf]5ces ( any importance c\ld be drawn f su* an ass]tion4 ,our pr9ciple c\ld only mean t :5 a ?+ happ5s to h p]cipi z well z ! o!r qualities includ$ "u esse1 x has p]cipi3 & we %\ld nev] be able to inf] t x 0 exp]i5c$1 except f a proposition :i* already ass]t$ t x 0 bo? exp]i5c$ & some?+ else4 ,accord+ly1 if ! ass]tion t p]cipi =ms "p ( ! :ole meant by reality is to h any importance1 x mu/ mean t ! :ole is organic1 at lea/ 9 ?is s5se1 t ! o!r con/itu5t or con/itu5ts ( x _c occur )\t p]cipi1 ev5 if p]cipi c occur )\t !m4 ,let u call ^! o!r con/itu5ts x4 ,! proposition t esse includes p]cipi1 & t !re=e f esse p]cipi c be inf]r$1 c only be important if x is meant to ass]t t p]cipi c be inf]r$ f x4 ,! only importance ( ! "q :e!r ! :ole esse includes ! "p p]cipi re/s !re=e on ! "q :e!r ! "p x is necess>ily connect$ ) ! "p p]cipi4 ,& ?is is 7#c7 ! ?ird possible mean+ ( ! ass]tion esse is p]cipi3 &1 z we n[ see1 ! only important "o4 ,esse is p]cipi ass]ts t :]ev] y h x y also h p]cipi t :atev] has ! prop]ty x also has ! prop]ty t x is exp]i5c$4 ,& ?is be+ s1 x w be conv5i5t if1 = ! future1 ,i may be all[$ to use ! t]m 'esse' to d5ote x alone4 ,i d n wi% !reby to beg ! "q :e!r :at we commonly mean by ! ^w 'real' does or does n include p]cipi z well z x4 ,i am q cont5t t my def9ition ( 'esse' to d5ote x1 %\ld be reg>d$ m]ely z an arbitr>y v]bal def9ition4 ,:e!r x is s or n1 ! only "q ( int]e/ is :e!r f x p]cipi c be inf]r$1 & ,i %\ld pref] to be able to express ?is 9 ! =m3 c p]cipi be inf]r$ f esse8 ,only let x be und]/ood t :5 ,i say esse1 t t]m w n = ! future include p]cipi3 x d5otes only t x1 :i* ,ideali/s1 p]haps rightly1 include along ) p]cipi "u _! t]m esse4 ,t !re is su* an x !y mu/ admit on pa9 ( mak+ ! proposition an absolute tautology2 & t f ?is x p]cipi c be inf]r$ !y mu/ admit1 on pa9 ( mak+ x a p]fectly b>r5 analytic proposition4 ,:e!r x done %\ld or %\ld n be call$ esse is n wor? a dispute3 :at is wor? dispute is :e!r p]cipi is necess>ily connect$ ) x4 ,we h !re=e discov]$ ! ambiguity ( ! copula 9 esse is p]cipi1 s f> z to see t ?is pr9ciple ass]ts two di/9ct t]ms to be s relat$1 t :atev] has ! "o1 :i* ,i call esse1 has also ! prop]ty t x is exp]i5c$4 ,x ass]ts a necess>y connexion betwe5 esse on ! "o h& & p]cipi on ! o!r2 ^! two words d5ot+ ea* a di/9ct t]m1 & esse d5ot+ a t]m 9 :i* t d5ot$ by p]cipi is n includ$4 ,we h1 !n 9 esse is p]cipi1 a necess>y syn!tic proposition :i* ,i h und]tak5 to refute4 ,& ,i may say at once t1 und]/ood z su*1 x _c be refut$4 ,if ! ,ideali/ *ooses to ass]t t x is m]ely a self-evid5t tru?1 ,i h only to say t x does n appe> to me to be s4 ,b ,i believe t no ,ideali/ ev] has ma9ta9$ x to be s4 ,al?\gh ?is--t two di/9ct t]ms are necess>ily relat$--is ! only s5se :i* 'esse is p]cipi' c h if x is to be true & important1 x c h ano!r s5se1 if x is to be an important falsehood4 ,i believe t ,ideali/s all hold ?is important falsehood4 ,!y d n p]ceive t ,esse is p]cipi mu/1 if true1 be m]ely a self-evid5t syn!tic tru?3 !y ei!r id5tify ) x or give z a reason = x ano!r proposition :i* mu/ be false because x is self-contradictory4 ,unless !y did s1 !y w\ld h to admit t x 0 a p]fectly unf\nd$ assumption2 & if !y recognis$ t x 0 unf\nd$1 ,i d n ?9k !y w\ld ma9ta9 its tru? to be evid5t4 ,esse is p]cipi1 9 ! s5se ,i h f\nd = x1 may inde$ be true2 ,i _c1 refute x3 b if ?is s5se 7 cle>ly appreh5d$1 no "o1 ,i ?9k1 w\ld believe t x 0 true4 ,ideali/s1 we h se51 mu/ ass]t t :atev] is exp]i5c$1 is necess>ily s4 ,& ?is doctr9e !y commonly express by say+ t '! object ( exp]i5ce is inconceivable ap>t f ! subject4' ,i h hi!rto be5 conc]n$ ) po9t+ out :at mean+ ?is ass]tion mu/ h1 if x is to be an important tru?4 ,i n[ propose to %[ t x may h an important mean+1 :i* mu/ be false1 because x is self-contradictory4 ,x is a well-kn[n fact 9 ! hi/ory ( philosophy t necess>y tru?s 9 g5]al1 b especially ^? ( :i* x is said t ! opposite is inconceivable1 h be5 commonly suppos$ to be analytic1 9 ! s5se t ! proposition d5y+ !m 0 self-contradictory4 ,x 0 9 ?is way1 commonly suppos$1 be=e ,kant1 t _m tru?s c\ld be prov$ by ! law ( contradiction alone4 ,?is is1 !re=e1 a mi/ake :i* x is pla9ly easy = ! be/ philosoph]s to make4 ,ev5 s9ce ,kant _m h cont9u$ to ass]t x2 b ,i am aw>e t among ^? ,ideali/s1 :o mo/ prop]ly des]ve ! "n1 x has become m fa%ionable to ass]t t tru?s are bo? analytic & syn!tic4 ,n[ ) _m ( _! reasons = ass]t+ ?is ,i am n conc]n$3 x is possible t 9 "s connexions ! ass]tion may be> a useful & true s5se4 ,b if we und]/& 'analytic' 9 ! s5se j def9$1 namely1 :at is prov$ by ! law ( contradiction alone1 x is pla9 t1 if 'syn!tic' means :at is n prov$ by ?is alone1 no tru? c be bo? analytic & syn!tic4 ,n[ x seems to me t ^? :o d ma9ta9 tru?s to be bo?1 d nev]!less ma9ta9 t !y are s 9 ?is z well z 9 o!r s5ses4 ,x is1 inde$1 extremely unlikely t s ess5tial a "p ( ! hi/orical mean+ ( 'analytic' & 'syn!tic' %\ld h be5 entirely disc>d$1 especially s9ce we f9d no express recognition t x is disc>d$4 ,9 t case x is fair to suppose t mod]n ,ideali/s h be5 influ5c$ by ! view t c]ta9 tru?s c be prov$ by ! law ( contradiction alone4 ,i admit !y also expressly decl>e t !y c n3 b ?is is by no means suffici5t to prove t !y d n also ?9k !y are2 s9ce x is v easy to hold two mutually contradictory op9ions4 ,:at ,i sugge/ !n is t ,ideali/s hold ! p>ticul> doctr9e 9 "q1 conc]n+ ! relation ( subject & object 9 exp]i5ce1 because !y ?9k x is an analytic tru? 9 ?is re/rict$ s5se t x is prov$ by ! law ( contradiction alone4 ,i am sugge/+ t ! ,ideali/ ma9ta9s t object & subject are necess>ily connect$1 ma9ly because he fails to see t !y are di/9ct1 t !y are two1 at all4 ,:5 he ?9ks ( 'yell[' & :5 he ?9ks ( ! 's5sation ( yell[1' he fails to see t !re is any?+ :atev] 9 ! latt] :i* is n 9 ! =m]4 ,?is be+ s1 to d5y t yell[ c ev] be ap>t f ! s5sation ( yell[ is m]ely to d5y t yell[ c ev] be o!r ?an x is2 s9ce yell[ & ! s5sation ( yell[ are absolutely id5tical4 ,to ass]t t yell[ is necess>ily an object ( exp]i5ce is to ass]t t yell[ is necess>ily yell[--a purely id5tical proposition1 & !re=e prov$ by ! law ( contradiction alone4 ,( c\rse1 ! proposition also implies t exp]i5ce is1 aft] all1 some?+ di/9ct f yell[--else !re w\ld be no reason = insi/+ t yell[ is a s5sation3 & t ! argum5t ?us bo? affirms & d5ies t yell[ & s5sation ( yell[ are di/9ct1 is :at suffici5tly refutes x4 ,b ?is contradiction c easily be ov]look$1 because ?\gh we are conv9c$1 9 o!r connexions1 t 'exp]i5ce' does mean some?+ & some?+ mo/ important1 yet we are nev] di/9ctly aw>e :at x means1 & ?us 9 e p>ticul> case we d n notice its pres5ce4 ,! facts pres5t !mselves z a k9d ( ant9omy3 7#a7 ,exp]i5ce is some?+ unique & diff]5t f any?+ else2 7#b7 ,exp]i5ce ( gre5 is entirely indi/+ui%able f gre52 two propositions :i* _c bo? be true4 ,ideali/s1 hold+ bo?1 c only take refuge 9 argu+ f ! "o 9 "s connexions & f ! o!r 9 o!rs4 ,b ,i am well aw>e t !re are _m ,ideali/s :o w\ld repel x z an utt]ly unf\nd$ *>ge t !y fail to di/+ui% betwe5 a s5sation or idea & :at ,i w call its object4 ,& !re are1 ,i admit1 _m :o n only imply1 z we all d1 t gre5 is di/9ct f ! s5sation ( gre51 b expressly insi/ ^u ! di/9ction z an important "p ( _! sy/em4 ,!y w\ld p]haps only ass]t t ! two =m an insep>able unity4 ,b ,i wi% to po9t out t _m1 :o use ?is phrase1 & :o d admit ! di/9ction1 are n !reby absolv$ f ! *>ge t !y d5y x4 ,= !re is a c]ta9 doctr9e1 v preval5t among philosoph]s n[adays1 :i* by a v simple r$uction may be se5 to ass]t t two di/9ct ?+s bo? are & are n di/9ct4 ,a di/9ction is ass]t$2 b x is also ass]t$ t ! ?+s di/+ui%$ =m an 'organic unity1' ,b1 =m+ su* a unity1 x is held1 ea* w\ld n be :at x is ap>t f its relation to ! o!r4 ,h5ce to consid] ei!r by itself is to make an illegitimate ab/raction4 ,! recognition t !re are 'organic unities' & 'illegitimate ab/ractions' 9 ?is s5se is reg>d$ z "o ( ! *ief conque/s ( mod]n philosophy4 ,b :at is ! s5se atta*$ to ^! t]ms8 ,an ab/raction is illegitimate1 :5 & only :5 we attempt to ass]t ( a "p--( some?+ ab/ract$--t :i* is true only ( ! :ole to :i* x belongs3 & x may p]haps be useful to po9t out t ?is %\ld n be done4 ,b ! application actually made ( ?is pr9ciple1 & :at p]haps w\ld be expressly ackn[l$g$ z its mean+1 is some?+ mu* ! rev]se ( useful4 ,! pr9ciple is us$ to ass]t t c]ta9 ab/ractions are 9 all cases illegitimate2 t :5ev] y try to ass]t any?+ :atev] ( t :i* is "p ( an organic :ole1 :at y ass]t c only be true ( ! :ole4 ,& ?is pr9ciple1 s f> f be+ a useful tru?1 is necess>ily false4 ,= if ! :ole c1 nay mu/1 be sub/itut$ = ! "p 9 all propositions & = all purposes1 ?is c only be because ! :ole is absolutely id5tical ) ! "p4 ,:51 !re=e1 we are told t gre5 & ! s5sation ( gre5 are c]ta9ly di/9ct b yet are n sep>able1 or t x is an illegitimate ab/raction to consid] ! "o ap>t f ! o!r1 :at ^! provisos are us$ to ass]t is1 t ?\gh ! two ?+s are di/9ct yet y n only c b mu/ treat !m z if !y 7 n4 ,_m philosoph]s1 !re=e1 :5 !y admit a di/9ction1 yet 7foll[+ ! lead ( ,hegel7 boldly ass]t _! "r1 9 a slightly m obscure =m ( words1 also to d5y x4 ,! pr9ciple ( organic unities1 l t ( comb9$ analysis & syn!sis1 is ma9ly us$ to def5d ! practice ( hold+ bo? ( two contradictory propositions1 :]ev] ?is may seem conv5i5t4 ,9 ?is1 z 9 o!r matt]s1 ,hegel's ma9 s]vice to philosophy has consi/$ 9 giv+ a "n to & erect+ into a pr9ciple1 a type ( fallacy to :i* exp]i5ce _h %[n philosoph]s1 along ) ! re/ ( mank9d1 to be addict$4 ,no wond] t he has foll[]s & admir]s4 ,i h %[n !n1 s f>1 t :5 ! ,ideali/ ass]ts ! important pr9ciple ',esse is p]cipi' he mu/1 if x is to be true1 mean by ?is t3 ,:atev] is exp]i5c$ also mu/ be exp]i5c$4 ,& ,i h also %[n t he may id5tify )1 or give z a reason =1 ?is proposition1 "o :i* mu/ be false1 because x is self contradictory4 ,b at ?is po9t ,i propose to make a complete break 9 my argum5t4 ',esse is p]cipi1' we h se51 ass]ts ( two t]ms1 z di/9ct f "o ano!r z 'gre5' & 'sweet1' t :atev] has ! "o has also ! o!r3 x ass]ts t 'be+' & 'be+ exp]i5c$' are necess>ily connect$3 t :atev] is is also exp]i5c$4 ,& ?is1 ,i admit1 _c be directly refut$4 ,b ,i believe x to be false2 & ,i h ass]t$ t anybody :o saw t 'esse & p]cipi' 7 z di/9ct z 'gre5' & 'sweet' w\ld be no m ready to believe t :atev] is is also exp]i5c$1 ?an to believe t :atev] is gre5 is also sweet4 ,i h ass]t$ t no "o w\ld believe t 'esse is p]cipi' if !y saw h[ diff]5t esse is f p]cipi3 b ?is ,i %all n try to prove4 ,i h ass]t$ t all :o d believe t 'esse is p]cipi' id5tify ) x or take z a reason = x a self-contradictory proposition3 b ?is ,i %all n try to prove4 ,i %all only try to %[ t c]ta9 propositions :i* ,i ass]t to be believ$1 are false4 ,t !y are believ$1 & t )\t ?is belief 'esse is p]cipi' w\ld n be believ$ ei!r1 ,i mu/ leave )\t a pro(4 ,i pass1 !n1 f ! un9t]e/+ "q ',is 'esse p]cipi8' to ! /ill m un9t]e/+ & app>5tly irrelevant "q ',:at is a s5sation or idea8' ,we all "k t ! s5sation ( blue diff]s f t ( gre54 ,b x is pla9 t if bo? are s5sations !y also h "s po9t 9 common4 ,:at is x t !y h 9 common8 ,& h[ is ?is common elem5t relat$ to ! po9ts 9 :i* !y diff]8 ,i w call ! common elem5t 'consci\sness' )\t yet attempt+ to say :at ! ?+ ,i s call is4 ,we h !n 9 e s5sation two di/9ct t]ms1 7#a7 'consci\sness1' 9 respect ( :i* all s5sations are alike2 & 7#b7 some?+ else1 9 respect ( :i* "o s5sation diff]s f ano!r4 ,x w be conv5i5t if ,i may be all[$ to call ?is second t]m ! 'object' ( a s5sation3 ?is also )\t yet attempt+ to say :at ,i mean by ! ^w4 ,we h !n 9 e s5sation two di/9ct elem5ts1 "o :i* ,i call consci\sness1 & ano!r :i* ,i call ! object ( consci\sness4 ,?is mu/ be s if ! s5sation ( blue & ! s5sation ( gre51 ?\gh diff]5t 9 "o respect1 are alike 9 ano!r3 blue is "o object ( s5sation & gre5 is ano!r1 & consci\sness1 :i* bo? s5sations h 9 common1 is diff]5t f ei!r4 ,b1 fur!r1 sometimes ! s5sation ( blue exi/s 9 my m9d & sometimes x does n2 & kn[+1 z we n[ d1 t ! s5sation ( blue includes two diff]5t elem5ts1 namely consci\sness & blue1 ! "q arises :e!r1 :5 ! s5sation ( blue exi/s1 x is ! consci\sness :i* exi/s1 or ! blue :i* exi/s1 or bo?4 ,& "o po9t at lea/ is pla93 namely t ^! ?ree alt]natives are all diff]5t f "o ano!r4 ,s t1 if any "o tells u t to say ',blue exi/s' is ! same ?+ z to say t ',bo? blue & consci\sness exi/1' he makes a mi/ake & a self-contradictory mi/ake4 ,b ano!r po9t is also pla91 namely1 t :5 ! s5sation exi/s1 ! consci\sness1 at lea/1 c]ta9ly does exi/2 = :5 ,i say t ! s5sations ( blue & ( gre5 bo? exi/1 ,i c]ta9ly mean t :at is common to bo? & 9 virtue ( :i* bo? are call$ s5sations1 exi/s 9 ea* case4 ,! only alt]native left1 !n1 is t ei!r bo? exi/ or ! consci\sness exi/s alone4 ,if1 !re=e1 any "o tells u t ! exi/5ce ( blue is ! same ?+ z ! exi/5ce ( ! s5sation ( blue he makes a mi/ake & a self-contradictory mi/ake1 = he ass]ts ei!r t blue is ! same ?+ z blue toge!r ) consci\sness1 or t x is ! same ?+ z consci\sness alone4 ,accord+ly to id5tify ei!r blue or any o!r ( :at ,i h call$ objects ( s5sation1 ) ! correspond+ s5sation is 9 e case1 a self-contradictory error4 ,x is to id5tify a "p ei!r ) ! :ole ( :i* x is a "p or else ) ! o!r "p ( ! same :ole4 ,if we are told t ! ass]tion ,blue exi/s is mean+less unless we mean by x t ,! s5sation ( blue exi/s1 we are told :at is c]ta9ly false & self-contradictory4 ,if we are told t ! exi/5ce ( blue is inconceivable ap>t f ! exi/5ce ( ! s5sation1 ! speak] probably means to convey to u1 by ?is ambigu\s expression1 :at is a self-contradictory error4 ,= we c & mu/ conceive ! exi/5ce ( blue z some?+ q di/9ct f ! exi/5ce ( ! s5sation4 ,we c & mu/ conceive t blue might exi/ & yet ! s5sation ( blue n exi/4 ,= my own "p ,i n only conceive ?is1 b conceive x to be true4 ,ei!r !re=e ?is t]rific ass]tion ( inconceivability means :at is false & self-contradictory or else x means only t z a matt] ( fact blue nev] c exi/ unless ! s5sation ( x exi/s also4 ,& at ?is po9t ,i ne$ n conceal my op9ion t no philosoph] has ev] yet succe$$ 9 avoid+ ?is self-contradictory error3 t ! mo/ /rik+ results bo? ( ,idealism & ( ,agno/icism are only obta9$ by id5tify+ blue ) ! s5sation ( blue3 t esse is held to be p]cipi1 solely because :at is exp]i5c$ is held to be id5tical ) ! exp]i5ce ( x4 ,t ,b]keley & ,mill committ$ ?is error w1 p]haps1 be grant$3 t mod]n ,ideali/s make x w1 ,i hope1 appe> m probable lat]4 ,b t my op9ion is plausible1 ,i w n[ (f] two pieces ( evid5ce4 ,! fir/ is t language (f]s u no means ( ref]r+ to su* objects z blue & gre5 & sweet1 except by call+ !m s5sations3 x is an obvi\s violation ( language to call !m ?+s or objects or t]ms4 ,& simil>ly we h no natural means ( ref]r+ to su* objects z causality or lik5ess or id5tity1 except by call+ !m ideas or notions or conceptions4 ,b x is h>dly likely t if philosoph]s _h cle>ly di/+ui%$ 9 ! pa/ betwe5 a s5sation or idea & :at ,i h call$ its object1 !re %\ld h be5 no sep>ate "n = ! latt]4 ,!y h always us$ ! same "n = ^! two diff]5t ?+s 7if ,i may call !m s73 & h5ce !re is "s probability t !y h suppos$ ^! ?+s n to be two & diff]5t1 b "o & ! same4 ,&1 secondly1 !re is a v good reason :y !y %\ld h suppos$ s1 9 ! fact t :5 we ref] to introspection & try to discov] :at ! s5sation ( blue is1 x is v easy to suppose t we h be=e u only a s+le t]m4 ,! t]m blue is easy en\gh to di/+ui%1 b ! o!r elem5t :i* ,i h call$ consci\sness--t :i* s5sation ( blue has 9 common ) s5sation ( gre5--is extremely difficult to fix4 ,t _m p fail to di/+ui% x at all is suffici5tly %[n by ! fact t !re are mat]iali/s4 ,&1 9 g5]al1 t :i* makes ! s5sation ( blue a m5tal fact seems to escape u3 x seems1 if ,i may use a metaphor1 to be transp>5t--we look ?r\gh x & see no?+ b ! blue2 we may be conv9c$ t !re is some?+ b :at x is no philosoph]1 ,i ?9k1 has yet cle>ly recognis$4 ,b ?is 0 a digression4 ,! po9t ,i _h e/abli%$ s f> 0 t 9 e s5sation or idea we mu/ di/+ui% two elem5ts1 7#a7 ! object1 or t 9 :i* "o diff]s f ano!r2 & 7#b7 consci\sness1 or t :i* all h 9 common--t :i* makes !m s5sations or m5tal facts4 ,?is be+ s1 x foll[$ t :5 a s5sation or idea exi/s1 we h to *oose betwe5 ! alt]natives t ei!r object alone1 or consci\sness alone1 or bo?1 exi/2 & ,i %[$ t ( ^! alt]natives "o1 namely t ! object only exi/s1 is exclud$ by ! fact t :at we mean to ass]t is c]ta9ly ! exi/5ce ( a m5tal fact4 ,!re rema9s ! "q3 ,d bo? exi/8 ,or does ! consci\sness alone8 ,& to ?is "q "o answ] has hi!rto be5 giv5 univ]sally3 ,t bo? exi/4 ,?is answ] foll[s f ! analysis hi!rto accept$ ( ! relation ( :at ,i h call$ object to consci\sness 9 any s5sation or idea4 ,x is held t :at ,i call ! object is m]ely ! cont5t ( a s5sation or idea4 ,x is held t 9 ea* case we c di/+ui% two elem5ts & two only1 7#a7 ! fact t !re is feel+ or exp]i5ce1 & 7#b7 :at is felt or exp]i5c$2 ! s5sation or idea1 x is said1 =ms a :ole1 9 :i* we mu/ di/+ui% two insep>able aspects1 cont5t & exi/5ce4 ,i %all try to %[ t ?is analysis is false2 & = t purpose ,i mu/ ask :at may seem an extraord9>y "q3 namely :at is meant by say+ t "o ?+ is cont5t ( ano!r8 ,x is n usual to ask ?is "q2 ! t]m is us$ z if ev]ybody mu/ und]/& x4 ,b s9ce ,i am go+ to ma9ta9 t blue is n ! cont5t ( ! s5sation ( blue1 & :at is m important1 t1 ev5 if x 7 ?is analysis w\ld leave out ! mo/ important elem5t 9 ! s5sation ( blue1 x is necess>y t ,i %\ld try to expla9 precisely :at x is t ,i %all d5y4 ,:at !n is meant by say+ t "o ?+ is ! cont5t ( ano!r8 ,fir/ ( all ,i wi% to po9t out t blue is rightly & prop]ly said to be "p ( ! cont5t ( a blue fl[]4 ,if1 !re=e1 we also ass]t t x is "p ( ! cont5t ( ! s5sation ( blue1 we ass]t t x has to ! o!r p>ts 7if any7 ( ?is :ole ! same relation :i* x has to ! o!r p>ts ( a blue fl[]--& we ass]t only ?is3 we _c mean to ass]t t x has to ! s5sation ( blue any relation :i* x does n h to ! blue fl[]4 ,& we h se5 t ! s5sation ( blue conta9s at lea/ "o o!r elem5t beside blue--namely1 :at ,i call consci\sness1 :i* makes x a s5sation4 ,s f> !n z we ass]t t blue is ! cont5t ( ! s5sation1 we ass]t t x has to ?is consci\sness ! same relation :i* x has to ! o!r p>ts ( a blue fl[]3 we d ass]t ?is1 & we ass]t no m ?an ?is4 ,into ! "q :at exactly ! relation is betwe5 blue & a blue fl[] 9 virtue ( :i* we call ! =m] "p ( its cont5t ,i d n propose to ent]4 ,x is suffici5t = my purpose to po9t out t x is ! g5]al relation mo/ commonly meant :5 we talk ( a ?+ & its qualities2 & t ?is relation is su* t to say ! ?+ exi/s implies t ! qualities also exi/4 ,! cont5t ( ! ?+ is :at we ass]t to exi/1 :5 we ass]t t ! ?+ exi/s4 ,:51 !re=e1 blue is said to be "p ( ! cont5t ( ! s5sation ( blue1 ! latt] is treat$ z if x 7 a :ole con/itut$ 9 exactly ! same way z any o!r ?+4 ,! s5sation ( blue1 on ?is view1 diff]s f a blue bead or a blue be>d1 9 exactly ! same way 9 :i* ! two latt] diff] f "o ano!r3 ! blue bead diff]s f ! blue be>d1 9 t :ile ! =m] conta9s glass1 ! latt] conta9s hair2 & ! s5sation ( blue diff]s f bo? 9 t1 in/ead ( glass or hair1 x conta9s consci\sness4 ,! relation ( ! blue to ! consci\sness is conceiv$ to be exactly ! same z t ( ! blue to ! glass or hair3 x is 9 all ?ree cases ! quality ( a ?+4 ,b ,i said j n[ t ! s5sation ( blue 0 analys$ into cont5t & exi/5ce1 & t blue 0 said to be ! cont5t ( ! idea ( blue4 ,!re is an ambiguity 9 ?is & a possible error1 :i* ,i mu/ note 9 pass+4 ,! t]m cont5t may be us$ 9 two s5ses4 ,if we use cont5t z equival5t to :at ,mr4 ,bradley calls ! :at--if we mean by x ! :ole ( :at is said to exi/1 :5 ! ?+ is said to exi/1 !n blue is c]ta9ly n ! cont5t ( ! s5sation ( blue3 "p ( ! cont5t ( ! s5sation is1 9 ?is s5se ( ! t]m1 t o!r elem5t :i* ,i h call$ consci\sness4 ,! analysis ( ?is s5sation into ! cont5t blue1 on ! "o h&1 & m]e exi/5ce on ! o!r1 is !re=e c]ta9ly false2 9 x we h aga9 ! self-contradictory id5tification ( ,blue exi/s ) ,! s5sation ( blue exi/s1 ,b !re is ano!r s5se 9 :i* blue might prop]ly be said to be ! cont5t ( ! s5sation--namely1 ! s5se 9 :i* cont5t1 l is oppos$ to sub/ance or matt]4 ,= ! elem5t consci\sness1 be+ common to all s5sations1 may be & c]ta9ly is reg>d$ z 9 "s s5se _! sub/ance1 & by ! cont5t ( ea* is only meant t 9 respect ( :i* "o diff]s f ano!r4 ,9 ?is s5se !n blue might be said to be ! cont5t ( ! s5sation2 b1 9 t case1 ! analysis into cont5t & exi/5ce is1 at lea/1 mislead+1 s9ce "u exi/5ce mu/ be includ$ :at exi/s 9 ! s5sation o!r ?an blue4 ,we h x1 !n1 z a univ]sally receiv$ op9ion t blue is relat$ to ! s5sation or idea ( blue1 z its cont5t1 & t ?is view1 if x is to be true1 mu/ mean t blue is "p ( :at is said to exi/ :5 we say t ! s5sation exi/s4 ,to say t ! s5sation exi/s is to say bo? t blue exi/s & t consci\sness1 :e!r we call x ! sub/ance ( :i* blue is ! cont5t or call x ano!r "p ( ! cont5t1 exi/s too4 ,any s5sation or idea is a ?+1 & :at ,i h call$ its object is ! quality ( ?is ?+4 ,su* a ?+ is :at we ?9k ( :5 we ?9k ( a m5tal image4 ,a m5tal image is conceiv$ z if x 7 relat$ to t ( :i* x is ! image 7if !re be any su* ?+7 9 exactly ! same way z ! image 9 a look+-glass is relat$ to t ( :i* x is ! reflection2 9 bo? cases !re is id5tity ( cont5t1 & ! image 9 ! look+-glass diff]s f t 9 ! m9d solely 9 respect ( ! fact t 9 ! "o case ! o!r con/itu5t ( ! image is glass & 9 ! o!r case x is consci\sness4 ,if ! image is ( blue1 x is n conceiv$ t ?is cont5t has any relation to ! consci\sness b :at x has to ! glass3 x ,is conceiv$ m]ely to be its cont5t4 ,& ow+ to ! fact t s5sations & ideas are all consid]$ to be :oles ( ?is description--?+s 9 ! m9d--! "q3 ,:at d we "k8 is consid]$ to be id5tical ) ! "q3 ,:at reason h we = suppos+ t !re are ?+s outside ! m9d correspond+ to ^! t are inside x8 ,:at ,i wi% to po9t out is 7#a7 t we h no reason = suppos+ t !re are su* ?+s z m5tal images at all--= suppos+ t blue is "p ( ! cont5t ( ! s5sation ( blue1 & 7#b7 t ev5 if !re are m5tal images1 no m5tal image & no s5sation or idea is m]ely a ?+ ( ?is k9d3 t 'blue1' ev5 if x is "p ( ! cont5t ( ! image or s5sation or idea ( blue1 is always also relat$ to x 9 q ano!r way1 & t ?is o!r relation1 omitt$ 9 ! traditional analysis1 is ! only "o :i* makes ! s5sation ( blue a m5tal fact at all4 ,! true analysis ( a s5sation or idea is z foll[s4 ,! elem5t t is common to !m all1 & :i* ,i h call$ consci\sness1 really is consci\sness4 ,a s5sation is1 9 reality1 a case ( 'kn[+' or 'be+ aw>e (' or 'exp]i5c+' some?+4 ,:5 we "k t ! s5sation ( blue exi/s1 ! fact we "k is t !re exi/s an aw>5ess ( blue4 ,& ?is aw>5ess is n m]ely1 z we h hi!rto se5 x mu/ be1 itself some?+ di/9ct & unique1 utt]ly diff]5t f blue3 x also has a p]fectly di/9ct & unique relation to blue1 a relation :i* is n t ( ?+ or sub/ance to cont5t1 nor ( "o "p ( cont5t to ano!r "p ( cont5t4 ,?is relation is j t :i* we mean 9 e case by 'kn[+4' ,to h 9 y\r m9d 'k' ( blue1 is n to h 9 y\r m9d a '?+' or 'image' ( :i* blue is ! cont5t4 ,to be aw>e ( ! s5sation ( blue is n to be aw>e ( a m5tal image--( a ?+1 ( :i* 'blue' & "s o!r elem5t are con/itu5t p>ts 9 ! same s5se 9 :i* blue & glass are con/itu5ts ( a blue bead4 ,x is to be aw>e ( an aw>5ess ( blue2 aw>5ess be+ us$1 9 bo? cases1 9 exactly ! same s5se4 ,?is elem5t1 we h se51 is c]ta9ly neglect$ by ! 'cont5t' !ory3 t !ory entirely fails to express ! fact t !re is1 9 ! s5sation ( blue1 ?is unique relation betwe5 blue & ! o!r con/itu5t4 ,& :at ,i cont5d is t ?is omission is n m]e neglig5ce ( expression1 b is due to ! fact t ?\gh philosoph]s h recognis$ t some?+ di/9ct is meant by consci\sness1 !y h nev] yet _h a cle> conception ( :at t some?+ is4 ,!y h n be5 able to hold x & blue be=e _! m9ds & to comp>e !m1 9 ! same way 9 :i* !y c comp>e blue & gre54 ,& ?is = ! reason ,i gave above3 namely t ! mom5t we try to fix our att5tion ^u consci\sness & to see :at1 di/9ctly1 x is1 x seems to vani%3 x seems z if we _h be=e u a m]e empt9ess4 ,:5 we try to introspect ! s5sation ( blue1 all we c see is ! blue3 ! o!r elem5t is z if x 7 diaphan\s4 ,yet x c be di/+ui%$ if we look att5tively en\gh1 & if we "k t !re is some?+ to look =4 ,my ma9 object 9 ?is p>agraph has be5 to try to make ! read] see x2 b ,i fe> ,i %all h succe$$ v ill4 ,x be+ ! case1 !n1 t ! s5sation ( blue includes 9 its analysis1 beside blue1 bo? a unique elem5t 'aw>5ess' & a unique relation ( ?is elem5t to blue1 ,i c make pla9 :at ,i meant by ass]t+1 z two di/9ct propositions1 7#a7 t blue is probably n "p ( ! cont5t ( ! s5sation at all1 & 7#b7 t1 ev5 x 71 ! s5sation w\ld nev]!less n be ! s5sation ( blue1 if blue _h only ?is relation to x4 ,! fir/ hypo!sis may n[ be express$ by say+ t1 if x 7 true1 !n1 :5 ! s5sation ( blue exi/s1 !re exi/s a blue aw>5ess3 (f5ce may be tak5 at ! expression1 b yet x expresses j :at %\ld be & is meant by say+ t blue is1 9 ?is case1 a cont5t ( consci\sness or exp]i5ce4 ,:e!r or n1 :5 ,i h ! s5sation ( blue1 my consci\sness or aw>5ess is ?us blue1 my introspection does n enable me to decide ) c]ta9ty3 ,i only see no reason = ?9k+ t x is4 ,b :e!r x is or n1 ! po9t is unimportant1 = introspection does enable me to decide t some?+ else is also true3 namely t ,i am aw>e ( blue1 & by ?is ,i mean1 t my aw>5ess has to blue a q diff]5t & di/9ct relation4 ,x is possible1 ,i admit1 t my aw>5ess is blue z well z be+ ( blue3 b :at ,i am q sure ( is t x is ( blue2 t x has to blue ! simple & unique relation ! exi/5ce ( :i* alone ju/ifies u 9 di/+ui%+ k ( a ?+ f ! ?+ kn[n1 inde$ 9 di/+ui%+ m9d f matt]4 ,& ?is result ,i may express by say+ t :at is call$ ! cont5t ( a s5sation is 9 v tru? :at ,i orig9ally call$ x--! s5sation's object4 ,b1 if all ?is be true1 :at foll[s8 ,ideali/s admit t "s ?+s really exi/ ( :i* !y are n aw>e3 !re are "s ?+s1 !y hold1 :i* are n insep>able aspects ( _! exp]i5ce1 ev5 if !y be insep>able aspects ( "s exp]i5ce4 ,!y fur!r hold t "s ( ! ?+s ( :i* !y are sometimes aw>e d really exi/1 ev5 :5 !y are n aw>e ( !m3 !y hold = in/ance t !y are sometimes aw>e ( o!r m9ds1 :i* cont9ue to exi/ ev5 :5 !y are n aw>e ( !m4 ,!y are1 !re=e1 sometimes aw>e ( some?+ :i* is n an insep>able aspect ( _! own exp]i5ce4 ,!y d "k "s ?+s :i* are n a m]e "p or cont5t ( _! exp]i5ce4 ,& :at my analysis ( s5sation has be5 design$ to %[ is1 t :5ev] ,i h a m]e s5sation or idea1 ! fact is t ,i am !n aw>e ( some?+ :i* is equally & 9 ! same s5se n an insep>able aspect ( my exp]i5ce4 ,! aw>5ess :i* ,i h ma9ta9$ to be includ$ 9 s5sation is ! v same unique fact :i* con/itutes e k9d ( k3 blue is z mu* an object1 & z little a m]e cont5t1 ( my exp]i5ce1 :5 ,i exp]i5ce x1 z ! mo/ exalt$ & indep5d5t real ?+ ( :i* ,i am ev] aw>e4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 no "q ( h[ we are to get outside ! circle ( our own ideas & s5sations4 ,m]ely to h a s5sation is already to be outside t circle4 ,x is to "k some?+ :i* is z truly & really n a "p ( my exp]i5ce1 z any?+ :i* ,i c ev] "k4 ,n[ ,i ?9k ,i am n mi/ak5 9 ass]t+ t ! reason :y ,ideali/s suppose t ev]y?+ :i* is mu/ be an insep>able aspect ( "s exp]i5ce1 is t !y suppose "s ?+s1 at lea/1 to be insep>able aspects ( _! exp]i5ce4 ,& !re is c]ta9ly no?+ :i* !y are s firmly conv9c$ to be an insep>able aspect ( _! exp]i5ce z :at !y call ! cont5t ( _! ideas & s5sations4 ,if1 !re=e1 ?is turns out 9 e case1 :e!r x be also ! cont5t or n1 to be at lea/ n an insep>able aspect ( ! exp]i5ce ( x1 x w be readily admitt$ t no?+ else :i* we exp]i5ce ev] is su* an insep>able aspect4 ,b if we nev] exp]i5ce any?+ b :at is n an insep>able aspect ( t exp]i5ce1 h[ c we inf] t any?+ :atev]1 let alone ev]y?+1 is an insep>able aspect ( any exp]i5ce8 ,h[ utt]ly unf\nd$ is ! assumption t esse is p]cipi appe>s 9 ! cle>e/ light4 ,b fur!r ,i ?9k x may be se5 t if ! object ( an ,ideali/'s s5sation 71 z he supposes1 n ! object b m]ely ! cont5t ( t s5sation1 if1 t is to say1 x really 7 an insep>able aspect ( 8 exp]i5ce1 ea* ,ideali/ c\ld nev] be aw>e ei!r ( himself or ( any o!r real ?+4 ,= ! relation ( a s5sation to its object is c]ta9ly ! same z t ( any o!r in/ance ( exp]i5ce to its object2 & ?is1 ,i ?9k1 is g5]ally admitt$ ev5 by ,ideali/s3 !y /ate z readily t :at is judg$ or ?\ght or p]ceiv$ is ! cont5t ( t judgm5t or ?\ght or p]ception1 z t blue ,is ! cont5t ( ! s5sation ( blue4 ,b1 if s1 !n :5 any ,ideali/ ?9ks he is aw>e ( himself or ( any "o else1 ?is _c really be ! case4 ,! fact ,is1 on 8 own !ory1 t himself & t o!r p]son are 9 reality m]e cont5ts ( an aw>5ess1 :i* is aw>e ( no?+ :atev]4 ,all t c be said is t !re is an aw>5ess 9 him1 ) a c]ta9 cont5t3 x c nev] be true t !re is 9 him a consci\sness ( any?+4 ,& simil>ly he is nev] aw>e ei!r ( ! fact t he exi/s or t reality is spiritual4 ,! real fact1 :i* he describes 9 ^? t]ms1 is t 8 exi/5ce & ! spirituality ( reality are cont5ts ( an aw>5ess1 :i* is aw>e ( no?+--c]ta9ly n1 !n1 ( x own cont5t4 ,& fur!r if ev]y?+1 ( :i* he ?9ks he is aw>e1 is 9 reality m]ely a cont5t ( 8 own exp]i5ce he has c]ta9ly no reason = hold+ t any?+ does exi/ except himself3 x w1 ( c\rse1 be possible t o!r p]sons d exi/2 solipsism w n be necess>ily true2 b he _c possibly inf] f any?+ he holds t x is n true4 ,t he himself exi/s w ( c\rse foll[ f 8 premiss t _m ?+s are cont5ts ( 8 exp]i5ce4 ,b s9ce ev]y?+1 ( :i* he ?9ks himself aw>e1 is 9 reality m]ely an insep>able aspect ( t aw>5ess2 ?is premiss all[s no inf]5ce t any ( ^! cont5ts1 f> less any o!r consci\sness1 exi/s at all except z an insep>able aspect ( 8 aw>5ess1 t is1 z "p ( himself4 ,su*1 & n ^? :i* he takes to foll[ f x1 are ! consequ5ces :i* d foll[ f ! ,ideali/'s supposition t ! object ( an exp]i5ce is 9 reality m]ely a cont5t or insep>able aspect ( t exp]i5ce4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 we cle>ly recognise ! nature ( t peculi> relation :i* ,i h call$ aw>5ess ( any?+2 if we see t ?is is involv$ equally 9 ! analysis ( e exp]i5ce--f ! m]e/ s5sation to ! mo/ develop$ p]ception or reflexion1 & t ?is is 9 fact ! only ess5tial elem5t 9 an exp]i5ce--! only ?+ t is bo? common & peculi> to all exp]i5ces--! only ?+ :i* gives u reason to call any fact m5tal2 if1 fur!r1 we recognise t ?is aw>5ess is & mu/ be 9 all cases ( su* a nature t its object1 :5 we are aw>e ( x1 is precisely :at x w\ld be1 if we 7 n aw>e3 !n x becomes pla9 t ! exi/5ce ( a table 9 space is relat$ to my exp]i5ce ( x 9 precisely ! same way z ! exi/5ce ( my own exp]i5ce is relat$ to my exp]i5ce ( t4 ,( bo? we are m]ely aw>e3 if we are aw>e t ! "o exi/s1 we are aw>e 9 precisely ! same s5se t ! o!r exi/s2 & if x is true t my exp]i5ce c exi/1 ev5 :5 ,i d n happ5 to be aw>e ( its exi/5ce1 we h exactly ! same reason = suppos+ t ! table c d s also4 ,:51 !re=e1 ,b]keley1 suppos$ t ! only ?+ ( :i* ,i am directly aw>e is my own s5sations & ideas1 he suppos$ :at 0 false2 & :5 ,kant suppos$ t ! objectivity ( ?+s 9 space consi/$ 9 ! fact t !y 7 ,vor/ellung5 hav+ to "o ano!r diff]5t relations f ^? :i* ! same ,vor/ellung5 h to "o ano!r 9 subjective exp]i5ce1 he suppos$ :at 0 equally false4 ,i am z directly aw>e ( ! exi/5ce ( mat]ial ?+s 9 space z ( my own s5sations2 & :at ,i am aw>e ( ) reg>d to ea* is exactly ! same--namely t 9 "o case ! mat]ial ?+1 & 9 ! o!r case my s5sation does really exi/4 ,! "q requir+ to be ask$ ab\t mat]ial ?+s is ?us n3 ,:at reason h we = suppos+ t any?+ exi/s correspond+ to our s5sations8 b3 ,:at reason h we = suppos+ t mat]ial ?+s d n exi/1 s9ce _! exi/5ce has precisely ! same evid5ce z t ( our s5sations8 ,t ei!r exi/ may be false2 b if x is a reason = d\bt+ ! exi/5ce ( matt]1 t x is an insep>able aspect ( our exp]i5ce1 ! same reason+ w prove conclusively t our exp]i5ce does n exi/ ei!r1 s9ce t mu/ also be an insep>able aspect ( our exp]i5ce ( x4 ,! only reasonable alt]native to ! admission t matt] exi/s z well z _s1 is absolute ,scepticism--t1 z likely z n no?+ exi/s at all4 ,all o!r suppositions--! ,agno/ic's1 t some?+1 at all ev5ts1 does exi/1 z mu* z ! ,ideali/'s1 t _s does--are1 if we h no reason = believ+ 9 matt]1 z baseless z ! grosse/ sup]/itions4 #a ,int]national ,j\rnal ( ,e?ics1 ,octob]1 #aijb4 ,,! ,,nature ,,& ,,reality ,,( ,,objects ,,( ,,p]ception ,!re are two beliefs 9 :i* almo/ all philosoph]s1 & almo/ all ord9>y p are agre$4 ,almo/ ev]yone believes t he himself & :at he directly p]ceives d n con/itute ! :ole ( reality3 he believes t some?+ o!r ?an himself & :at he directly p]ceives exi/s or is real4 ,i d n mean to say t almo/ ev]yone believes t :at he directly p]ceives is real3 ,i only mean t he does believe t1 :e!r :at he directly p]ceives is real or n1 some?+ o!r ?an x & o!r ?an himself c]ta9ly is s4 ,& n only does ea* ( u ?us agree 9 believ+ t some?+ o!r ?an himself & :at he directly p]ceives is real3 almo/ ev]yone also believes t among ! real ?+s1 o!r ?an himself & :at he directly p]ceives1 are o!r p]sons :o h ?\ghts & p]ceptions 9 "s respects simil> to 8 own4 ,t mo/ p believe ?is ,i ?9k ,i ne$ sc>cely try to %[4 ,b s9ce a good _m philosoph]s may appe> to h held views contradictory ( ?is "o1 ,i w briefly po9t out my reason = ass]t+ t mo/ philosoph]s1 ev5 among ^? 7if any7 :o h believ$ ! contradictory ( ?is1 h yet held ?is z well4 ,almo/ all philosoph]s tell u some?+ ab\t ! nature ( human k & human p]ception4 ,!y tell u t we p]ceive s & s2 t ! nature or orig9 ( our p]ceptions is su* & su*2 or 7z ,i h j be5 tell+ y7 t m5 9 g5]al h su* & su* beliefs4 ,x might1 inde$1 be said t we are n to int]pret su* language too /rictly3 t1 ?\gh a philosoph] talks ab\t human k & our p]ceptions1 he only means to talk ab\t 8 own4 ,b 9 _m cases a philosoph] w leave no d\bt ^u ?is po9t1 by expressly assum+ t !re are o!r p]ceptions1 :i* diff] 9 "s respects f 8 own3 su*1 = in/ance1 is ! case :5 7z is s common n[adays7 a philosoph] introduces psy*o-g5etic consid]ations into 8 argum5ts --consid]ations conc]n+ ! nature ( ! p]ceptions ( m5 :o exi/$ be=e & at a mu* l[] /age ( culture ?an himself4 ,any philosoph]1 :o uses su* argum5ts1 obvi\sly assumes t p]ceptions o!r ?an 8 own h exi/$ or be5 real4 ,& ev5 ^? philosoph]s :o ?9k !mselves ju/ifi$ 9 ! conclusion t nei!r _! own p]ceptions nor any p]ceptions l !irs are ultimately real1 w\ld1 ,i ?9k admit1 t ph5om5ally1 at lea/1 !y are real1 & are c]ta9ly m real ?an "s o!r ?+s4 ,almo/ ev]yone1 !n1 does believe t "s p]ceptions o!r ?an 8 own1 & :i* he himself does n directly p]ceive1 are real2 & believ+ ?is1 he believes t some?+ o!r ?an himself & :at he directly p]ceives is real4 ,b h[ d we "k t any?+ exi/s except our own p]ceptions1 & :at we directly p]ceive8 ,h[ d we "k t !re are any o!r p1 :o h p]ceptions 9 "s respects simil> to our own8 ,i believe t ^! two que/ions express v exactly ! nature ( ! problem :i* x is my *ief object1 9 ?is pap]1 to discuss4 ,:5 ,i say ^! words to y1 !y w at once sugge/ to y\r m9ds ! v "q1 to :i* ,i desire to f9d an answ]2 !y w convey to y ! v same mean+ :i* ,i h be=e my m9d1 :5 ,i use ! words4 ,y w und]/& at once :at "q x is t ,i mean to ask4 ,b1 = all t1 ! words :i* ,i h us$ are highly ambigu\s4 ,if y beg9 to ask y\rselves :at ,i d mean by !m1 y w f9d t !re are sev]al q diff]5t ?+s :i* ,i might mean4 ,& !re is1 ,i ?9k1 great dang] ( confus+ ^! diff]5t mean+s ) "o ano!r4 ,i ?9k t philosoph]s1 :5 !y h ask$ ?is "q 9 "o s5se1 h (t5 answ]$ x 9 q a diff]5t s5se2 & yet h suppos$ t ! answ] :i* !y h giv5 is an answ] to ! v same "q :i* !y orig9ally ask$4 ,x is precisely because !re is ?is ambiguity--?is dang] ( confusion1 9 ! words :i* ,i h us$1 t ,i h *os5 to use !m4 ,i wi% to po9t out z cle>ly z ,i c1 n only :at ,i d mean by !m1 b also "s ?+s :i* ,i d n mean2 & ,i wi% to make x cle> t ! que/ions :i* ,i d n mean to ask1 are diff]5t que/ions f t :i* ,i d mean to ask4 ,i w take ! second ( my two que/ions1 s9ce !re is 9 ! o!r an additional ambiguity to :i* ,i d n n[ wi% to call att5tion4 ,my second "q 03 ,h[ d we "k t !re exi/ any o!r p :o h p]ceptions 9 "s respects simil> to our own8 ,:at does ?is "q mean8 ,n[ ,i ?9k y may h notic$ t :5 y make a /atem5t to ano!r p]son1 & he answ]s ,h[ d y "k t t is s8 he v (t5 means to sugge/ t y d n "k x4 ,& yet1 ?\gh he means to sugge/ t y d n "k x1 he may n = a mom5t wi% to sugge/ t y d n believe x1 nor ev5 t y h n t degree or k9d ( conviction1 :i* goes beyond m]e belief1 & :i* may be tak5 to be ess5tial to any?+ :i* c prop]ly be call$ k4 ,he does n mean to sugge/ = a mom5t t y are say+ some?+ :i* y d n believe to be true1 or ev5 t y are n ?or\ghly conv9c$ ( its tru?4 ,:at he does mean to sugge/ is t :at y ass]t$ 0 n true1 ev5 ?\gh y may n only h believ$ x b felt sure t x 0 true4 ,he sugge/s t y don't "k x1 9 ! s5se t :at y believe or feel sure ( is n true4 ,n[ ,i po9t ?is out1 n because ,i myself mean to sugge/ t we don't "k ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons1 b m]ely 9 ord] to %[ t ! ^w "k is sometimes us$ 9 a s5se 9 :i* x is n m]ely equival5t to believe or feel sure (4 ,:5 ! "q ,h[ d y "k t8 is ask$1 ! que/ion] does n m]ely mean to ask h[ d y come to believe t1 or to be conv9c$ ( x8 ,he sometimes1 & ,i ?9k g5]ally1 means to ask a "q ) reg>d to ! tru?1 & n ) reg>d to ! exi/5ce ( y\r belief4 ,& simil>ly :5 ,i ask ! "q ,h[ d we "k t o!r p exi/8 ,i d n mean to ask ,h[ d we come to believe 9 or be conv9c$ ( _! exi/5ce8 ,i d n int5d to discuss ?is "q at all4 ,i %all n ask :at sugge/s to u our belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons or ( an ext]nal _w2 ,i %all n ask :e!r we arrive at x by inf]5ce or by in/9ct or 9 any o!r mann]1 :i* ev] has be5 or may be sugge/$3 ,i %all discuss no "q ( any k9d :atev] ) reg>d to its orig91 or cause1 or ! way 9 :i* x arises4 ,^! psy*ological que/ions are n :at ,i propose to discuss4 ,:5 ,i ask ! "q ,h[ d we "k t o!r p exi/8 ,i d n mean3 ,h[ does our belief 9 _! exi/5ce arise8 ,b if ,i d n mean ?is :at d ,i mean ,p ,i h said t ,i mean to ask a "q ) reg>d to ! tru? ( t belief2 & ! p>ticul> "q :i* ,i mean to ask might be express$ 9 ! words3 ,:at reason h we = our belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons8 ,b ^! are words :i* !mselves ne$ "s explanation1 & ,i w try to give x4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 !n1 :5 ,i talk ( a reason1 ,i mean only a good reason & n a bad "o4 ,a bad reason is1 no d\bt1 a reason1 9 "o s5se ( ! ^w2 b ,i mean to use ! ^w reason exclusively 9 ! s5se 9 :i* x is equival5t to good reason4 ,b :at1 !n1 is meant by a good reason = a belief8 ,i ?9k ,i c express suffici5tly accurately :at ,i mean by x 9 ?is connection1 z foll[s3--,a good reason = a belief is a proposition :i* is true1 & :i* w\ld n be true unless ! belief 7 also true4 ,we %\ld1 ,i ?9k1 commonly say t :5 a man kn[s su* a proposition1 he has a good reason = 8 belief2 &1 :5 he kn[s no su* proposition1 we %\ld say t he has no reason = x4 ,:5 he kn[s su* a proposition1 we %\ld say he kn[s some?+ :i* is a reason = ?9k+ 8 belief to be true--some?+ f :i* x c\ld be validly inf]r$4 ,& if1 9 answ] to ! "q ,h[ d y "k s & s8 he 7 to /ate su* a proposition1 we %\ld1 ,i ?9k1 feel t he _h answ]$ ! "q :i* we meant to ask4 ,suppose1 = in/ance1 9 answ] to ! "q ,h[ d y "k t8 he 7 to say ,i saw x 9 ! ,times4 ,!n1 if we believ$ t he _h se5 x 9 ! ,times1 & also believ$ t x w\ld n h be5 9 ! ,times1 unless x _h be5 true1 we %\ld admit t he _h answ]$ our "q4 ,we %\ld no long] d\bt t he did "k :at he ass]t$1 we %\ld no long] d\bt t 8 belief 0 true4 ,b if1 on ! o!r h&1 we believ$ t he _h n se5 x 9 ! ,times--if1 = in/ance1 we _h reason to believe t :at he saw 0 n ! /atem5t :i* he made1 b "s o!r /atem5t :i* he mi/ook = x2 or if we believ$ t ! k9d ( /atem5t 9 "q 0 "o ) reg>d to :i* !re 0 no presumption t1 be+ 9 ! ,times1 x w\ld be true3 9 ei!r ( ^! cases we %\ld1 ,i ?9k1 feel t he _h n answ]$ our "q4 ,we %\ld /ill d\bt :e!r :at he _h said 0 true4 ,we %\ld /ill d\bt :e!r he knew :at he ass]t$2 & s9ce a man _c tell y h[ he kn[s a ?+ unless he does "k t ?+1 we %\ld ?9k t1 ?\gh he might h told u truly h[ he came to believe x1 he _h c]ta9ly n told u h[ he knew x4 ,b ?\gh we %\ld ?us hold t he _h n told u h[ he knew :at he _h ass]t$1 & t he _h giv5 u no reason = believ+ x to be true2 we mu/ yet admit t he _h giv5 u a reason 9 a s5se--a bad reason1 a reason :i* 0 no reason because x _h no t5d5cy to %[ t :at he believ$ 0 true2 & we might also be p]fectly conv9c$ t he _h giv5 u ! reason :y he believ$ x--! proposition by believ+ :i* he 0 induc$ also to believe 8 orig9al ass]tion4 ,i mean1 !n1 by my "q1 ,h[ d we "k t o!r p exi/8 :at1 ,i believe1 is ord9>ily meant1 namely1 ,:at reason h we = believ+ t !y exi/8 & by ?is aga9 ,i mean1 :at ,i also believe is ord9>ily meant1 namely1 ,:at proposition d we believe1 :i* is bo? true itself & is also su* t x w\ld n be true1 unless o!r p exi/$8 ,& ,i hope x is pla9 t ?is "q1 ?us expla9$1 is q a diff]5t "q f ! psy*ological "q1 :i* ,i said ,i did n mean to ask--f ! "q1 ,h[ does our belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p arise8 ,my illu/ration1 ,i hope1 has made ?is pla94 ,= ,i h po9t$ out t we may q well hold t a man has told u h[ a belief ( 8 arises1 & ev5 :at 0 ! reason :i* made him adopt t belief1 & yet may h fail$ to give u any good reason = 8 belief--any proposition :i* is bo? true itself1 & also su* t ! tru? ( 8 belief foll[s f x4 ,&1 inde$1 x is pla9 t if any "o ev] believes :at is false1 he is believ+ some?+ = :i* !re is no good reason1 9 ! s5se :i* ,i h expla9$1 & = :i*1 !re=e1 he _c possibly h a good reason2 & yet x pla9ly does n foll[ t 8 belief did n arise 9 anyway :atev]1 nor ev5 t he _h no reason = x--no bad reason4 ,x is pla9 t false beliefs d arise 9 "s way or o!r--!y h orig9s & causes3 & _m p :o hold !m h bad reasons = hold+ !m--_! belief does arise 7by inf]5ce or o!rwise7 f _! belief 9 "s o!r proposition1 :i* is n itself true1 or else is n a good reason = hold+ t1 :i* !y inf] f x1 or :i*1 9 "s o!r way1 x induces !m to believe4 ,i submit1 !re=e1 t ! "q1 ,:at good reason h we = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p8 is diff]5t f ! "q1 ,h[ does t belief arise8 ,b :5 ,i say ?is1 ,i mu/ n be misund]/ood2 ,i mu/ n be und]/ood to affirm t ! answ] to bo? que/ions may n1 9 a s5se1 be ! same4 ,i fully admit t ! v same fact1 :i* sugge/s to u ! belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p1 may also be a good reason = believ+ t !y d exi/4 ,all t ,i ma9ta9 is t ! "q :e!r x is a good reason = t belief is a diff]5t "q f ! "q :e!r x sugge/s t belief3 if we ass]t t a c]ta9 fact bo? sugge/s our belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons & is also a good reason = hold+ t belief1 we are ass]t+ two diff]5t ?+s & n "o only4 ,& h5ce1 :5 ,i ass]t1 z ,i %all ass]t1 t we h a good reason = our belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons1 ,i mu/ n be und]/ood also to ass]t ei!r t we inf] ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons f ?is good reason1 or t our belief 9 t good reason sugge/s our belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons 9 any o!r way4 ,x is pla91 ,i ?9k1 t a man may believe two true propositions1 ( :i* ! "o w\ld n be true1 unless ! o!r 7 true too1 )\t1 9 any s5se :atev]1 hav+ arriv$ at 8 belief 9 ! "o f 8 belief 9 ! o!r2 & x is pla91 at all ev5ts1 t ! "q :e!r 8 belief 9 ! "o did arise f 8 belief 9 ! o!r1 is a diff]5t "q f ! "q :e!r ! tru? ( ! "o belief foll[s f ! tru? ( ! o!r4 ,i hope1 !n1 t ,i h made x a little cle>] :at ,i mean by ! "q3 ,:at reason h we = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p8 & t :at ,i mean by x is at all ev5ts diff]5t f :at is meant by ! "q3 ,h[ does our belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p arise8 ,b ,i am sorry to say t ,i h n yet rea*$ ! end ( my explanations z to :at my mean+ is4 ,i am afraid t ! subject may seem v t$i\s4 ,i c assure y t ,i h f\nd x excessively t$i\s to try to make my mean+ cle> to myself4 ,i h con/antly f\nd t ,i 0 confus+ "o "q ) ano!r1 & t1 :]e ,i _h ?\ght ,i _h a good reason = "s ass]tion1 ,i _h 9 reality no good reason4 ,b ,i may p]haps rem9d y t ?is "q1 ,h[ d we "k s & s8 ,:at reason h we = believ+ x8 is "o ( :i* philosophy is full2 & "o to :i* ! mo/ v>i\s answ]s h be5 giv54 ,philosophy l>gely consi/s 9 giv+ reasons2 & ! "q :at are good reasons = a p>ticul> conclusion & :at are bad1 is "o ^u :i* philosoph]s h disagre$ z mu* z on any o!r "q4 ,= "o & ! same conclusion diff]5t philosoph]s h giv5 n only diff]5t1 b incompatible1 reasons2 & conv]sely diff]5t philosoph]s h ma9ta9$ t "o & ! same fact is a reason = incompatible conclusions4 ,we are apt1 ,i ?9k1 sometimes to pay too little att5tion to ?is fact4 ,:5 we h tak51 p]haps1 no little pa9s to assure ourselves t our own reason+ is correct1 & especially :5 we "k t a great _m o!r philosoph]s agree ) u1 we are apt to assume t ! argum5ts ( ^? philosoph]s1 :o h come to a contradictory conclusion1 are sc>cely wor?y ( s]i\s consid]ation4 ,& yet1 ,i ?9k1 !re is sc>cely a s+le reason$ conclusion 9 philosophy1 z to :i* we %all n f9d t "s o!r philosoph]1 :o has1 s f> z we "k1 be/[$ equal pa9s on 8 reason+1 & ) equal ability1 has rea*$ a conclusion incompatible ) ours4 ,we may be satisfi$ t we are "r1 & we may1 9 fact1 be s2 b x is c]ta9 t bo? _c be "r3 ei!r our oppon5t or we mu/ h mi/ak5 bad reasons = good4 ,& ?is be+ s1 h[ev] satisfi$ we may be t x is n we :o h done s1 ,i ?9k we %\ld at lea/ draw ! conclusion t x is by no means easy to avoid mi/ak+ bad reasons = good2 & t no process1 h[ev] labori\s1 :i* is 9 ! lea/ likely to help u 9 avoid+ ?is %\ld be evad$4 ,b x is at lea/ possible t "o s\rce ( error lies 9 mi/ak+ "o k9d ( reason = ano!r--9 suppos+ t1 because !re is1 9 "o s5se1 a reason = a giv5 conclusion1 !re is also a reason 9 ano!r1 or t because !re is1 9 "o s5se1 no reason = a giv5 conclusion1 !re is1 !re=e1 no reason at all4 ,i believe myself t ?is is a v frequ5t s\rce ( error3 b x is at lea/ a possible "o4 ,& :]e1 z disagreem5ts %[1 !re c]ta9ly is error on "o side or ! o!r1 & reason1 too1 to suppose t ! error is n easy to detect1 ,i ?9k we %\ld sp>e no pa9s 9 inve/igat+ any s\rce1 f :i* x is ev5 possible t ! error may arise4 ,= ^! reasons ,i ?9k ,i am p]haps do+ "r 9 try+ to expla9 z cle>ly z possible n only :at reasons we h = believ+ 9 an ext]nal _w1 b also 9 :at s5se ,i take !m to be reasons4 ,i proce$1 !n ) my explanation4 ,& !re is "o ?+1 :i*1 ,i ?9k my illu/ration has %[n t ,i d n mean4 ,i h def9$ a reason = a belief z a true proposition1 :i* w\ld n be true unless ! belief itself--:at is believ$--7 also true2 & ,i h us$1 z synonym\s ) ?is =m ( words1 ! expressions3 ,a reason = a belief is a true proposition f :i* ! tru? ( ! belief foll[s f :i* x c\ld be validly inf]r$4 ,n[ ^! expressions might sugge/ ! idea t ,i mean to re/rict ! ^w reason1 to :at1 9 ! /ricte/ s5se1 might be call$ a logical reason--to propositions f :i* ! belief 9 "q foll[s1 accord+ to ! rules ( inf]5ce accept$ by ,=mal ,logic4 ,b ,i am n us+ ! words foll[1 validly inf]r$1 9 ?is n>r[ s5se2 ,i d n mean to re/rict ! words reason = a belief to propositions f :i* ! laws ( ,=mal ,logic /ate t ! belief c\ld be d$uc$4 ,! illu/ration :i* ,i gave is inconsi/5t ) ?is re/rict$ mean+4 ,i said t ! fact t a /atem5t appe>$ 9 ! ,times might be a good reason = believ+ t t /atem5t 0 true4 ,& ,i am us+ ! ^w reason 9 ! wide & popul> s5se1 9 :i* x really might be4 ,if1 = in/ance1 ! ,times /at$ t ! ,k+ 0 dead1 we %\ld ?9k t 0 a good reason = believ+ t ! ,k+ 0 dead2 we %\ld ?9k t ! ,times w\ld n h made su* a /atem5t z t unless ! ,k+ really 7 dead4 ,we %\ld1 inde$1 n ?9k t ! /atem5t 9 ! ,times r5d]$ x absolutely c]ta9 t ! ,k+ 0 dead4 ,b x is extremely unlikely t ! ,times w\ld make a /atem5t ( ?is k9d unless x 7 true2 &1 9 t s5se1 ! fact ( ! /atem5t appe>+ 9 ! ,times w\ld r5d] x highly probable--mu* m likely ?an n--t ! ,k+ 0 dead4 ,& ,i wi% x to be und]/ood t ,i am us+ ! words reason = a belief 9 ?is extremely wide s5se4 ,:5 ,i look = a good reason = our belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p1 ,i %all n reject any proposition m]ely on ! gr\nd t x only r5d]s _! exi/5ce probable--only %[s x to be m likely ?an n t !y exi/4 ,provid$ t ! proposition 9 "q does r5d] x positively probable t !y exi/1 !n1 if x also con=ms to ! conditions :i* ,i am ab\t to m5tion1 ,i %all call x a good reason4 ,b x is n e proposition :i* r5d]s x probable t o!r p exi/1 :i* ,i %all consid] to be a good answ] to my "q4 ,i h j expla9$ t my mean+ is wide 9 "o direction--9 admitt+ "s propositions :i* r5d] a belief m]ely probable2 b ,i h n[ to expla9 t x is re/rict$ 9 two o!r directions4 ,i d mean to exclude c]ta9 propositions :i* d r5d] t belief probable4 ,:5 ,i ask3 ,:at reason h we = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p8 a c]ta9 ambiguity is introduc$ by ! use ( ! plural we4 ,if ea* ( sev]al diff]5t p]sons has a reason = believ+ t he himself exi/s1 !n x is n m]ely probable1 b c]ta91 accord+ to ! rules ( ,=mal ,logic1 t1 9 a s5se1 !y h a reason = believ+ t sev]al p exi/2 ea* has a reason = believ+ t he himself exi/s2 &1 !re=e1 all ( !m1 tak5 toge!r1 h reasons = suppos+ t sev]al p]sons exi/4 ,if1 !re=e1 ,i 7 ask+ ! "q3 ,:at reason h we = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons8 9 ?is s5se1 x w\ld foll[ t if ea* ( u has a reason = believ+ 9 8 own exi/5ce1 ^! reasons1 tak5 toge!r1 w\ld be a reason = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( all ( u4 ,b ,i am n ask+ ! "q 9 ?is s5se3 x is pla9 t ?is is n its natural s5se4 ,:at ,i d mean to ask is3 ,does ea* s+le "o ( u "k any proposition1 :i* is a reason = believ+ t o!rs exi/8 ,i am us+ we1 t is to say1 9 ! s5se ( ea* ( u4 ,b aga9 ,i d mean ea* ( u3 ,i am n m]ely ask+ :e!r "s "o man kn[s a proposition :i* is a reason = believ+ t o!r m5 exi/4 ,x w\ld be possible t "s "o man1 or "s few m51 %\ld "k su* a proposition1 & yet ! re/ "k no su* proposition4 ,b ,i am n ask+ :e!r ?is is ! case4 ,i am ask+ :e!r among propositions ( ! k9d :i* 7z we commonly suppose7 all or almo/ all m5 "k1 !re is any :i* is a reason = suppos+ t o!r m5 exi/4 ,& 9 ask+ ?is "q ,i am n begg+ ! "q by suppos+ t all m5 d exi/4 ,my "q might1 ,i ?9k1 be put q accurately z foll[s4 ,!re are c]ta9 k9ds ( belief :i*1 z we commonly suppose1 all or almo/ all m5 %>e4 ,i describe ?is k9d ( belief z our beliefs1 simply z an easy way ( po9t+ out :i* k9d ( belief ,i mean1 b )\t assum+ t all m5 d %>e !m4 ,& ,i !n ask3 ,suppos+ a s+le man to h beliefs ( ?is k9d1 :i* among !m w\ld be a good reason = suppos+ t o!r m5 exi/$ hav+ l beliefs8 ,?is1 !n1 is ! fir/ re/riction :i* ,i put ^u ! mean+ ( my "q4 ,& x is1 ,i ?9k1 a re/riction :i*1 9 _! natural mean+1 ! words sugge/4 ,:5 we ask3 ,:at reason h we = believ+ t o!r p exi/8 we naturally und]/& t "q to be equival5t to3 ,:at reason has ea* ( u = t belief8 ,& ?is "q aga9 is naturally equival5t to ! "q3 ,:i* among ! propositions t a s+le man believes1 b :i* are ( ! k9d :i* 7rightly or wrongly7 we assume all m5 to believe1 are su* t !y w\ld n be true unless "s o!r p]son ?an t man exi/$8 ,b !re is ano!r re/riction :i*1 ,i ?9k1 ! words ( my "q also naturally sugge/4 ,if we 7 to ask anyone ! "q3 ,h[ d y "k t y did see t /atem5t 9 ! ,times8 & he 7 to answ] ,because ,i did see x 9 ! ,times & 9 ! ,/&>d too1 we %\ld n ?9k t he _h giv5 u a reason = ! belief t he saw x 9 ! ,times4 ,we %\ld n ?9k 8 answ] a reason1 because x ass]ts ! v ?+ = :i* we require a reason4 ,& simil>ly :5 ,i ask3 ,h[ d we "k t any ?+ or p]son exi/s1 o!r ?an ourselves & :at we directly p]ceive8 ,:at reason h we = believ+ ?is8 ,i mu/ naturally be und]/ood to mean3 ,:at proposition1 o!r ?an "o :i* itself ass]ts or presupposes ! exi/5ce ( some?+ beyond ourselves & our own p]ceptions1 is a reason = suppos+ t su* a ?+ exi/s8 ,& ?is re/riction obvi\sly excludes an imm5se numb] ( propositions ( a k9d :i* all ( u d believe4 ,we all ( u believe an imm5se numb] ( diff]5t propositions ab\t ! exi/5ce ( ?+s :i* we d n directly p]ceive1 & _m ( ^! propositions are1 9 my s5se1 good reasons = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( /ill o!r ?+s4 ,! belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( a /atem5t 9 ! ,times1 :5 we h n se5 t /atem5t1 may1 z ,i impli$1 be a good reason = believ+ t someone is dead4 ,b no su* proposition c be a good answ] to my "q1 because x ass]ts ! v k9d ( ?+ = :i* ,i require a reason3 x ass]ts ! exi/5ce ( some?+ o!r ?an myself & :at ,i directly p]ceive4 ,:5 ,i am ask+3 ,:at reason h ,i = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( any?+ b myself1 my own p]ceptions1 & :at ,i d directly p]ceive8 y w\ld naturally und]/& me to mean3 ,:at reason1 o!r ?an ! exi/5ce ( su* a ?+1 h ,i = ?is belief8 ,ea* ( u1 !n1 we commonly assume1 believes "s true propositions1 :i* d n !mselves ass]t ! exi/5ce ( any?+ o!r ?an himself1 8 own p]ceptions1 or :at he directly p]ceives4 ,ea* ( u1 = in/ance1 believes t he himself has & has _h c]ta9 p>ticul> p]ceptions3 & ^! propositions are propositions ( ! k9d ,i mean--propositions :i* d n !mselves ass]t ! exi/5ce ( any?+ o!r ?an himself1 8 own p]ceptions1 & :at he directly p]ceives3 !y are1 ,i ?9k1 by no means ! only propositions ( ?is k9d1 :i* mo/ ( u believe3 b !y are propositions ( ?is k9d4 ,b1 z ,i say1 ,i am n assum+ t ea* ( u--ea* ( sev]al diff]5t p--does believe propositions ( ?is k9d4 ,all t ,i assume is t at lea/ "o man does believe "s su* propositions4 ,& !n ,i ask3 ,:i* among ^? true propositions1 :i* "o man believes1 are su* t !y w\ld probably n be true1 unless "s o!r man exi/$ & _h c]ta9 p>ticul> p]ceptions8 ,:i* among !m are su* t x foll[s 79 ! wide s5se1 :i* ,i h expla9$7 f _! tru?1 t x is m likely ?an n t "s o!r man has p]ceptions8 ,?is is ! mean+ ( my "q1 s f> z ,i h hi!rto expla9$ x3 & ,i hope ?is mean+ is q cle>4 ,x is 9 ?is s5se t ,i am ask+3 ,:at reason h we = believ+ t o!r p exi/8 ,h[ d we "k t !y exi/8 ,?is1 inde$1 is n all t ,i mean by t "q3 !re is "o o!r po9t--! mo/ important "o--:i* rema9s to be expla9$4 ,b ?is is "p ( :at ,i mean to ask2 & be=e ,i g on to expla9 :at else ,i mean1 ,i wi% fir/ to /op & enquire :at is ! answ] to ?is "p ( my "q4 ,:at is ! answ] to ! "q3 ,:i* among ! true propositions1 ( a k9d :i* 7z we commonly assume7 ea* ( u believes1 & :i* d n !mselves ass]t ! exi/5ce ( any?+ o!r ?an t p]son himself1 8 own p]ceptions1 or :at he directly p]ceives1 are su* t !y w\ld probably n be true unless "s o!r p]son exi/$1 :o _h p]ceptions 9 "s respects simil> to 8 own8 ,n[ to ?is "q ! answ] is v obvi\s4 ,x is v obvi\s t 9 ?is s5se we h reasons = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons1 & also :at "s ( ^? reasons are4 ,b ,i wi% to make x q pla9 t ?is is s3 t 9 ?is s5se "o man has a reason = believ+ t ano!r has c]ta9 p]ceptions4 ,all t ,i am ask+ y to grant1 is1 y see1 t "s ( y w\ld n be hav+ j ^? p]ceptions :i* y n[ h1 unless ,i1 z ,i read ?is pap]1 7 p]ceiv+ m or less black m>ks on a m or less :ite gr\nd2 or t ,i on ! o!r h&1 %\ld n be hav+ j ^? p]ceptions :i* ,i n[ h1 unless "s o!r p]sons ?an myself 7 he>+ ! s\nds ( my voice4 ,& ,i am n ask+ y ev5 to grant t ?is is c]ta9--only t x is positively probable--m likely ?an n4 ,surely x is v obvi\s t ?is proposition is true4 ,b ,i wi% to make x q cle> :at w\ld be ! consequ5ces ( d5y+ t any su* propositions are true--propositions :i* ass]t t ! exi/5ce ( c]ta9 p]ceptions 9 "o man are a reason = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( c]ta9 p]ceptions 9 ano!r man--:i* ass]t t "o man w\ld probably n h _h j ^? p]ceptions :i* he did h1 unless "s o!r man _h _h c]ta9 p>ticul> p]ceptions4 ,x is pla91 ,i ?9k1 t1 unless "s su* propositions are true1 we h no m reason = suppos+ t ,alex&] ! ,great ev] saw an elephant1 ?an = suppos+ t ,s9dbad ! ,sailor saw a ,roc2 we h no m reason = suppos+ t anybody saw ,julius ,caes> murd]$ 9 ! ,s5ate ,h\se at ,rome1 ?an = suppos+ t somebody saw him c>ri$ up to ,heav5 9 a fi]y *>iot4 ,x is pla91 ,i ?9k1 t if we h any reason at all = suppos+ t 9 all probability ,alex&] ! ,great did see an elephant1 & t 9 all probability no su* p]son z ,s9dbad ! ,sailor ev] saw a ,roc1 "p ( t reason consi/s 9 ! assumption t "s o!r p]son w\ld probably n h _h j ^? p]ceptions :i* he did h1 unless ,alex&] ! ,great _h se5 an elephant1 & unless ,s9dbad ! ,sailor _h n se5 a ,roc4 ,& mo/ philosoph]s1 ,i ?9k1 are will+ to admit t we h "s reason1 9 "s s5se or o!r1 = su* propositions z ^!4 ,!y are will+ to admit n only t "s p]sons probably did see ,julius ,caes> murd]$ 9 ! ,s5ate ,h\se2 b also t "s p]sons1 o!r ?an ^? :o saw x1 _h & h "s reason = suppos+ t "s "o else probably saw x4 ,"s sceptical philosoph]s might1 inde$1 d5y bo? propositions2 & to refute _! views1 ,i admit1 o!r argum5ts are ne$$ ?an any :i* ,i %all br+ =w>d 9 ?is pap]4 ,b mo/ philosoph]s w1 ,i ?9k1 admit n only t facts1 = :i* !re is1 z we say1 good hi/orical evid5ce1 are probably true2 b also t :at we call good hi/orical evid5ce really is 9 "s s5se a good reason = ?9k+ !m true4 ,accord+ly ,i am go+ to assume t _m propositions ( ! foll[+ k9d are true4 ,propositions1 namely1 :i* ass]t t "o man w\ld probably n h c]ta9 p]ceptions :i* he does h1 unless "s o!r man _h c]ta9 p>ticul> p]ceptions4 ,t "s ( y1 = in/ance1 w\ld probably n be hav+ precisely ! p]ceptions :i* y are hav+1 unless ,i 7 hav+ ! p]ception ( m or less black m>ks on a m or less :ite gr\nd4 ,&1 9 ?is s5se1 ,i say1 we c]ta9ly h reasons = suppos+ t o!r p h p]ceptions simil>1 9 "s respects1 to ^? :i* we sometimes h4 ,b :5 ,i said ,i 0 go+ to ask ! "q3 ,:at reason h we = suppos+ t o!r p exi/8 y w c]ta9ly n h ?\ght t ,i m]ely meant to ask ! "q :i* ,i h j answ]$4 ,my words w h sugge/$ to y some?+ mu* m important ?an m]ely ?is4 ,:51 = in/ance1 ,i said t to ! "q ,h[ d y "k t8 ! answ] ,i saw x 9 ! ,times w\ld be a satisfactory answ]1 y may h felt1 z ,i felt1 t x w\ld n 9 all circum/ances be reg>d$ z su*4 ,! p]son :o ask$ ! "q might1 9 "s cases1 fairly reply3 ,t is no answ]3 h[ d y "k t1 because y saw a ?+ 9 ! ,times1 x is !re=e true8 ,9 o!r words he might ask =a reason = suppos+ t ! occurr5ce ( a p>ticul> /atem5t 9 ! ,times 0 a reason = suppos+ t /atem5t true4 ,& ?is is a "q to :i* we all believe t !re may be an answ]4 ,we believe t1 ) "s k9ds ( /atem5ts :i* ! ,times makes--"s k9ds ( /atem5ts ) reg>d to ,fiscal ,policy = example--! fact t ! ,times makes !m is no reason = suppos+ !m to be true3 :]eas ) reg>d to o!r k9ds ( /atem5ts1 :i* x makes1 su* a /atem5t1 = in/ance1 z t ! ,k+ 0 dead1 ! fact t x makes !m is a reason = suppos+ !m true4 ,we believe t !re are "s k9ds ( /atem5ts1 :i* x is v unlikely ! ,times w\ld make1 unless !y 7 true2 & o!rs :i* x is n at all unlikely t ! ,times might make1 al?\gh !y 7 n true4 ,& we believe t a reason might be giv5 = di/+ui%+1 9 ?is way1 betwe5 ! two diff]5t k9ds ( /atem5t3 = ?9k+ t1 9 "s cases 7on po9ts1 = in/ance1 :i*1 z we %\ld say1 are n simple que/ions ( fact7 ! ,times is fallible1 :]eas 9 o!r cases1 x is1 ?\gh n absolutely infallible1 v unlikely to /ate :at is n true4 ,n[ x is precisely 9 ?is fur!r s5se t ,i wi% to consid]3 :at reason h we = believ+ t c]ta9 p>ticul> ?+s1 o!r ?an ourselves1 our own p]ceptions1 & :at we directly p]ceive1 are real8 ,i h ass]t$ t ,i d h c]ta9 p]ceptions1 :i* x is v unlikely ,i %\ld h1 unless "s o!r p]son _h c]ta9 p>ticul> p]ceptions2 t1 = in/ance1 x is v unlikely ,i %\ld be hav+ precisely ^? p]ceptions :i* ,i am n[ hav+ unless someone else 7 he>+ ! s\nd ( my voice4 ,& ,i n[ wi% to ask3 ,:at reason h ,i = suppos+ t ?is is unlikely8 ,:at reason has any ( u = suppos+ t any su* proposition is true8 ,& ,i mean by hav+ a reason precisely :at ,i =m]ly meant4 ,i mean3 ,:at o!r proposition d ,i "k1 :i* w\ld n be true1 unless my p]ception 7 connect$ ) someone else's p]ception1 9 ! mann] 9 :i* ,i ass]t$ !m to be connect$8 ,"h aga9 ,i am ask+ = a good reason2 & am n ask+ a psy*ological "q ) reg>d to orig94 ,"h aga9 ,i am n ask+ = a reason1 9 ! /rict s5se ( ,=mal ,logic2 ,i am m]ely ask+ = a proposition :i* w\ld probably n be true1 unless :at ,i ass]t$ 7 true4 ,"h aga9 ,i am ask+ = "s proposition ( a k9d :i* ea* ( u believes2 ,i am ask+3 ,:at reason has ea* ( u = believ+ t "s ( 8 p]ceptions are connect$ ) p>ticul> p]ceptions ( o!r p 9 ! mann] ,i ass]t$8--= believ+ t he w\ld n h c]ta9 p]ceptions t he does h1 unless "s o!r p]son _h c]ta9 p>ticul> p]ceptions8 ,& "h aga9 ,i am ask+ = a reason--,i am ask+ = "s proposition o!r ?an "o :i* itself ass]ts3 ,:5 "o man has a p]ception ( su* & su* a p>ticul> k9d1 x is probable t ano!r man has a p]ception or ?\ght ( ?is or t o!r k9d4 ,b :at k9d ( reason c be giv5 = believ+ a proposition ( ?is sort8 ,= believ+ a proposition :i* ass]ts t1 s9ce "o p>ticul> ?+ exi/s1 x is probable t ano!r p>ticul> ?+ also exi/s8 ,"o ?+ ,i ?9k is pla91 namely t we c h no good reason = believ+ su* a proposition1 unless we h good reason = believ+ "s g5]alisation4 ,x is commonly believ$1 = in/ance1 t c]ta9 s-call$ fl9t arr[-heads1 :i* h be5 discov]$1 7 probably made by prehi/oric m52 & ,i ?9k x is pla9 t we h no reason = believ+ ?is unless we h reason to suppose t objects :i* resemble ^! 9 c]ta9 p>ticul> respects are g5]ally made by m5--are m (t5 made by m5 ?an by any o!r ag5cy4 ,unless c]ta9 p>ticul> *>act]i/ics :i* ^? arr[-heads h 7 *>act]i/ics :i* belong$ at lea/ m frequ5tly to articles ( human manufacture ?an to any articles n made by m51 x w\ld surely be j z likely z n t ^! arr[heads 7 n made by m5--t !y 71 9 fact n arr[-heads4 ,t is to say1 unless we h reason to ass]t a g5]alisation--! g5]alisation t objects ( a c]ta9 k9d are g5]ally made by m51 we h no reason to suppose t ^! p>ticul> objects1 :i* are ( ! k9d 9 "q1 7 made by m54 ,& ! same1 s f> z ,i c see1 is true univ]sally4 ,if we ev] h any reason = ass]t+ t1 s9ce "o p>ticul> ?+ exi/s1 ano!r probably exi/s or exi/$ or w exi/ also "p ( our reason1 at lea/1 mu/ consi/ 9 reasons = ass]t+ "s g5]alisation--= ass]t+ t ! exi/5ce ( ?+s ( a p>ticul> k9d is1 m (t5 ?an n1 accompani$ or prec$$ or foll[$ by ! exi/5ce ( ?+s ( ano!r p>ticul> k9d4 ,x is1 ,i ?9k1 sometimes assum$ t an alt]native to ?is !ory may be f\nd 9 ! !ory t ! exi/5ce ( "o k9d ( ?+ intr9sically po9ts to1 or is intr9sically a sign or symbol ( ! exi/5ce ( ano!r ?+4 ,x is sugge/$ t :5 a ?+ :i* ?us po9ts to ! exi/5ce ( ano!r ?+ exi/s1 !n x is at lea/ probable t ! ?+ po9t$ to exi/s also4 ,b ?is !ory1 ,i ?9k1 (f]s no real alt]native4 ,=1 9 ! fir/ place1 :5 we say t ! exi/5ce ( "o ?+ ,a is a sign ( or po9ts to ! exi/5ce ( ano!r ?+ ,b1 we v commonly actually mean to say t :5 a ?+ l ,a exi/s1 a ?+ l ,b g5]ally exi/s too4 ,we may1 no d\bt1 mean some?+ else too2 b ?is we d mean4 ,we say1 = in/ance1 t c]ta9 p>ticul> words1 :i* we he> or read1 are a sign t somebody has ?\ght ( ! p>ticul> ?+s :i* we call ! mean+ ( ^? words4 ,b we %\ld c]ta9ly hesitate to admit t ! he>+ or read+ ( c]ta9 words c\ld be call$ a sign ( ! exi/5ce ( c]ta9 ?\ghts1 unless x 7 true t :5 ^? words are he>d or read1 ! ?\ghts 9 "q g5]ally h exi/$4 ,if :5 ^? words 7 he>d or read1 ! ?\ghts _h g5]ally n exi/$1 we %\ld say t1 9 "o s5se ( ! ^w at all ev5ts1 ! he>+ ( ! words 0 n a sign ( ! exi/5ce ( ! ?\ghts4 ,9 ?is s5se1 !re=e1 to say t ! exi/5ce ( ,a po9ts to or is a sign ( ! exi/5ce ( ,b is actually to say t :5 ,a exi/s1 ,b g5]ally exi/s also4 ,b1 no d\bt1 ! words po9ts to is a sign ( may be us$ 9 "s o!r s5se3 !y may1 = in/ance1 mean only t ! exi/5ce ( ,a sugge/s 9 "s way ! belief t ,b exi/s4 ,& 9 su* a case we c]ta9ly might "k t ! exi/5ce ( ,a po9t$ to ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 )\t kn[+ t :5 ,a exi/$ ,b g5]ally exi/$ also4 ,let u suppose1 !n1 t 9 "s su* s5se ,a does po9t to ! exi/5ce ( ,b2 c ?is fact give u a reason = suppos+ x ev5 probable t ,b exi/$4 ,c]ta9ly x c1 provid$ x is true t :5 ,a does po9t to ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 ,b g5]ally exi/s4 ,b surely x c d s1 only on ?is condition4 ,if :5 ,a po9ts to ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 ,b1 nev]!less1 does n g5]ally exi/1 !n surely ! fact t ,a po9ts to ! exi/5ce ( ,b c con/itute no probability t ,b does n exi/3 on ! contr>y x w !n be probable t1 ev5 ?\gh ,a po9ts to ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 ,b does n exi/4 ,we h1 9 fact1 only sub/itut$ ! g5]alisation t ,a's po9t+ to ,b is g5]ally accompani$ by ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 = ! g5]alisation t ,a's exi/5ce is g5]ally accompani$ by ! exi/5ce ( ,b4 ,if we are to h any reason = ass]t+ t1 :5 ,a po9ts to or is a sign ( ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 ,b probably exi/s1 we mu/ /ill h a reason = "s g5]alisation--= a g5]alisation :i* ass]ts t :5 "o ?+ po9ts to ! exi/5ce ( ano!r1 t o!r g5]ally exi/s4 ,x is pla91 !n1 ,i ?9k1 t if we are to f9d a reason = ! ass]tion t "s p>ticul> p]ception ( m9e w\ld probably n exi/1 unless someone else 7 hav+ or _h _h a p]ception ( a k9d :i* ,i c "n1 we mu/ f9d a reason = "s g5]alisation4 ,& x is also pla91 ,i ?9k1 t 9 _m cases ( ?is k9d ! g5]alisation mu/ consi/ 9 an ass]tion t :5 "o man has a c]ta9 k9d ( p]ception1 "s o!r man g5]ally has _h "s o!r p]ception or belief4 ,we assume1 = in/ance1 t :5 we he> or read c]ta9 words1 somebody besides ourselves has ?\ght ! ?\ghts1 :i* con/itute ! mean+ ( ^? words2 & x is pla91 ,i ?9k1 t we h no reason = ?is assumption except "o :i* is also a reason = ! assumption t :5 c]ta9 words are he>d or read1 somebody g5]ally has _h c]ta9 ?\ghts4 ,& my enquiry1 !re=e1 at lea/ includes ! enquiry3 ,:at reasons h we = su* g5]alisations z ^!8 = g5]alisations :i* ass]t a connection betwe5 ! exi/5ce ( a c]ta9 k9d ( p]ception 9 "o man1 & t ( a c]ta9 k9d ( p]ception or belief 9 ano!r man8 ,& to ?is "q1 ,i ?9k1 b "o answ] c be giv54 ,if we h any reason = su* g5]alisations at all1 "s reason mu/ be giv51 9 "o way or ano!r1 by obs]vation--by obs]vation1 und]/ood 9 ! wide s5se 9 :i* x includes exp]im5t4 ,no philosoph]1 ,i ?9k1 has ev] fail$ to assume t obs]vation does give a reason = "s g5]alisations--= "s propositions :i* ass]t t :5 "o k9d ( ?+ exi/s1 ano!r g5]ally exi/s or has exi/$ 9 a c]ta9 relation to x4 ,ev5 ^? :o1 l ,hume1 imply t obs]vation _c give a reason = any?+1 yet con/antly appeal to obs]vation 9 support ( g5]alisations ( _! own4 ,& ev5 ^? :o hold t obs]vation c give no reason = any g5]alisation ab\t ! relation ( "o man's p]ceptions to ano!r's1 yet hold t x c give a reason = g5]alisations ab\t ! relation ( "s to o!rs among a man's own p]ceptions4 ,x is1 inde$1 by no means agre$ h[ obs]vation c give a reason = any g5]alisation4 ,nobody kn[s :at reason we h1 if we h any1 = suppos+ t x c4 ,b t x c1 ev]yone1 ,i ?9k1 assumes4 ,i ?9k1 !re=e1 mo/ philosoph]s w agree1 t if we c f9d any reason at all = g5]alisations ( ! k9d 9 :i* ,i am int]e/$1 a reason = "s ( !m at all ev5ts mu/ be f\nd 9 obs]vation4 ,& :at ,i propose to ask is3 ,:at reason c be f\nd 9 obs]vation = ev5 a s+le proposition ( ! k9d ,i h describ$8 = a proposition :i* ass]ts t :5 "o man has "o k9d ( p]ception1 ano!r man g5]ally has or has _h ano!r4 ,b1 :5 x is said t obs]vation gives u a reason = g5]alisations1 two ?+s may be meant nei!r ( :i* ,i mean4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 we popul>ly use obs]vation 9 a s5se 9 :i* we c be said to obs]ve ! p]ceptions1 feel+s & ?\ghts ( o!r p3 9 :i*1 !re=e1 we c be said to obs]ve ! v ?+s ) reg>d to :i* ,i am ask+ :at reason we h = believ+ 9 _! exi/5ce4 ,b x is univ]sally#a agre$ t !re is a s5se 9 :i* no man c obs]ve ! p]ceptions1 feel+s or ?\ghts ( any o!r man4 ,& x is to ?is /rict s5se t ,i propose to conf9e ! ^w4 ,i %all use x 9 a s5se1 9 :i* we c c]ta9ly be said to obs]ve no?+ b ourselves1 our own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts & feel+s1 & :at we directly p]ceive4 ,& 9 ! second place1 x may be said t obs]vations made by ano!r p]son may give me a reason = believ+ "s g5]alisation4 ,& x is c]ta9ly ! case t = _m ( ! g5]alisations 9 :i* we all believe1 if we h a reason 9 obs]vation at all1 x is n 9 our own obs]vation t we h x3 "p ( our reason1 at all ev5ts1 lies 9 ?+s :i* o!r p h obs]v$ b :i* we ourselves h n obs]v$4 ,b 9 ask+ ?is p>ticul> "q1 ,i am n ask+ = reasons ( ?is sort4 ,! v "q t ,i am ask+ is3 ,:at reason has any "o ( u = suppos+ t any o!r p]son :atev] has ev] made any obs]vations8 ,& j z1 9 ! fir/ mean+ :i* ,i gave to ?is "q1 x meant3 ,:at ?+1 t any s+le man obs]ves is su* t x w\ld probably n h exi/$1 unless "s o!r man _h made a p>ticul> obs]vation8 ,s n[ ,i am ask+3 ,:i* among ! ?+s1 :i* "o s+le man obs]ves1 are su* t !y w\ld probably n h exi/$1 unless x 7 true t "s ( !m g5]ally /ood 9 c]ta9 relations to obs]vations ( "s o!r p]son8 ,i am ask+3 ,:i* among my own obs]vations give me a reason = suppos+ t "s ( !m are ( a k9d :i* are g5]ally prec$$ or accompani$ by obs]vations ( o!r p8 ,:i*1 = in/ance1 among my own obs]vations give a good reason = ! g5]alisation t :5 ,i he> c]ta9 words1 somebody else has g5]ally _h c]ta9 p>ticul> ?\ghts1 or t :5ev] anyone he>s c]ta9 words1 somebody else has g5]ally _h ! ?\ghts :i* con/itute :at we call ! mean+ ( ^? words8 ,i am ask+3 ,:i* among ! va/ s]ies ( obs]vations1 :i* any "o individual makes dur+ 8 lifetime1 give a good reason = any g5]alisation :atev] ( ?is k9d--a g5]alisation :i* ass]ts t "s ( !m are g5]ally prec$$ by c]ta9 ?\ghts1 p]ceptions or feel+s 9 o!r p]sons8 ,i q admit t !re are "s g5]alisations ( ?is k9d = :i* ! obs]vations ( "s p>ticul> m5 w n give a reason4 ,all t ,i ask is3 ,is !re ev5 "o g5]alisation ( ?is k9d1 = :i* ! k9d ( obs]vations1 :i* 7z we commonly assume7 ea* man1 or ne>ly e man does make1 d give a reason8 ,among obs]vations ( ! k9d :i* 7z we commonly assume7 are common to y & to me1 d y\rs1 by !mselves1 give any reason = ev5 "o su* g5]alisation8 ,& d m9e1 by !mselves1 give any reason = ev5 "o su* g5]alisation8 ,& if !y d1 :i*1 among ^! obs]vations1 is x :i* d s8 ,my "q is1 !n3 ,:at reason d my own obs]vations give me1 = suppos+ t any p]ception :atev]1 :i* ,i h1 w\ld probably n occur1 unless "s o!r p]son _h a c]ta9 k9d ( p]ception8 ,:at reason d my own obs]vations give me = suppos+1 = in/ance1 t ,i %\ld n be p]ceiv+ :at ,i d n[ p]ceive1 unless someone 7 he>+ ! s\nd ( my voice8 ,:at reason d y\r own obs]vations give y = suppos+ t y w\ld n be p]ceiv+ j :at y are p]ceiv+1 unless ,i 7 p]ceiv+ m or less black m>ks on a m or less :ite gr\nd8 ,! "q does1 ,i ?9k1 appe> to be a reasonable "o2 & mo/ philosoph]s1 ,i ?9k1 h assum$ t !re is an answ] to x4 ,yet x may be said t !re is no answ] to x3 t my own obs]vations give me no reason :atev] = any s+le proposition ( ?is k9d4 ,!re are c]ta9 philosoph]s 7ev5 ap>t f ?or\gh sceptics1 ) :om1 z ,i h said1 ,i am n n[ argu+7 :o h d5i$ t !y d4 ,!re are c]ta9 philosoph]s :o hold t no?+ :i* any s+le "o ( u obs]ves or c obs]ve1 gives ! slighte/ reason = suppos+ t any ( 8 own p]ceptions are g5]ally connect$ ) c]ta9 p]ceptions 9 o!r p4 ,!re are philosoph]s :o hold t ! only g5]alisations = :i* our own obs]vations d give any w>rant are g5]alisations conc]n+ ! mann] 9 :i* our own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts & feel+s d & probably w succe$ "o ano!r2 & :o conclude t1 ?is be+ s1 we h no reason :atev] = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( any o!r p4 ,& ^! philosoph]s are1 ,i ?9k1 "r 9 draw+ ?is conclusion f ?is premiss4 ,x does n1 inde$1 foll[ f _! premiss t we h n a reason 9 ! s5se :i* ,i fir/ expla9$1 & 9 :i*1 ,i insi/$1 x mu/ be admitt$ t we h a reason4 ,x does n foll[ t "s ( our p]ceptions are n su* z w\ld probably n exi/1 unless "s o!r p]son _h c]ta9 p]ceptions4 ,b1 z ,i h urg$1 :5 we say t we h a reason = ass]t+ ! exi/5ce ( some?+ n p]ceiv$1 we commonly mean some?+ m ?an ?is4 ,we mean n only t1 s9ce :at we p]ceive does exi/1 ! unp]ceiv$ ?+ probably exi/s too2 we mean also t we h "s reason = ass]t+ ?is connection betwe5 ! p]ceiv$ & ! unp]ceiv$4 ,& hold+1 z we d1 t no reason c be giv5 = ass]t+ su* a connection1 except obs]vation1 we %\ld say t1 if obs]vation gives no reason = ass]t+ x1 we h no reason = ass]t+ x2 & hav+ no reason = ass]t+ ?is connection betwe5 ! p]ceiv$ & ! unp]ceiv$1 we %\ld say t we h none ei!r = ass]t+ ! ev5 probable exi/5ce ( ! unp]ceiv$4 ,?is1 ,i ?9k1 is :at we commonly mean by say+ t we h no reason to believe 9 ! exi/5ce ( a p>ticul> ?+ :i* we d n p]ceive4 ,& h5ce1 ,i ?9k1 ^? philosoph]s :o hold t our own obs]vations give u no reason :atev] = any g5]alisation :atev] conc]n+ ! connection ( any ( !m ) ^? ( o!r p1 are q "r 9 conclud+ t we h no reason to ass]t t any o!r p]son ev] did h any p>ticul> ?\ght or p]ception :atev]4 ,i ?9k t ! words ( ?is conclusion1 und]/ood 9 _! natural mean+1 express precisely :at ! premiss ass]ts4 ,we ne$ n1 inde$1 conclude1 z _m ( ^! philosoph]s are incl9$ to d1 t1 because we h no reason = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p1 x is !re=e highly d\btful :e!r !y d exi/4 ,! philosoph]s :o advocate ?is op9ion commonly refute !mselves by assign+ ! exi/5ce ( o!r p z "p ( _! reason = believ+ t x is v d\btful :e!r any o!r p exi/4 ,t = :i* we h no reason may1 nev]!less1 be c]ta9ly true4 ,&1 inde$1 "o ( ! philosoph]s :o hold mo/ cle>ly & expressly t we d "k n only ! exi/5ce ( o!r p b also t ( mat]ial objects1 is also "o ( ^? :o d5y mo/ emphatically t our own obs]vations c give any reason = believ+ ei!r 9 ! "o or 9 ! o!r4 ,i ref] to ,?omas ,reid4 ,reid1 inde$1 all[s himself to use n only ! ^w obs]ve1 b ev5 ! ^w p]ceive1 9 t wide s5se 9 :i* x might be said t we obs]ve or p]ceive ! ?\ghts & feel+s ( o!rs3 & ,i ?9k t ! fact t he uses ! words 9 ?is s5se1 has misl$ him into ?9k+ t 8 view is m plausible & m 9 accordance ) ,common ,s5se ?an x really is3 by us+ ! words 9 ?is s5se he is able to plead t obs]vation really does give a reason = "s ( ^? g5]alisations1 = :i* ,common ,s5se holds t obs]vation 79 a n>r[] s5se7 does give a reason4 ,b ) reg>d to :at we obs]ve or p]ceive1 9 ! /rict s5se to :i* #a am conf9+ ^? words1 he ass]ts q explicitly t x gives u no reason ei!r = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( mat]ial objects or = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r m9ds4 ,b]keley1 he says1 has prov$ incontrov]tibly t x gives u no reason = ! "o1 & ,hume t x gives u no reason = ! o!r4 ,n[ ^! philosoph]s may be "r 9 hold+ ?is4 ,x may1 p]haps1 be true t1 9 ?is s5se1 my own obs]vations give me no reason :atev] = believ+ t any o!r p]son ev] has or w p]ceive any?+ l or unlike :at ,i p]ceive4 ,b ,i ?9k x is desirable we %\ld realise h[ p>adoxical are ! consequ5ces :i* mu/ be admitt$1 if ?is is true4 ,x mu/ !n be admitt$ t ! v l>ge "p ( our k1 :i* we suppose to h "s basis 9 exp]i5ce1 is by no means bas$ ^u exp]i5ce1 9 ! s5se1 & to ! ext5t1 :i* we suppose4 ,we d = in/ance1 commonly suppose t !re is "s basis 9 exp]i5ce = ! ass]tion t "s p1 :om we call ,g]mans1 use "o set ( words to express mu* ! same mean+ :i* we express by us+ a diff]5t set ( words4 ,b1 if ?is view be correct1 we mu/ admit t no p]son's exp]i5ce gives him any reason :atev] = suppos+ t1 :5 he he>s c]ta9 words1 any "o else has ev] he>d or ?\ght ( ! same words1 or meant any?+ by !m4 ,! view admits1 inde$1 t ,i d "k t :5 ,i he> c]ta9 words1 somebody else has g5]ally _h ?\ghts m or less simil> to ^? :i* ,i suppose him to h _h3 b x d5ies t my own obs]vations c\ld ev] give me ! lea/ reason = suppos+ t ?is is s4 ,x admits t my own obs]vations may give me reason = suppos+ t if anyone has ev] _h p]ceptions l m9e 9 "s respects1 he w also h _h o!r p]ceptions l o!rs ( m9e3 b x d5ies t !y give me any reason = suppos+ t any "o else has _h a p]ception l "o ( m9e4 ,x admits t my own obs]vations may give me reason = suppos+ t c]ta9 p]ceptions & ?\ghts 9 "o p]son 7if !y exi/7 w be foll[$ or prec$$ by c]ta9 o!r p]ceptions & ?\ghts 9 t p]son3 b x d5ies t !y give me any reason :atev] = any simil> g5]alisation conc]n+ ! connection ( a c]ta9 k9d ( p]ception 9 "o p]son ) a c]ta9 k9d ( p]ception 9 ano!r4 ,x admits t ,i %\ld n h c]ta9 p]ceptions1 :i* ,i d h1 unless someone else _h _h c]ta9 o!r p]ceptions2 b x d5ies t my own obs]vations c give me any reason = say+ s--= say+ t ,i %\ld n h _h ?is p]ception1 unless someone else _h _h t4 ,no obs]vations ( m9e1 x holds1 c ev] r5d] x probable t su* a g5]alisation is true2 no obs]vation ( m9e c ev] confirm or v]ify su* a g5]alisation4 ,if we are to say t any su* g5]alisation :atev] is bas$ ^u obs]vation1 we c only mean1 :at ,reid means1 t x is bas$ on a s]ies ( assumptions4 ,:5 ,i obs]ve ?is p>ticul> ?+1 ,i assume t t p>ticul> ?+1 :i* ,i d n obs]ve1 exi/s2 :5 ,i obs]ve ano!r p>ticul> ?+1 ,i aga9 assume t a second p>ticul> ?+1 :i* ,i d n obs]ve1 exi/s2 :5 ,i obs]ve a ?ird p>ticul> ?+1 ,i aga9 assume t a ?ird p>ticul> ?+1 :i* ,i d n obs]ve1 exi/s4 ,^! assum$ facts--! assum$ fact t "o obs]vation ( m9e is accompani$ by ! exi/5ce ( "o p>ticul> k9d ( ?+1 & t ano!r obs]vation ( m9e is accompani$ by ! exi/5ce ( a diff]5t p>ticul> k9d ( ?+1 w !n give me a reason = diff]5t g5]alisations conc]n+ ! connection ( diff]5t p]ceptions ( m9e ) diff]5t ext]nal objects--objects :i* ,i d n p]ceive4 ,b 7x is ma9ta9$7 no?+ b a mass ( su* assumptions w give me a reason = any su* g5]alisation4 ,n[ ,i ?9k x mu/ be admitt$ t !re is some?+ p>adoxical 9 su* a view4 ,i ?9k x may be admitt$ t1 9 hold+ x1 ! philosoph] ( ,common ,s5se dep>ts f ,common ,s5se at lea/ z f> 9 "o direction z 8 oppon5ts _h done 9 ano!r4 ,b ,i ?9k t !re is "s excuse = ^? :o hold x3 ,i ?9k t1 9 "o respect1 !y are m 9 ! "r ?an ^? :o d n hold x--?an ^? :o hold t my own obs]vations d give me a reason = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p4 ,= ^? :o hold t my obs]vations d give me a reason1 h1 ,i believe1 univ]sally suppos$ t ! reason lies 9 a "p ( my obs]vations1 9 :i* no su* reason is to be f\nd4 ,?is is :y ,i h *os5 to ask ! "q3 ,:at reason d my obs]vations give me = believ+ t any o!r p]son has any p>ticul> p]ceptions or beliefs8 ,i wi% to consid] :i* among ! ?+s :i* ,i obs]ve w give su* a reason4 ,= ?is is a "q to :i* no answ]1 t ,i h ev] se51 appe>s to me to be correct4 ,^? :o h ask$ x h1 s f> z ,i "k1 answ]$ x ei!r by d5y+ t my obs]vations give me any reason or by po9t+ to a "p ( my obs]vations1 :i*1 z x seems to me1 really d give none4 ,^? :o d5y are1 x seems to me1 "r 9 hold+ t ! reason giv5 by ^? :o affirm is no reason4 ,& _! correct op9ion on ?is po9t w1 ,i ?9k1 p>tly s]ve to expla9 _! d5ial4 ,!y h suppos$ t if our obs]vations give u any reason at all = ass]t+ ! exi/5ce ( o!r p1 t reason mu/ lie :]e x has be5 suppos$ to lie by ^? :o hold t !y d give a reason4 ,& !n1 f9d+ t ?is assign$ reason is no reason1 !y h assum$ t !re is no o!r4 ,i am propos+ !n to ask3 ,:i* among ! obs]vations1 :i* ,i make1 & :i* 7z we commonly suppose7 are simil> 9 k9d to ^? :i* all or almo/ all m5 make1 w give a reason = suppos+ t ! exi/5ce ( any ( !m is g5]ally connect$ ) ! exi/5ce ( c]ta9 k9ds ( p]ception or belief 9 o!r p8 ,& 9 ord] to answ] ?is "q1 x is obvi\s we mu/ fir/ consid] two o!rs4 ,we mu/ consid]1 9 ! fir/ place3 ,( :at nature mu/ obs]vations be1 if !y are to give a reason = any g5]alisation ass]t+ t ! exi/5ce ( "o k9d ( ?+ is g5]ally connect$ ) t ( ano!r8 ,& we mu/ consid] 9 ! second place3 ,:at k9ds ( ?+s d we obs]ve8 ,n[ to ! fir/ ( ^! que/ions ,i am n go+ to attempt to give a complete answ]4 ,! "q conc]n+ ! rules ( ,inductive ,logic1 :i* is ! "q at issue1 is an imm5sely difficult & intricate "q4 ,& ,i am n go+ to attempt to say1 :at k9d ( obs]vations are suffici5t to ju/ify a g5]alisation4 ,b x is comp>atively easy to po9t out t a c]ta9 k9d ( obs]vations are necess>y to ju/ify a g5]alisation3 & ?is is all t ,i propose to d4 ,i wi% to po9t out c]ta9 conditions :i* obs]vations mu/ satisfy1 if !y are to ju/ify a g5]alisation2 )\t 9 any way imply+ t all obs]vations :i* d satisfy ^! conditions1 w ju/ify a g5]alisation4 ,! conditions1 ,i %all m5tion1 are ones :i* are c]ta9ly n suffici5t to ju/ify a g5]alisation2 b !y are1 ,i ?9k1 conditions1 )\t :i* no g5]alisation c be ju/ifi$4 ,if a p>ticul> k9d ( obs]vations d n satisfy ^! conditions1 we c say ) c]ta9ty t ^? obs]vations give u no reason = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p2 ?\gh1 ) reg>d to obs]vations :i* d satisfy !m1 we %all only be able to say t !y may give a reason4 ,:at conditions1 !n1 mu/ obs]vations satisfy1 if !y are to ju/ify a g5]alisation8 ,let u suppose t ! g5]alisation to be ju/ifi$ is "o :i* ass]ts t ! exi/5ce ( a k9d ( object1 :i* we w call ,a1 is g5]ally prec$$1 accompani$1 or foll[$ by ! exi/5ce ( a k9d ( object1 :i* we call ,b4 ,a1 = in/ance1 might be ! he>+ ( a c]ta9 ^w by "o p]son1 & ,b ! ?\ght ( t :i* we call ! mean+ ( ! ^w1 9 ano!r p]son2 & ! g5]alisation to be ju/ifi$ might be t :5 "o p]son he>s a ^w1 n spok5 by himself1 someone else has g5]ally ?\ght ( ! mean+ ( t ^w4 ,:at mu/ ,i h obs]v$1 if ! g5]alisation t ! exi/5ce ( ,a is g5]ally prec$$ by ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 is to be ju/ifi$ by my obs]vations8 ,"o fir/ po9t1 ,i ?9k1 is pla94 ,i mu/ h obs]v$ bo? "s object1 :i* is 9 "s respects l ,a1 & :i* ,i w call 1 & also "s object 9 "s respects l ,b :i* ,i w call 3 ,i mu/ h obs]v$ bo? & 1 & also ,i mu/ h obs]v$ prec$+ 4 ,?is1 at lea/1 ,i mu/ h obs]v$4 ,b ,i d n pret5d to say h[ l & mu/ be to ,a & ,b2 nor d ,i pret5d to say h[ (t5 ,i mu/ h obs]v$ prec$+ 1 al?\gh x is g5]ally held t ,i mu/ h obs]v$ ?is m ?an once4 ,^! are que/ions1 :i* w\ld h to be discuss$ if we 7 try+ to discov] :at obs]vations 7 suffici5t to ju/ify ! g5]alisation t ! exi/5ce ( ,a is g5]ally prec$$ by t ( ,b4 ,b ,i am only try+ to lay d[n ! m9imum :i* is necess>y to ju/ify ?is g5]alisation2 & !re=e ,i am cont5t to say t we mu/ h obs]v$ some?+ m or less l ,b prec$+ some?+ m or less l ,a1 at lea/ once4 ,b !re is yet ano!r m9imum condition4 ,if my obs]vation ( prec$+ is to ju/ify ! g5]alisation t ! exi/5ce ( ,a is g5]ally prec$$ by ! exi/5ce ( ,b1 x is pla91 ,i ?9k1 t bo? ! & ! 1 :i* ,i obs]v$1 mu/ h exi/$ or be5 real2 & t also ! exi/5ce ( mu/ really h prec$$ t ( 4 ,x is pla9 t if1 :5 ,i obs]v$ & 1 exi/$ b did n1 ?is obs]vation c\ld give me no reason to suppose t on ano!r occasion :5 ,a exi/$1 w\ld exi/4 ,or aga91 if1 :5 ,i obs]v$ prec$+ 1 bo? & exi/$1 b ! exi/5ce ( did n really prec$e t ( 1 b1 on ! contr>y1 foll[$ x1 ?is obs]vation c\ld c]ta9ly give me no reason to suppose t1 9 g5]al1 ! exi/5ce ( ,a 0 prec$$ by ! exi/5ce ( ,b4 ,inde$ ?is condition t :at is obs]v$ mu/ h be5 real might be said to be includ$ 9 ! v mean+ ( ! ^w obs]vation4 ,we %\ld1 9 ?is connection1 say t we _h n obs]v$ prec$+ 1 unless & 7 bo? real1 & _h really prec$$ 4 ,if ,i say ,i h obs]v$ t1 on "o occasion1 my he>+ ( ! ^w 'moon' 0 foll[$ by my imag9+ a lum9\s silv]y disc1 ,i commonly mean to include 9 my /atem5t ! ass]tion t ,i did1 on t occasion1 really he> ! ^w moon1 & really did h a visual image ( a lum9\s disc1 & t my p]ception 0 really foll[$ by my imag9ation4 ,if x 7 prov$ to me t ?is _h n really happ5$1 ,i %\ld admit t ,i _h n really obs]v$ x4 ,b ?\gh ?is condition t1 if obs]vation is to give reason = a g5]alisation1 :at is obs]v$ mu/ be real1 may ?us be said to be impli$ 9 ! v ^w obs]vation1 x 0 necess>y = me to m5tion ! condition explicitly4 ,x 0 necess>y1 because1 z ,i %all pres5tly %[1 we d & mu/ also use ! ^w obs]vation 9 a s5se 9 :i* ! ass]tion ,i obs]ve ,a by no means includes ! ass]tion ,a exi/s--9 a s5se 9 :i* x may be true t ?\gh ,i did obs]ve ,a1 yet ,a did n exi/4 ,b !re is also1 ,i ?9k1 a ?ird necess>y condition :i* is v apt to be ov]look$4 ,x may1 p]haps1 be all[$ t obs]vation gives "s reason = ! proposition t h5s' eggs are g5]ally laid by h5s4 ,i d n mean to say t any "o man's obs]vation c give a reason = ?is proposition3 ,i d n assume ei!r t x c or t x _c4 ,nor d ,i mean to make any assumption z to :at mu/ be meant by ! words h5s & eggs1 if ?is proposition is to be true4 ,i am q will+ to all[ = ! mom5t t if x is true at all1 we mu/ und]/& by h5s & eggs1 objects v unlike t :i* we directly obs]ve1 :5 we see a h5 9 a y>d1 or an egg on ! breakfa/-table4 ,i am will+ to all[ ! possibility t1 z "s ,ideali/s w\ld say1 ! proposition ,h5s lay eggs is false1 unless we mean by x3 ,a c]ta9 k9d ( collection ( spirits or monads sometimes has a c]ta9 intelligible relation to ano!r k9d ( collection ( spirits or monads4 ,i am will+ to all[ ! possibility t1 z ,reid & "s sci5ti/s w\ld say1 ! proposition ,h5s lay eggs is false1 if we mean by x any?+ m ?an t3 ,c]ta9 configurations ( invisible mat]ial p>ticles sometimes h a c]ta9 spatio-temporal relation to ano!r k9d ( configuration ( invisible mat]ial p>ticles4 ,or aga9 ,i am will+ to all[1 ) c]ta9 o!r philosoph]s1 t we mu/1 if x is to be true1 int]pret ?is proposition z mean+ t c]ta9 k9ds ( s5sations h to c]ta9 o!r k9ds a relation :i* may be express$ by say+ t ! "o k9d ( s5sations lay ! o!r k9d4 ,or aga91 z o!r philosoph]s say1 ! proposition ,h5s lay eggs may possibly mean3 ,c]ta9 s5sations ( m9e w\ld1 "u c]ta9 conditions1 h to c]ta9 o!r s5sations ( m9e a relation :i* may be express$ by say+ t ! "o set w\ld lay ! o!r set4 ,b :atev] ! proposition ,h5s' eggs are g5]ally laid by h5s may mean1 mo/ philosoph]s w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 all[ t1 9 "s s5se or o!r1 ?is proposition 0 true4 ,& !y w\ld also ,i ?9k all[ t we h "s reason = x2 & t "p ( ?is reason at all ev5ts lies 9 obs]vation3 !y w\ld all[ t we %\ld h no reason = x unless c]ta9 ?+s _h be5 obs]v$1 :i* h be5 obs]v$4 ,few1 ,i ?9k1 w\ld say t ! exi/5ce ( an egg intr9sically po9ts to t ( a h51 9 su* a s5se t1 ev5 if we _h _h no exp]i5ce ( any k9d conc]n+ ! mann] 9 :i* objects l eggs are connect$ ) animals l h5s1 ! m]e inspection ( an egg w\ld ju/ify ! ass]tion3 ,a h5 has probably exi/$4 ,i assume1 !n1 t objects hav+ all ! *>act]i/ics :i* h5s' eggs h 7:atev] ^! may be7 are g5]ally laid by h5s 7:atev] h5s may be72 & ,i assume t1 if we h any reason = ?is g5]alisation at all1 obs]vation gives u "s reason = x4 ,b n[1 let u suppose t ! only obs]vations we _h made 7 ^? :i* we %\ld commonly describe by say+ t we _h se5 a h5 lay+ an egg4 ,i d n say t any numb] ( su* obs]vations1 by !mselves1 w\ld be suffici5t to ju/ify our g5]alisation3 ,i ?9k x is pla9 t !y w\ld n4 ,b let u suppose1 = ! mom5t1 t we _h obs]v$ no?+ else :i* bore ^u ! connection betwe5 h5s & eggs2 & t1 if !re=e our g5]alisation 0 ju/ifi$ by any obs]vations at all1 x 0 ju/ifi$ by ^!4 ,we are suppos+1 !n1 t ! obs]vations :i* we describe z see+ h5s lay eggs give "s reason = ! g5]alisation t eggs ( t k9d are g5]ally laid by h5s4 ,& if ^! obs]vations give reason = ?is1 obvi\sly 9 a s5se !y give reason = ! g5]alisation t ! exi/5ce ( su* an egg is g5]ally prec$$ by t ( a h52 & h5ce also1 !y give u reason to suppose t if su* an egg exi/s1 a h5 has probably exi/$ also--t unless a h5 _h exi/$1 ! egg w\ld n h exi/$4 ,b ! po9t to :i* ,i wi% to call att5tion is t x is only 9 a limit$ s5se t !y d give reason = ?is4 ,!y only give u reason to suppose t1 = ea* egg1 !re has exi/$ a h51 :i* 0 at "s "t ne> ! place :]e ! egg 9 "q !n 01 & :i* exi/$ at a "t ne> to t at :i* ! egg began to exi/4 ,! only k9d ( h5s1 ^: exi/5ce !y d give u reason to suppose1 are h5s1 ( :i* ea* 0 at "s "t 9 spatial & temporal proximity 7or1 if ,ideali/s pref]1 9 ! relations :i* are ! intelligible c\nt]p>ts ( ^!7 to an egg4 ,!y give u no in=mation at all ab\t ! exi/5ce ( h5s 7if !re are any7 :i* nev] came )9 a ?\s& miles ( an egg1 or :i* 7 dead a ?\s& ye>s be=e any egg exi/$4 ,t is to say1 !y d give u reason to suppose t1 if a p>ticul> egg exi/s1 !re has probably exi/$ a h5 :i* 0 at "s "t ne> t egg2 b !y give u no reason to suppose t1 if a p>ticul> egg exi/s1 !re mu/ h exi/$ a h5 :i* nev] came ne> t egg4 ,!y d give u reason to suppose t1 = ea* egg1 !re has probably exi/$ a h5 :i* at "s "t /ood to ! egg 9 "q 9 t relation :i* we h obs]v$ to hold betwe5 an egg & a h51 :5 we obs]v$ ! h5 lay+ an egg4 ,b !y give u no reason to inf] f ! exi/5ce ( an egg any o!r k9d ( h53 any h5 :i* nev] /ood to ! egg 9 ! relation 9 :i* we h obs]v$ t "s h5s d /& to eggs4 ,:at ,i wi% to sugge/ is t ?is condition is a univ]sal condition = s\nd inductions4 ,if ! obs]vation ( prec$+ c ev] give u any reason at all = suppos+ t ! exi/5ce ( ,a is g5]ally prec$$ by t ( ,b1 x c at mo/ only give u reason to suppose t ! exi/5ce ( an ,a is g5]ally prec$$ by t ( a ,b :i* /&s to our ,a 9 ! same relation 9 :i* has be5 obs]v$ to /& to 4 ,x _c give ! lea/ reason = suppos+ t ! exi/5ce ( an ,a mu/ h be5 prec$$ by t ( a ,b1 :i* did n /& to ,a 9 ! obs]v$ relation1 b 9 "s q diff]5t "o4 ,if we are to h any reason to inf] f ! exi/5ce ( an ,a ! exi/5ce ( su* a ,b1 ! reason mu/ lie 9 "s diff]5t obs]vations4 ,t ?is is s1 9 ! case ( h5s' eggs & h5s1 is1 ,i ?9k1 obvi\s3 &1 if ! rule is n univ]sal1 "s reason %\ld at lea/ be giv5 = suppos+ t x does apply 9 "o case & n 9 ano!r4 ,hav+ ?us attempt$ to po9t out "s conditions :i* seem to be necess>y1 ?\gh n suffici5t1 :]e obs]vation is to give any reason = a g5]alisation1 ,i may n[ proce$ to my second prelim9>y "q4 ,:at k9ds ( ?+s d we obs]ve8 ,9 ord] to illu/rate h[ mu* & h[ little ,i mean by obs]vation or direct p]ception1 ,i w take z an in/ance a v common visual p]ception4 ,mo/ ( u are famili> ) ! exp]i5ce :i* we %\ld describe by say+ t we _h se5 a r$ book & a blue book side by side ^u a %elf4 ,:at exactly c we be said to obs]ve or directly p]ceive :5 we h su* an exp]i5ce8 ,we c]ta9ly obs]ve "o col\r1 :i* we call blue1 & a diff]5t col\r1 :i* we call r$2 ea* ( ^! we obs]ve z hav+ a p>ticul> size & %ape2 & we obs]ve also ^! two col\r$ pat*es z hav+ to "o ano!r ! spatial relation :i* we express by say+ !y are side by side4 ,all ?is we c]ta9ly see or directly p]ceive n[1 :atev] may h be5 ! process by :i* we h come to p]ceive s mu*4 ,b :5 we say1 z 9 ord9>y talk we %\ld1 t ! objects we p]ceive are books1 we c]ta9ly mean to ascribe to !m prop]ties1 :i*1 9 a s5se :i* we all und]/&1 are n actually se5 by u1 at ! mom5t :5 we are m]ely look+ at two books on a %elf two y>ds (f4 ,& all su* prop]ties ,i mean to exclude z n be+ !n obs]v$ or directly p]ceiv$ by u4 ,:5 ,i speak ( :at we obs]ve1 :5 we see two books on a %elf1 ,i mean to limit ! expression to t :i* is actually se54 ,&1 ?us und]/ood1 ! expression does include col\rs1 & ! size & %ape ( col\rs1 & spatial relations 9 ?ree dim5sions betwe5 ^! pat*es ( col\r1 b x includes no?+ else4 ,b ,i am also us+ obs]vation 9 a s5se 9 :i* we c be said actually to obs]ve a movem5t4 ,we commonly say t we c sometimes see a r$ billi>d ball mov+ t[>ds a :ite "o on a gre5 table4 ,&1 "h aga91 ,i d n mean to include 9 :at is directly p]ceiv$ or obs]v$1 all t we mean by say+ t ! two objects p]ceiv$ are billi>d-balls4 ,b ,i d mean to include :at 7we %\ld say7 we actually see4 ,we actually see a m or less r\nd r$ pat* mov+ t[>ds a m or less r\nd :ite pat*2 we see ! /ret* ( gre5 betwe5 !m dim9i%+ 9 size4 ,& ?is p]ception is n m]ely ! same z a s]ies ( p]ceptions--fir/ a p]ception ( a r$ pat* ) a gre5 /ret* ( "o size betwe5 x & ! :ite2 !n a p]ception ( a r$ pat* ) a gre5 /ret* ( a diff]5t size betwe5 x & ! :ite2 & s on4 ,9 ord] to p]ceive a movem5t we mu/ h a diff]5t p]ception f any "o ( ^! or f ! sum ( !m4 ,we mu/ actually see ! gre5 /ret* dim9i%+ 9 size4 ,n[ x is und\bt$ly difficult1 9 "s in/ances1 to decide precisely :at is p]ceiv$ 9 ?is s5se & :at is n4 ,b ,i hope ,i h said en\gh to %[ t ,i am us+ p]ceive & obs]ve 9 a s5se 9 :i*1 on a giv5 occasion1 x is easy to decide t "s ?+s c]ta9ly are p]ceiv$1 & o!r ?+s1 z c]ta9ly1 are n p]ceiv$4 ,i am us+ x 9 a s5se 9 :i* we d p]ceive su* a complex object z a :ite pat* mov+ t[>ds a r$ "o on a gre5 field2 b ,i am n us+ x 9 any s5se 9 :i* we c\ld be said to p]ceive or obs]ve t :at we saw mov+ 0 a billi>d-ball4 ,& 9 ! same way ,i ?9k we c di/+ui% r\ghly betwe5 :at1 on any giv5 occasion1 we p]ceive1 z we say1 by any "o ( ! o!r s5ses1 & :at we d n p]ceive by x4 ,we c say ) c]ta9ty t1 on any giv5 occasion1 !re are c]ta9 k9ds ( cont5t :i* we are actually he>+1 & o!rs :i* we are n actually he>+2 ?\gh ) reg>d to "s aga9 x is difficult to say :e!r we are actually he>+ !m or n4 ,& simil>ly we c di/+ui% ) c]ta9ty 9 "s in/ances1 betwe5 :at we are on a giv5 occasion1 actually smell+ or feel+1 & :at we are n actually smell+ or feel+4 ,b n[1 besides ^! k9ds ( ?+s1 objects1 or cont5ts1 :i* we p]ceive1 z we say1 by ! s5ses1 !re is also ano!r k9d :i* we c be said to obs]ve4 ,n only c ,i obs]ve a r$ & blue book side by side2 ,i c also obs]ve myself obs]v+ !m4 ,i c p]ceive a r$ pat* mov+ t[>ds a :ite1 & ,i c also p]ceive my p]ception ( ?is movem5t4 ,& :at ,i wi% to make z pla9 z ,i c is t my p]ception ( ! movem5t ( a col\r$ pat* c at lea/ be di/+ui%$ f t movem5t itself4 ,i wi% to make x pla9 t to obs]ve a col\r$ pat* mov+ is to obs]ve "o ?+2 & to obs]ve myself obs]v+ a col\r$ pat* mov+ is ano!r4 ,:5 ,i obs]ve my own p]ception ( a movem5t1 ,i obs]ve some?+ m ?an :5 ,i m]ely obs]ve ! movem5t1 & some?+ v diff]5t f ! movem5t4 ,i may p]ceive a r$ & a blue book side by side on a %elf2 & at ano!r "t ,i may p]ceive a r$ ball mov+ t[>ds a :ite4 ,! r$ & blue pat*1 ( "o %ape1 at re/ side by side1 are diff]5t f ! r$1 ( ano!r %ape1 mov+ t[>ds ! :ite2 & yet1 :5 ,i say t bo? are p]ceiv$1 ,i mean by p]ceiv$ "o & ! same ?+4 ,& s9ce1 ?us1 two diff]5t ?+s may bo? be p]ceiv$1 !re mu/ also be "s diff]5ce betwe5 ea* ( !m & :at is meant by say+ t x is p]ceiv$4 ,inde$1 9 precisely ! same way ,9 :i* ,i may obs]ve a spatial relation betwe5 a r$ pat* & a blue 7:5 ,i obs]ve !m side by side7 ,i d1 :5 ,i obs]ve my own p]ception ( !m1 obs]ve a spatial relation betwe5 x & !m4 ,i obs]ve a di/ance betwe5 my p]ception & ! r$ & blue books :i* ,i p]ceive1 comp>able 9 magnitude ) ! bread? or height ( ! blue book1 j z ^! are comp>able 9 magnitude ) "o ano!r4 ,& :5 ,i say ,i obs]ve a di/ance betwe5 my p]ception ( a r$ book & t r$ book itself1 ,i d n mean t ,i obs]ve a di/ance betwe5 my eyes1 or any o!r "p ( :at ,i call my body1 & ! r$ pat* 9 "q4 ,i am talk+ n ( my eyes1 b ( my actual p]ception4 ,i obs]ve my p]ception ( a book to be ne> ! book & fur!r f ! table1 9 exactly ! same s5se 9 :i* ,i obs]ve ! book to be ne> ! %elf on :i* x /&s1 & fur!r f ! table4 ,& j z1 if ! di/ance betwe5 a r$ pat* & a :ite is to be p]ceiv$1 ! r$ pat* mu/ be diff]5t f ! :ite1 s1 if ,i p]ceive a c]ta9 di/ance betwe5 my p]ception & ! r$ pat*1 my p]ception mu/ be diff]5t f ! r$ pat* :i* ,i p]ceive4 ,i assume1 !n1 t we obs]ve1 on ! "o h&1 col\r$ pat*es ( c]ta9 %apes & sizes1 & _! spatial relations to "o ano!r1 toge!r ) all ! o!r k9ds ( cont5ts1 :i* we %\ld usually be said to p]ceive ?r\gh ! s5ses4 ,&1 on ! o!r h&1 we also sometimes obs]ve our own p]ceptions ( su* cont5ts & our ?\ghts4 ,& ^! two k9ds ( cont5t are diff]5t f "o ano!r3 my p]ception ( a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x1 is n itself a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x2 & h5ce1 :5 ,i obs]ve my p]ception ( ?is pat*1 ,i obs]ve some?+ diff]5t f t :i* ,i obs]ve :5 ,i m]ely p]ceive ! pat*4 ,ei!r ( ^! two k9ds ( cont5t--ei!r col\rs1 mov+ or at re/1 s\nds1 smells1 & all ! re/--or1 on ! o!r h&1 my p]ceptions ( ^!--ei!r ( ^! two k9ds1 or bo?1 might conceivably1 s9ce bo? are obs]v$1 give gr\nds = a g5]alisation conc]n+ :at exi/s4 ,b1 z ,i h said1 if obs]vations are to give any gr\nd = su* a g5]alisation1 x mu/ be assum$ t :at ,is obs]v$ exi/s or is real4 ,& s9ce1 z ,i h insi/$1 :5 ,i obs]ve my p]ception ( a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x1 ,i obs]ve some?+ diff]5t f :at ,i obs]v$ :5 ,i m]ely obs]v$ a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x1 x foll[s t to assume ! exi/5ce ( my p]ception ( ?is r$ & gold is n ! same ?+ z to assume ! exi/5ce ( ! r$ & gold itself4 ,b :at1 x may be ask$1 d ,i mean by ?is prop]ty ( exi/5ce or reality1 :i* may1 x w\ld seem1 belong to e cont5t1 :i* ,i obs]ve1 or may aga9 belong to none1 or :i* may belong to "s & n to o!rs8 ,:at is ?is prop]ty :i* may belong to my p]ception ( a movem5t1 & yet n belong to ! movem5t p]ceiv$1 or :i* may aga9 belong to ! movem5t p]ceiv$ & n to my p]ception ( x1 or :i* may aga9 belong to bo? or to nei!r8 ,x is necess>y1 ,i ?9k1 to ask ?is "q at ?is po9t1 because !re are "s philosoph]s :o hold t1 9 ! case ( "s k9ds ( cont5t1 at all ev5ts1 to say t !y exi/ is to say t !y are p]ceiv$4 ,"s hold t to say ,a exi/s is to say nei!r m nor less ?an ,a is p]ceiv$--t ! two expressions are p]fect synonyms2 & o!rs aga9 w\ld say t by ,a exi/s or is real we may mean m ?an t ,a is p]ceiv$1 b t we mu/ at lea/ mean ?is4 ,n[1 ,i h hi!rto us$ ! ^w exi/5ce pretty freely1 & ,i ?9k t1 :5 ,i us$ x1 ,i us$ x 9 its ord9>y s5se4 ,i ?9k x w g5]ally h sugge/$ to y precisely :at ,i meant to convey1 & ,i ?9k t1 9 "s cases at all ev5ts1 x w n ev5 h occurr$ to y to d\bt :e!r y did und]/& :at ,i meant by x4 ,b1 if ^! philosoph]s are "r1 !n1 if y h und]/ood :at ,i meant by x1 ,i h all along be5 us+ x 9 a s5se1 :i* r5d]s ! end ( my la/ p>agraph p]fect nons5se4 ,if ^! philosoph]s are "r1 !n1 :5 ,i ass]t t :at is p]ceiv$ may yet n exi/1 ,i am really ass]t+ t :at is p]ceiv$ may yet n be p]ceiv$--,i am contradict+ myself4 ,i am1 ( c\rse1 q unaw>e t ,i am do+ s4 ,b ^! philosoph]s w\ld say ei!r y are contradict+ y\rself1 or y are n us+ ! ^w exi/s 9 its ord9>y s5se4 ,& ei!r ( ^! alt]natives w\ld be fatal to my purpose4 ,if ,i am n us+ ! ^w 9 its ord9>y s5se1 !n ,i %all n be und]/ood by anyone2 &1 if ,i am contradict+ myself1 !n :at ,i say w n be wor? und]/&+4 ,n[1 ) "o class ( ^! philosoph]s--! class to :i*1 ,i ?9k1 ,b]keley belongs--,i ?9k ,i c put myself "r comp>atively easily4 ,! philosoph]s ,i mean are ^? :o say t x is only 9 ! case ( "o p>ticul> class ( cont5ts 7! k9d ( cont5t :i* ,b]keley calls ideas7 t to say ! 'cont5t' ,a exi/s is to say ,a is p]ceiv$1 & :o admit t 9 ! case ( o!r cont5ts--myself & my p]ceptions & ?\ghts1 = example--to say t ^! exi/ or are real1 is to say ( !m some?+ diff]5t f ?is4 ,^! philosoph]s admit1 t is to say1 t ! ^w exi/s has two diff]5t s5ses3 & t 9 only "o ( ^! s5ses is x synonym\s ) ! words is p]ceiv$4 ,:5 7!y hold7 ,i say ( su* a cont5t z a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x t x exi/s ,i d mean t x is p]ceiv$2 b :5 ,i say ( my p]ception ( su* a pat* t x exi/s1 ,i d n mean t my p]ception is p]ceiv$ b some?+ diff]5t f ?is4 ,n[1 x w\ld be no?+ /range t "o & ! same ^w %\ld be us$ 9 two diff]5t s5ses2 _m words are us$ 9 _m diff]5t s5ses4 ,b x w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 be some?+ v /range inde$1 if 9 ! case ( a ^w :i* we con/antly apply to all sorts ( diff]5t objects1 we %\ld uni=mly apply x to "o l>ge class ( object 9 ! "o s5se & ! "o s5se only & ! o!r l>ge class 9 ! o!r s5se & ! o!r s5se only4 ,usually1 9 ! case ( su* ambigu\s words1 x happ5s t1 9 diff]5t contexts1 we apply x to "o & ! same object 9 bo? s5ses4 ,we sometimes wi% to say ( a giv5 object t x has ! "o prop]ty1 & sometimes we wi% to say ( ! same object t x has ! o!r prop]ty2 & h5ce we apply ! same ^w to ! same object1 at "o "t 9 "o s5se1 & at ano!r 9 ! o!r4 ,i ?9k1 !re=e1 t1 ev5 if !re 7 ^! two diff]5t s5ses ( ! ^w exi/5ce1 x w\ld be v unlikely t we %\ld n commonly1 9 "s contexts1 apply x 9 ! s5se1 9 :i* 7z is alleg$7 x does apply to p]ceptions1 to cont5ts :i* are n p]ceptions4 ,inde$1 ,i ?9k1 x is q pla9 t we con/antly d ask1 ) reg>d to :at is n a p]ception1 :e!r x exi/s1 9 precisely ! same s5se1 9 :i* we ask1 ) reg>d to a p]ception1 :e!r x exi/s4 ,we ask 9 precisely ! same s5se3 ,0 ! ,roc a real bird1 or m]ely an imag9>y "o8 &1 did ,s9dbad's p]ception ( ! ,roc really exi/1 or is x a fiction t he p]ceiv$ a ,roc8 ,i ?9k1 !re=e1 t ! s5se 9 :i* ^! philosoph]s admit t we d apply ! ^w exi/5ce to p]ceptions1 is "o 9 :i* we also commonly apply x to cont5ts o!r ?an p]ceptions4 ,b1 ev5 if ?is is n ! case1 ,i c set myself "r ) !m by a simple explanation4 ,i ne$ m]ely expla9 t ! s5se 9 :i* ,i am propos+ to enquire :e!r a r$ pat* exi/s1 is precisely ! s5se 9 :i* !y admit t my p]ception ( a r$ pat* does exi/4 ,& 9 ?is s5se1 x is pla9 t to suppose t a ?+ may exi/1 :i* is n p]ceiv$1 or t x may n exi/1 al?\gh x is p]ceiv$1 is at lea/ n self-contradictory4 ,b !re may be o!r philosoph]s :o w say t1 9 ! case ( a p]ception also1 to say t x exi/s or is real is to say t x is p]ceiv$--ei!r t alone or some?+ m z well4 ,& to ^! philosoph]s ,i w\ld fir/ po9t out t !y are admitt+ t ! proposition ,?is p]ception is real is significant4 ,!re is "s s5se or o!r 9 :i* we may say3 ,alex&]'s p]ception ( an elephant 0 real or did exi/1 b ,s9dbad's p]ception ( a ,roc 0 n real--nev] did exi/3 ! latt] proposition is1 9 "s s5se or o!r1 n self-contradictory4 ,& !n ,i w\ld ask ( !m3 ,:5 !y say1 t to call a p]ception real is to ass]t t x is p]ceiv$1 d !y mean by ?is t to call x real is to ass]t t x is really p]ceiv$1 or n8 ,if !y say ,no1 !n !y are ass]t+ t to call a p]ception real is m]ely to say t x 0 p]ceiv$ 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ,s9dbad did p]ceive a ,roc3 !y are ass]t+ t to call x real is n to say1 9 any s5se1 t x 0 really p]ceiv$3 !y are ass]t+ t to call a p]ception real is to say t x 0 p]ceiv$1 9 "s s5se q o!r ?an t 9 :i* we ord9>ily use ! ^w3 = we c]ta9ly commonly mean1 :5 we say ,a 0 p]ceiv$1 t a p]ception ( ,a 0 real3 we %\ld commonly say t ,s9dbad did n p]ceive a ,roc--mean+ t no su* p]ception ev] did exi/4 ,i d n ?9k !y d mean ?is2 &1 9 any case1 if !y d1 ,i ?9k x is pla9 t !y are wrong4 ,:5 we say t a p]ception is real1 we c]ta9ly d n mean m]ely t x is ! object ( ano!r p]ception1 :i* may itself be q unreal--purely ,imag9>y4 ,i assume1 !re=e1 t :5 !y say3 ,to call a p]ception real is to say t x is p]ceiv$2 !y mean1 :at we %\ld naturally und]/&1 namely1 t3 ,to call x real is to say t x is really p]ceiv$--to say t x is ! object ( ano!r p]ception1 :i* is also real 9 ! same s5se4 ,&1 if !y mean ?is1 !n :at !y say is c]ta9ly untrue4 ,_! def9ition ( reality is circul>4 ,x _c be ! case t ! only s5se 9 :i* a p]ception may be said to be real1 is "o 9 :i* to call x s is to ass]t t n x alone1 b ano!r p]ception is real also4 ,x _c be ! case t ! ass]tion ,a is real is id5tical ) ! ass]tion ,a & ,b are bo? real1 :]e ,a & ,b are diff]5t1 & real is us$ 9 ! same s5se z appli$ to bo?4 ,if x is to be true t ! ass]tion ,a is real ev]1 9 any s5se1 includes ! ass]tion ,a is really p]ceiv$1 !re mu/ be ano!r s5se ( ! ^w real1 9 :i* to ass]t ,a is real is to ass]t less ?an ,a is really p]ceiv$--! s5se1 namely1 9 :i* we "h ass]t t ! p]ception ( ,a is real4 ,we f9d1 !re=e1 t ! o!r class ( philosoph]s 7 at lea/ "r 9 ?is3 !y 7 "r 9 all[+ t ! s5se 9 :i* we commonly say t our p]ceptions exi/ is "o 9 :i* exi/ does n include1 ev5 z a "p ( its mean+1 is p]ceiv$4 ,we f9d t !re is a common s5se ( ! ^w exi/5ce1 9 :i* to say ,a exi/s mu/ mean less ?an ,a is really p]ceiv$3 s9ce1 o!rwise1 ! only possible def9ition ( ! ^w exi/5ce w\ld be a circul> def9ition4 ,& ,i may po9t out t two o!r def9itions1 :i* h be5 sometimes sugge/$ by philosoph]s z giv+ :at we commonly mean by reality or exi/5ce are vitiat$ by ! same fault--!y also are circul>4 ,"s philosoph]s h sometimes sugge/$ t :5 we call a ?+ real1 we mean t x is sy/ematically connect$ 9 "s way ) o!r ?+s4 ,b1 :5 we look into _! mean+1 we f9d t :at !y mean is 7:at1 inde$1 is alone plausible7--sy/ematically connect$ ) o!r real ?+s4 ,& x may possibly be ! case t we sometimes use ! ^w real 9 ?is s5se3 b1 at lea/1 x mu/ be c]ta9ly ! case1 t1 if we d1 we also use x 9 ano!r & simpl] s5se--! s5se 9 :i* x is employ$ 9 ! propos$ def9ition4 ,& o!r philosoph]s h sugge/$ t :at we mean by real is--connect$ 9 "s way ) a purpose--help+ or h9d]+1 or ! object ( a purpose4 ,b if we look into _! mean+1 we f9d !y mean--connect$ ) a real purpose4 ,& h5ce1 ev5 if we d sometimes mean by real1 connect$ ) a real purpose1 x is pla9 we also sometimes mean by real some?+ simpl] ?an ?is--t namely1 :i* is meant by real 9 ! propos$ def9ition4 ,x is c]ta91 !re=e1 t we d commonly use ! ^w exi/5ce 9 a s5se1 9 :i* to say ,a exi/s is n to say ,a is p]ceiv$1 or ,a is sy/ematically connect$ ) o!r real ?+s1 or ,a is purposive4 ,!re is a simpl] s5se ?an any ( ^!--! s5se 9 :i* we say t our own p]ceptions d exi/1 & t ,s9dbad's p]ceptions did n exi/4 ,b :5 ,i say ?is1 ,i am by no means d5y+ t :at exi/s1 9 ?is simple s5se1 may n always also exi/ 9 all ! o!rs2 & t :at exi/s 9 any ( !m may n also always exi/ 9 ?is4 ,x is q possible t :at exi/s is always also p]ceiv$1 & t :at is p]ceiv$ always also exi/s4 ,all t ,i am say+ is t1 ev5 if ?is is s1 ?is proposition is significant--is n m]ely a proposition ab\t ! mean+ ( a ^w4 ,x is n self-contradictory to suppose t "s ?+s :i* exi/ are n p]ceiv$1 & t "s ?+s :i* are p]ceiv$ d n exi/4 ,b1 x may be ask$3 ,:at is ?is common simple s5se ( ! ^w exi/s8 ,= my own "p1 x seems to me to be s simple t x _c be express$ 9 o!r words1 except ^? :i* are recognis$ z its synonyms4 ,i ?9k we are all p]fectly famili> ) its mean+3 x is ! mean+ :i* y und]/ood me to h ?r\gh\t ?is pap]1 until ,i began ?is discussion4 ,i ?9k we c p]ceive at once :at is meant by ass]t+ t my p]ception ( black m>ks on a :ite gr\nd is real1 & t no su* p]ception z ,s9dbad's ( a ,roc 0 ev] real3 we are p]fectly famili> ) ! prop]ty :i* ! "o p]ception is affirm$ to possess1 & ! o!r to be )\t4 ,& ,i ?9k1 z ,i h said1 t ?is prop]ty is a simple "o4 ,b1 :atev] x is1 ?is1 :i* we ord9>ily mean1 is :at ,i mean by exi/5ce or reality4 ,& ?is prop]ty1 we h se51 is c]ta9ly nei!r id5tical ) nor inclusive ( t complex "o :i* we mean by ! words is p]ceiv$4 ,i may n[1 !n1 at la/ approa* ! ma9 "q ( my pap]4 ,:i* among ! cont5ts :i* ,i obs]ve w give me reason to suppose t my obs]vation ( "s ( !m is g5]ally prec$$ or accompani$ or foll[$ by ! exi/5ce ( c]ta9 p>ticul> p]ceptions1 ?\ghts or feel+s 9 ano!r p]son8 ,i h expla9$ t ! cont5ts :i* ,i actually obs]ve may be divid$ into two classes3 on ! "o h&1 ^? :i*1 z we commonly say1 we p]ceive ?r\gh ! s5ses2 &1 on ! o!r h&1 my p]ceptions ( ^! la/1 my ?\ghts1 & my feel+s4 ,i h expla9$ t if any ( ^! obs]v$ cont5ts are to give reason = a g5]alisation ab\t :at exi/s1 !y mu/ exi/4 ,& ,i h expla9$ t ) reg>d to bo? classes ( cont5ts ,i am us+ ! ^w exi/ 9 precisely ! same s5se--a s5se1 9 :i* x is c]ta9ly n self-contradictory to suppose t :at is p]ceiv$1 does n exi/1 & t :at is n p]ceiv$1 does exi/2 &1 9 :i*1 !re=e1 ! assumption t a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x exi/s1 is a diff]5t assumption f ! assumption t my p]ception ( a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x exi/s2 & ! assumption t my p]ception ( a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x exi/s1 is a diff]5t assumption f ! assumption t a r$ pat* ) gold lett]s on x exi/s4 ,:at1 !n1 t we obs]ve1 c give u any reason = believ+ t anyone else has c]ta9 p>ticul> p]ceptions1 ?\ghts or feel+s8 ,x has1 ,i ?9k1 be5 v commonly assum$ t ! obs]vation ( my own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 & feel+s1 c1 by itself1 give me su* a reason4 ,& ,i propose1 !re=e1 to exam9e ?is assumption4 ,if1 z ,i hope to %[1 x is false2 x w !n foll[1 t if our own obs]vation gives u any reason :atev]1 = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons1 we mu/ assume ! exi/5ce1 n only ( our own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts & feel+s1 b also ( "s1 at lea/1 among t o!r class ( data1 :i* ,i may n[1 = ! sake ( brevity1 call s5se-cont5ts2 we mu/ assume t "s ( !m exi/1 9 precisely ! same s5se 9 :i* we assume t our p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 & feel+s exi/4 ,! !ory :i* ,i propose to exam9e is1 !n1 ! foll[+4 ,my obs]vation ( my own ?\ghts1 feel+s1 & p]ceptions may1 x ass]ts1 give me "s reason to suppose t ano!r p]son has ?\ghts1 feel+s1 & p]ceptions simil> to "s ( m9e4 ,let u assume1 accord+ly1 t my own ?\ghts1 feel+s1 & p]ceptions d exi/2 b t none ( ! s5se-cont5ts1 :i* ,i also obs]ve1 d s4 ,:]e among my p]ceptions am ,i to look = any :i* might conceivably give me a reason = suppos+ ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]ceptions simil> to my own8 ,x is obvi\s :]e ,i mu/ look4 ,i h p]ceptions :i* ,i call p]ceptions ( o!r p's bodies2 & ^! are c]ta9ly simil> 9 _m respects to o!r p]ceptions ( my own body4 ,b ,i also obs]ve t c]ta9 k9ds ( p]ceptions ( my own body are prec$$ by c]ta9 o!r p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 or feel+s ( m9e4 ,i may1 = in/ance1 obs]ve t :5 ,i p]ceive my h& sudd5ly cat* hold ( my foot 9 a p>ticul> way1 ?is p]ception 0 prec$$ by a p>ticul> k9d ( feel+ ( pa94 ,i may1 p]haps1 obs]ve ?is (t5 en\gh to ju/ify ! g5]alisation t ! p]ception ( t p>ticul> motion ( my body is g5]ally prec$$ by t p>ticul> feel+ ( pa94 ,& 9 ?is way ,i may p]haps h reason = q a numb] ( g5]alisations :i* ass]t t p>ticul> k9ds ( p]ceptions ( my own body are g5]ally prec$$ by o!r p>ticul> k9ds ( p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 or feel+s ( my own4 ,b ,i may also1 no d\bt1 h ! p]ception1 :i* ,i call ! p]ception ( ano!r p]son's h& cat*+ hold ( 8 foot1 9 a mann] simil> to t 9 :i* ,i h p]ceiv$ my own h& cat* hold ( my own foot4 ,& my p]ception ( ano!r p]son's h& cat*+ hold ( 8 foot may und\bt$ly be simil> 9 _m respects to my p]ception ( my own h& cat*+ hold ( my own foot4 ,b ,i %all n obs]ve ! same k9d ( feel+ ( pa9 prec$+ my p]ception ( 8 h& cat*+ hold ( 8 foot1 :i* ,i h obs]v$ prec$+ my p]ception ( my h& cat*+ hold ( my foot4 ,w my g5]alisation1 !n1 give me any reason to suppose t nev]!less my p]ception ( 8 h& cat*+ hold ( 8 foot is prec$$ by a simil> feel+ ( pa91 n 9 me b 9 him8 ,we und\bt$ly d assume t :5 ,i p]ceive ano!r p]son's body mak+ movem5ts simil> to ^? :i* ,i h obs]v$ my own body mak+1 ?is p]ception has g5]ally be5 prec$$ by "s feel+ or p]ception ( 8 simil> to t :i* ,i h obs]v$ to prec$e my p]ception ( simil> movem5ts 9 my own body4 ,we d assume ?is2 & x is precisely ! k9d ( g5]alisation1 :i*1 ,i h insi/$1 mu/ be admitt$ to be true4 ,b my pres5t "q is3 ,w su* obs]vations z ,i h describ$ give any reason = ?9k+ any su* g5]alisation true8 ,i ?9k x is pla9 t !y w n give ! slighte/ reason = ?9k+ s4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 all ! p]ceptions :i* ,i call p]ceptions ( ano!r p]son's body diff] v consid]ably f any ( ^? :i* ,i call p]ceptions ( my own4 ,b ,i am will+ to waive ?is objection4 ,i am n (f]+ any !ory z to :at degree ( lik5ess is suffici5t to ju/ify a g5]alisation3 & !re=e ,i w all[ t ! degree ( lik5ess may be suffici5t4 ,b !re rema9s an objection :i* is1 ,i ?9k1 q fatal to ! propos$ inf]5ce4 ,?is objection is t ! inf]5ce 9 "q pla9ly does n satisfy ! ?ird condition :i* ,i sugge/$ above z necess>y1 :]ev] any g5]alisation is to be ju/ifi$ by obs]vation4 ,i am will+ to all[ t my obs]vations ( ! fact t my p]ception ( a c]ta9 movem5t 9 my own body is prec$$ by a c]ta9 feel+ ( pa91 w ju/ify ! g5]alisation t my p]ception ( any su* movem5t1 :e!r 9 my own body or 9 t ( ano!r p]son1 is g5]ally prec$$ by a simil> feel+ ( pa94 ,& ,i all[1 !re=e1 t :5 ,i p]ceive a c]ta9 movem5t 9 ano!r's body1 x is probable t ! feel+ ( pa9 exi/s1 ?\gh ,i d n p]ceive x4 ,b1 if x is probable t su* a feel+ ( pa9 exi/s1 su* a feel+ mu/ /& 9 ! same relation to my p]ception ( ! movem5t 9 ano!r p]son's body1 9 :i* a simil> feel+ ( pa9 has be5 obs]v$ by me to /& to my p]ception ( su* a movem5t 9 my own body4 ,t is to say ! only k9d ( feel+ ( pa91 :i* my obs]vations d ju/ify me 9 inf]r+1 if 7z ,i admit !y may7 !y ju/ify me 9 inf]r+ any at all1 is a feel+ ( pa9 ( my own4 ,!y _c possibly ju/ify ! belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( any su* feel+ except "o :i* /&s to my p]ception 9 ! same relation 9 :i* my feel+s d /& to my p]ceptions--"o1 t is to say1 :i* is my own4 ,i h no m reason to believe t ! feel+ ( pa9 :i* probably prec$es my p]ception ( a movem5t 9 ano!r p]son's body c be ! feel+ ( ano!r p]son1 ?an1 9 my =m] example1 ,i _h reason to suppose t ! h51 ^: exi/5ce probably prec$$ t ( a giv5 egg1 c\ld be a h51 :i* _h nev] be5 ne> ! egg 9 "q4 ,! two cases are exactly analog\s4 ,i obs]ve a feel+ ( pa9 ( my own prec$+ a p]ception ( my own4 ,i obs]ve ! two1 t is to say1 z /&+ to "o ano!r1 9 ^? relations 7:atev] !y may be7 9 :i* any p]ception ( m9e /&s to any o!r ?\ght1 p]ception or feel+ ( m9e1 & :i* are1 at all ev5ts1 diff]5t f any relation 9 :i* a p]ception or feel+ ( ano!r p]son c /& to "o ( m9e4 ,i nev] p]ceive ! feel+ & ! p]ception z /&+ 9 any o!r relation4 ,9 any case1 !re=e1 :]e ,i d obs]ve some?+ l ! p]ception1 b d n obs]ve ! feel+1 ,i c only be ju/ifi$ 7if ju/ifi$ 9 inf]r+ any feel+ at all71 9 inf]r+ an unp]ceiv$ feel+ ( my own4 ,= ?is reason ,i ?9k t no obs]vations ( my own p]ceptions1 feel+s or ?\ghts c give me ! slighte/ reason = suppos+ a connection betwe5 any ( !m & any feel+1 p]ception1 or ?\ght 9 ano!r p]son4 ,! argum5t is p]fectly g5]al1 s9ce all my p]ceptions1 feel+s & ?\ghts d h to "o ano!r ^? relations 9 virtue ( :i* ,i call !m m9e2 & :i*1 :5 ,i talk ( a p]ception1 feel+ or ?\ght z be+ ano!r p]sons1 ,i mean to say t x has n got to any ( m9e4 ,i c1 !re=e1 m]ely f obs]vation ( ?is class ( data nev] obta9 ! slighte/ reason = belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( a feel+1 p]ception1 or ?\ght :i* does n /& 9 ^! relations to "o ( m9e--:i* is1 t is to say1 ! feel+1 p]ception or ?\ght1 ( ano!r p]son4 ,b h[ diff]5t is ! case1 if we adopt ! hypo!sis1 :i* ,i wi% to recomm5d--if we assume ! exi/5ce ( t o!r class ( data :i* ,i h call$ s5se-cont5ts6 ,on ?is hypo!sis1 t :i* ,i p]ceive1 :5 ,i p]ceive a movem5t ( my own body1 is real2 t :i* ,i p]ceive :5 ,i p]ceive a movem5t ( ano!r's body is real also4 ,i c n[ obs]ve n m]ely ! relation betwe5 my p]ception ( a movem5t ( my body & my own feel+s1 b also a relation betwe5 a real movem5t ( my body & my own feel+s4 ,& !re is no reason :y ,i %\ld n be ju/ifi$ 9 inf]r+ t ano!r p]son's feel+s /& 9 ! same relation to ! real movem5ts ( 8 body1 9 :i* ,i obs]ve my own feel+s to /& to simil> real movem5ts ( m9e4 ,b !re is ano!r argum5t :i* may /ill be urg$ by ^? :o hold t my own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 & feel+s1 by !mselves1 may be suffici5t to ju/ify a belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons4 ,x may be said3 ,our obs]vation ( our own p]ceptions may be suffici5t to v]ify or confirm ! hypo!sis t o!r p]sons exi/4 ,?is hypo!sis is "o :i* works4 ,! assumption t o!r p]sons h p>ticul> ?\ghts1 feel+s & p]ceptions enables u to pr$ict t !y w h o!rs & t our own p]ceptions w be modifi$ accord+ly3 x enables u to pr$ict future p]ceptions ( our own2 & we f9d t ^! pr$ictions are con/antly v]ifi$4 ,we obs]ve t we d h ! p]ceptions1 :i* ! hypo!sis leads u to expect we %\ld h4 ,9 %ort1 our p]ceptions occur j z !y w\ld d1 if ! hypo!sis 7 true2 our p]ceptions behave z if o!r p]sons _h ! p]ceptions1 ?\ghts & feel+s :i* we suppose !m to h4 ,surely1 !n1 !y confirm ! tru? ( ! hypo!sis--!y give "s reason to ?9k x probably true8 ,all ?is1 :i* ,i h suppos$ an oppon5t to urge1 ,i admit to be true4 ,i admit t ! fact t an hypo!sis works may give "s reason to suppose x true4 ,i admit t my p]ceptions occur j z !y w\ld d1 if o!r p _h ! p]ceptions :i* ,i suppose !m to h4 ,i admit t t assumption enables me to make pr$ictions z to future p]ceptions ( my own1 & t ,i obs]ve ^! pr$ictions to come true4 ,i admit all ?is4 ,b ,i admit x only 9 a s5se 9 :i* x 9 no way conflicts ) ! position :i* ,i am ma9ta9+4 ,! words1 :i* ,i h put into ! m\? ( a suppos$ oppon5t1 may1 9 fact1 mean ?ree diff]5t ?+s1 :i* x is wor? :ile to di/+ui%4 ,9 two ( ^? mean+s1 :i* ,i %all admit to be true & :i* are :at make !m seem plausible1 !y d n d5y :at ,i ass]t4 ,only 9 ! ?ird s5se are !y an objection to my position3 & 9 t s5se !y are false4 ,"o ( ! mean+s :i* ,i admit to be true is z foll[s3--,i h n only admitt$ b insi/$ t "s ( my p]ceptions are j su* z w\ld occur if ano!r p]son _h c]ta9 p>ticul> feel+s3 ,i h insi/$ t ,i %\ld n h j ^? p]ceptions :i* ,i d h1 unless "s o!r p]son _h c]ta9 feel+s & p]ceptions :i* ,i suppose him to h4 ,& ,i admit fur!r t ! fact t ,i h "o ( ! p]ceptions 9 "q--= in/ance1 t ( ano!r p]son's h& cat*+ hold ( 8 foot--?is fact1 toge!r ) ! true assumption t ,i %\ld n h ?is p]ception1 unless "s o!r p]son felt pa91 w ju/ify ! ass]tion t ano!r p]son has felt pa94 ,9 ?is s5se1 ,i admit1 ! fact t ,i p]ceive :at ,i d p]ceive w give me reason to suppose t ano!r p]son has felt pa94 ,&1 on ! o!r h&1 ,i also admit t ! fact t ,i h ?is p]ception1 toge!r ) ! true assumption t :5 ,i h x ano!r p]son has felt pa91 may help to ju/ify ! assumption t ! p]ception 9 "q is "o :i* ,i %\ld n h _h unless ano!r p]son _h felt pa9--x helps to ju/ify ! g5]alisation t c]ta9 ( my p]ceptions are j :at w\ld occur1 if ano!r p]son _h felt pa94 ,9 g5]al t]ms1 t is to say1 ,i admit t ! occurr5ce ( ,b1 toge!r ) ! assumption t ,b is j ! sort ( ?+ :i* w\ld occur if ,a exi/$1 w ju/ify ! ass]tion t ,a exi/s 9 t p>ticul> in/ance4 ,& ,i also admit t ! occurr5ce ( ,b1 toge!r ) ! assumption t ,a exi/s 9 t p>ticul> in/ance1 may help to ju/ify ! assumption t ,b is j ! sort ( ?+ :i* w\ld exi/1 if ,a exi/$4 ,9 o!r words3 ,:5 x is said t ! obs]vation ( ,b's exi/5ce confirms or v]ifies ! assumption t ,a exi/s1 ei!r ( two ?+s may be meant4 ,x may be meant t1 assum+ ,b to be ! sort ( ?+ :i* w\ld exi/ if ,a exi/$1 ! obs]vation ( ,b confirms ! assumption t ,a exi/s 9 ?is p>ticul> in/ance4 ,or1 on ! o!r h&1 x may be meant t1 assum+ ,a to exi/ 9 ?is p>ticul> in/ance1 ! obs]vation ( ,b may confirm ! g5]alisation1 t ,b is j ! sort ( ?+ :i* w\ld exi/1 if ,a exi/$4 ,ei!r ! "o or ! o!r ( ^! two ?+s is1 ,i ?9k1 :at is g5]ally assum$1 :5 x is assum$ t :at we d obs]ve confirms or v]ifies ! assumption t !re exi/s "s p>ticul> ?+ :i* we don't obs]ve4 ,& ,i am admitt+ t bo? ^! assumptions are true4 ,b nei!r ( !m conflicts 9 any way ) ! position ,i am ma9ta9+4 ,:at ,i am ma9ta9+ is t no obs]vation ( my own p]ceptions1 by itself1 c confirm ! g5]alisation t any "o ( !m is j :at w\ld occur if ano!r p]son _h a p>ticul> feel+4 ,i admit ?is g5]alisation to be true2 & ,i admit t my obs]vation ( my own p]ceptions & feel+s may give me reason to suppose t if ano!r p]son has c]ta9 p]ceptions or feel+s he w also h c]ta9 o!rs4 ,:at ,i d5y is t !y give me ! slighte/ reason to suppose t ! exi/5ce ( any su* feel+ or p]ception 9 ano!r has any connection ) ! exi/5ce ( any p]ception ( my own--to suppose t any p]ception ( my own is ! sort ( ?+ :i* w\ld occur if ano!r p]son _h a p>ticul> feel+4 ,:at !re=e1 my oppon5t mu/ affirm is t ! obs]vation ( a p]ception ( my own )\t ! assumption 7:i* ,reid makes7 t 9 t p>ticul> in/ance any feel+ or p]ception ( ano!r p]son1 ( any k9d :atev]1 has prec$$ x1 may give me reason to suppose t t p]ception ( my own is ( a k9d :i* is g5]ally prec$$ by a p>ticul> k9d ( feel+ 9 ano!r p]son4 ,& ?is1 ,i ?9k1 is pla9ly false4 ,b !re is yet a ?ird ?+ :i* may be meant1 & :i* ,i am will+ to admit may be true4 ,x may be said3 ,i believe _m g5]alisations ( ! foll[+ k9d4 ,i believe t :5 ,i h a p]ception ,a1 "s o!r p]son has g5]ally _h a feel+ ,x2 ,i believe t ! exi/5ce ( ! feel+ ,x is g5]ally foll[$1 9 ! same p]son1 by t ( ! feel+ ,y2 & ,i believe also t :5 ano!r p]son has ! feel+ ,y1 ,i g5]ally h ! p]ception ,b4 ,i believe all ?is4 ,& x mu/1 ,i ?9k1 be admitt$ t we d believe g5]alisations ( ?is k9d1 & g5]alisations 9 :i* !re are n m]ely two /eps betwe5 ,a & ,b1 b a great numb] ( /eps4 ,b !n1 x may be said1 my belief 9 ?is g5]alisation causes me1 :5 ,i obs]ve my p]ception ,a1 to expect t ,i %all h ! p]ception ,b2 & su* expectations1 ,i obs]ve1 are con/antly realis$4 ,& ?is also1 ,i ?9k1 mu/ be admitt$ to be true4 ,b1 f9ally1 x may be said1 beliefs :i* produce expectations :i* are con/antly realis$ are g5]ally true4 ,& h5ce ! fact t ^! beliefs ( m9e ab\t ! connection ( feel+s 9 o!r p]sons ) p]ceptions ( my own d lead to expectations :i* are realis$1 gives me reason to suppose t ^! g5]alisations are true & h5ce t o!r p]sons d h p>ticul> k9ds ( feel+s4 ,& ,i am will+ to admit t ?is also is true4 ,i am will+ to admit t true pr$ictions c1 z a rule1 only be produc$ by true beliefs4 ,! g5]alisation t ?is is s1 is1 inde$1 "o :i* c only be ju/ifi$ by ! obs]vations ( beliefs1 :i* are1 9 "s way1 indep5d5tly prov$ to be true2 & h5ce1 if x is to be ju/ifi$1 )\t assum+ ! exi/5ce ( any?+ o!r ?an my own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 & feel+s1 x c only be ju/ifi$ by my obs]vation t beliefs ) reg>d to ! mann] 9 :i* ^! succe$ "o ano!r g5]ally lead to true pr$ictions4 ,:e!r ! obs]vation ( su* beliefs alone c\ld give suffici5t reason = x1 is1 ,i ?9k1 d\btful2 b ,i am will+ to admit t x may be s4 ,"o ?+1 h[ev]1 is1 ,i ?9k1 q pla93 namely1 t ?is g5]alisation ,beliefs :i* lead to true pr$ictions are g5]ally true _c be true1 unless "s o!r ( ! cont5ts :i* ,i obs]ve1 beside my own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 & feel+s1 d exi/4 ,t is to say1 9 giv+ a reason = suppos+ ! exi/5ce ( o!r p1 ?is g5]alisation also gives a reason = ! v !ory :i* ,i am advocat+1 namely1 t "s ( ^? data :i* ,i h call$ s5se-cont5ts d exi/4 ,x does ?is1 because x is q c]ta9 t beliefs 9 g5]alisations ab\t ! exi/5ce ( s5se-cont5ts c 7& d7 con/antly lead to true pr$ictions4 ,! belief t :5 ,i h obs]v$ a fire ( a c]ta9 size 9 my grate1 some?+ simil> to :at ,i h obs]v$ w cont9ue to exi/ = a c]ta9 "t1 c1 & con/antly does1 lead to ! true pr$iction t1 :5 ,i come back to my room 9 half an h\r's "t1 ,i %all obs]ve a fire ( a c]ta9 size /ill burn+4 ,we make pr$ictions on su* gr\nds1 ,i ?9k1 e day & all day long4 ,& h5ce unless su* beliefs z t :at ,i obs]ve :5 ,i see a fire burn+ does exi/1 are true1 we c]ta9ly h no reason to suppose t beliefs :i* lead to true pr$ictions are g5]ally true4 ,& h5ce on ?is hypo!sis also x rema9s true3 t1 unless "s ( ! cont5ts :i* ,i obs]ve o!r ?an my own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 & feel+s1 d exi/1 ,i _c h ! slighte/ reason = suppos+ t ! exi/5ce ( c]ta9 p]ceptions ( my own is g5]ally connect$ ) t ( c]ta9 p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 or feel+s 9 any o!r p]son4 ,i conclude !re=e t1 unless "s ( ! obs]v$ data :i* ,i h call$ s5se-cont5ts d exi/1 my own obs]vations _c give me ! slighte/ reason = believ+ t anybody else has ev] _h any p>ticul> p]ception1 ?\ght1 or feel+4 ,&1 hav+ arriv$ s f> t[>ds an answ] to my fir/ "q3 ,h[ d we "k t any o!r p]sons exi/8 ,i may n[ po9t out t precisely ! same answ] mu/ be giv5 to my second "q3 ,h[ d we "k t any p>ticul> k9d ( ?+ exi/s1 o!r ?an ourselves1 our p]ceptions1 ?\ghts1 & feel+s1 & :at we directly p]ceive8 ,!re is a view conc]n+ :at exi/s1 :i* des]ves1 ,i ?9k1 mu* m respect ?an x g5]ally receives f philosoph]s n[adays4 ,! view ,i mean is ! view t mat]ial objects1 su* z !y are conceiv$ by physical sci5ce1 d really exi/4 ,x is held by "s p]sons 7& ,reid is among !m7 t we d "k ( ! exi/5ce1 n only ( o!r p]sons1 b also ( ! movem5ts ( matt] 9 space4 ,x is held t we d "k1 ) consid]able precision1 :at k9ds ( movem5ts ( matt] g5]ally prec$e my p]ception1 :5 ,i h a p>ticul> p]ception4 ,x is held1 = in/ance1 t :5 ,i p]ceive a r$ & blue book side by side on a %elf1 at a c]ta9 di/ance f me1 !re h exi/$1 betwe5 two mat]ial objects1 :i* may be call$ books1 & ano!r k9d ( mat]ial object1 :i* may be call$ my eyes1 c]ta9 wave-l motions ( a mat]ial m$ium2 t !re h exi/$ two diff]5t sets ( waves1 ( :i* ! "o is connect$ ) my p]ception ( r$ & ! o!r ) my p]ception ( blue2 & t ! relative heights & bread?s ( ! two diff]5t sets ( waves1 & ! relative velocity ( _! movem5ts are v exactly kn[n4 ,x is held t "s m5 h a va/ am\nt ( v precise in=mation ab\t ! exi/5ce ( objects ( ?is k9d2 & ,i ?9k ! view t ?is is s des]ves a great deal ( respect4 ,b :at ,i wi% n[ to po9t out is t no "o's obs]vation ( 8 own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts & feel+s1 c1 by itself1 give him ! slighte/ reason = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( any su* mat]ial objects4 ,all ! argum5ts by :i* ,i h tri$ to %[ t ?is k9d ( obs]vation alone c give me no reason to believe 9 ! exi/5ce ( any k9d ( p]ception or feel+ 9 ano!r p]son1 apply1 ) at lea/ equal =ce1 to %[ t x c give me no reason to believe 9 ! exi/5ce ( any k9d ( mat]ial object4 ,on ! o!r h&1 if we are to admit ! pr9ciple t ,beliefs :i* lead to true pr$ictions1 are g5]ally true1 ?is pr9ciple w give u at lea/ z mu* reason to believe 9 ! exi/5ce ( c]ta9 k9ds ( mat]ial objects z to believe 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p]sons2 s9ce "o ( ! mo/ rem>kable facts ab\t beliefs 9 ! exi/5ce ( su* objects is t !y d s (t5 lead to true pr$ictions4 ,b x mu/ be rememb]$ t we c h no reason = believ+ ?is pr9ciple itself1 unless our own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts & feel+s are n ! only k9d ( obs]v$ cont5t :i* really does exi/3 we c h no reason = x1 unless "s su* ?+s z :at ,i p]ceive1 :5 ,i see a r$ & blue book side by side1 d really exi/4 ,x w\ld seem1 !re=e1 t if my own obs]vations d give me any reason :atev] = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ei!r ( any p]ception 9 any o!r p]son or ( any mat]ial object1 x mu/ be true t n only my own p]ceptions1 ?\ghts & feel+s1 b also "s ( ! o!r k9ds ( ?+s :i* ,i directly p]ceive--col\rs1 s\nds1 smells1 etc4--d really exi/3 x mu/ be true t "s objects ( ?is k9d exi/ or are real 9 precisely ! same simple s5se 9 :i* my p]ceptions ( !m exi/ or are real4 ,is !re !n any reason to ?9k t ?is is n true8 ,is !re any reason to ?9k1 = in/ance1 t none ( ! col\rs :i* ,i p]ceive z occupy+ areas ( c]ta9 %apes & sizes really exi/ 9 ! areas :i* !y appe> to occupy8 ,?is is a "q :i* ,i wi%$ to discuss at l5g?1 because ,i ?9k t x is "o 9 :i* !re are real difficulties4 ,b ,i h giv5 s mu* space to o!r que/ions1 t ,i c only deal ) x v briefly "h4 ,"s philosoph]s are v fond ( ass]t+ t a col\r _c exi/ except :5 x is p]ceiv$2 & x might possibly be ?\ght t :5 ,i sugge/ t col\rs d really exi/1 ,i am sugge/+ t !y d exi/ :5 !y are n p]ceiv$4 ,i wi%1 !re=e1 briefly to po9t out t ! "q :e!r any?+ does exi/1 :5 x is n p]ceiv$1 is "o :i* ,i h n argu$ & %all n attempt to argue 9 ?is pap]4 ,i h1 inde$1 tri$ to %[ t s9ce exi/s does n mean is p]ceiv$1 x is1 at lea/1 conceivable t ?+s %\ld exi/1 :5 !y are n p]ceiv$4 ,b ,i h admitt$ t x is q possible none d s3 x may be ! case t :5ev] a ?+ exi/s1 x is also at ! same "t p]ceiv$1 = any?+ t ,i h said or %all say to ! contr>y4 ,i ?9k1 inde$1 t1 if su* ?+s z col\rs d exi/1 my obs]vation ( _! behavi\r w ju/ify me 9 conclud+ t !y also exi/ :5 ,i myself am1 at lea/1 n aw>e ( p]ceiv+ !m3 b s9ce ,i h n attempt$ to det]m9e :at k9ds ( obs]vation are suffici5t to ju/ify a g5]alisation1 ,i d n pret5d to say :e!r ?is is s or n3 & /ill less d ,i pret5d to say :e!r1 if !y exi/ :5 ,i d n p]ceive !m1 we are ju/ifi$ 9 suppos+ t someone else mu/ be p]ceiv+ !m4 ,! "q :e!r any?+ exi/s1 :5 x is n p]ceiv$1 &1 if s1 :at ?+s1 seems to me to be "o :i* c only be settl$ by obs]vation2 & ?us1 ,i conceive1 obs]vation might ju/ify u 9 conclud+ t c]ta9 k9ds ( ?+s--pa9s1 = example1 d n exi/1 :5 !y are n p]ceiv$ & t o!r k9ds ( ?+s--col\rs1 = example1 d exi/1 :5 !y are n p]ceiv$4 ,! only way1 9 :i*1 s f> z ,i am aw>e1 ! !ory ,i am advocat+ does conflict ) ord9>y ,ideali/ic conclusions1 is t x does sugge/ t ?+s1 :i* are n spiritual1 d sometimes exi/1 z really & z truly1 z ?+s :i* are4 ,! !ory1 !re=e1 t no?+ exi/s1 except :5 x is p]ceiv$1 is no objection 7ev5 if x be true7 to ! supposition t col\rs d exi/4 ,:at objections are !re to ?is supposition8 ,all s]i\s objections to x are1 ,i ?9k1 ( "o type4 ,!y all re/ ^u ! assumption t1 if a c]ta9 k9d ( ?+ exi/s at a c]ta9 "t 9 a c]ta9 place1 c]ta9 o!r k9ds ( ?+s _c exi/ at ! same "t 9 ! same place4 ,!y are all1 t is to say1 ( ! same type z ,b]keley's argum5t3 t1 ?\gh ! same body ( wat] may appe> to be simultane\sly bo? hot & cold 7if "o ( ! h&s we plunge into x is w>m & ! o!r cold71 yet ! heat & ! cold _c bo? really be 9 ! same body at ! same "t4 ,& x is wor? notic+ t anyone :o uses ?is argum5t mu/ admit t he und]/&s :at is meant by really exi/+ 9 a giv5 place1 & t he means by x some?+ o!r ?an be+ p]ceiv$ z 9 a giv5 place4 ,= ! argum5t itself admits t bo? ! heat & ! cold are really p]ceiv$ z be+ 9 ! same place1 & t !re is no difficulty 9 suppos+ t !y are s2 :]eas ,x urges t !re is a difficulty 9 suppos+ t !y bo? really exi/ 9 x4 ,n[ !re is "o obvi\s defect 9 ?is type ( argum5t1 if design$ to prove t no s5sible quality exi/s at any place :]e x is p]ceiv$ z be+--a defect1 :i* ,b]keley himself admits 9 8 ,pr9ciples1 ?\gh he omits to notice x :]e he repeats ! argum5t 9 8 ,hylas4 ,ev5 if we assume t ! heat & ! cold _c bo? exi/ 9 ! same place 7& ,i admit t1 9 ?is case1 ! contr>y assumption does seem repugnant to ,common ,s5se71 x does n foll[ t nei!r exi/s !re4 ,t is to say ?is type ( argum5t1 ev5 if we grant its initial assumption1 w only entitle u to conclude t "s s5sible qualities :i* we p]ceive z be+ 9 a c]ta9 place at a c]ta9 "t1 d n exi/ 9 t place at t "t4 ,& ?is conclusion1 ,i am incl9$ to ?9k1 is true4 ,9 ! case1 = in/ance1 ( ! s-call$ images :i* we p]ceive 9 a look+-glass1 we may v readily admit t ! col\rs & %apes :i* we p]ceive d n exi/ at ! places :]e !y appe> to be--namely at v>i\s di/ances beh9d ! glass4 ,b yet1 s f> z ,i c see1 we h no reason :atev] = suppos+ t !y d n1 except ! assumption t our obs]vations give u reason to believe t o!r s5sible qualities d exi/ 9 ^? positions beh9d ! glass2 & ! assumption t :]e ^! o!r s5sible qualities d exi/1 ^? :i* we see 9 ! glass d n exi/4 ,i %\ld1 !re=e1 admit t "s s5sible qualities :i* we p]ceive z be+ 9 c]ta9 places1 d n exi/ 9 ^? places1 :ile /ill reta9+ my belief t o!rs d4 ,& p]haps ?is explanation is ! "o :i* %\ld also be adopt$ 9 ! case ( s5sible qualities :i* appe> to be at a great di/ance f u4 ,:51 = in/ance1 7z we say71 we see ! moon1 :at we p]ceive 7if ! moon be full7 is a r\nd bright silv] disc1 ( a small size1 at a place v di/ant f u4 ,does t silv] disc exi/ at t place8 ,) :at suppositions does ! assumption t x does conflict8 ,only1 s f> z ,i c see1 ) ! supposition t ! place 9 "q is really occupi$ by a body su* z sci5ce has taught u to suppose t ! moon really is--a sph]ical body imm5sely l>g] ?an objects1 9 comp>ison ) :i* ! silv] disc :i* we p]ceive is small2 or else ) ! supposition t ! place 9 "q is really occupi$ by "s "p ( our atmosph]e1 or "s "p ( ! m$ium :i* sci5ce supposes to exi/ betwe5 our atmosph]e & ! moon2 or else ) ! supposition t ! place 9 "q is really occupi$ by :at we might see1 if ! moon 7 ne>] to u by _m ?\s&s ( miles4 ,unless we suppose t "s o!r object is 9 ! place1 9 :i* ! silv] disc appe>s to be1 & t ?is object is ( a k9d :i* _c occupy ! same place :i* is occupi$ by a silv] disc1 we h no reason to suppose t ! silv] disc does n really exi/ 9 ! place :]e x appe>s to be4 ,&1 9 ?is case1 we p]haps h reason = bo? suppositions & %\ld !re=e conclude t ! silv] disc1 :i* we p]ceive1 does n exi/ 9 any real place4 ,"p1 !re=e1 ( ^! objections to our !ory may1 ,i ?9k1 be met by admitt+ t "s ( ! 444 s5sible qualities :i* we p]ceive d n exi/ at ! places :]e !y appe> to exi/1 ?\gh e!rs d4 ,b !re is1 ,i ?9k1 ano!r class ( cases1 9 :i* we may be ju/ifi$ 9 d5y+ t two ?+s :i* 7x is ass]t$7 _c occupy ! same space1 really _c4 ,i w take an in/ance :i* is1 ,i ?9k1 typical4 ,:5 we look at a drop ( blood ) ! nak$ eye1 we p]ceive a small r$ spot1 uni=mly r$ all ov]4 ,b :5 7z we say7 we look at ! same object "u a microscope ( a c]ta9 p[]1 ,i am in=m$ t we see a mu* l>g] spot1 ( simil> %ape1 inde$1 b n uni=mly r$--hav+1 9 fact1 small r$ spots at diff]5t positions 9 a yell[i% field4 ,& if we 7 aga9 to look at ! same object ?r\gh a microscope ( mu* high] p[] /ill1 we might p]ceive yet a ?ird diff]5t arrangem5t ( col\rs4 ,is !re any fatal objection to suppos+ t all ?ree appe>ances--! uni=m r$ spot1 ! yell[i% field ) r$di% spots 9 x1 & ! ?ird1 :atev] t may be--d all really occupy ! same real spatial area8 ,i _c see t !re is4 ,we are famili> ) ! idea t a giv5 spatial area may conta9 p>ts :i* are invisible to u4 ,& h5ce1 ,i ?9k x is q conceivable t p>ts ( a giv5 area may be really occupi$ by "o col\r1 :ile ! :ole is really occupi$ by ano!r4 ,& ?is1 ,i ?9k1 is :at we actually d believe 9 _m cases4 ,at all ev5ts1 we c]ta9ly believe t ! area :i* appe>s to be occupi$ by "o col\r really is ! same area z t :i* appe>s to be occupi$ by ano!r4 ,&1 unless we assume t ! area1 9 bo? cases1 really is ! same1 we c c]ta9ly h no reason to d5y t ea* col\r does really occupy ! area :i* x appe>s to occupy4 ,= ^! reasons ,i ?9k t ! difficulties 9 ! way ( suppos+ t "s ( ! s5sible qualities :i* we p]ceive z be+ 9 c]ta9 places1 really exi/ 9 ! places 9 :i* we p]ceive !m to be1 are n insup]able4 ,i h inde$ n done ju/ice to ^! difficulties2 b !n1 nei!r h ,i done ju/ice to :at is to be said on ! o!r side4 ,at all ev5ts1 ,i ?9k x is pla9 t we h no reason to ass]t1 9 any case :atev]1 t a p]ceiv$ col\r does n really exi/ 9 ! place :]e x is p]ceiv$ z be+1 unless we assume t t v same place really is occupi$ by some?+ else--ei!r by "s diff]5t s5sible qualities or by mat]ial objects su* z physical sci5ce supposes to exi/4 ,b :at reason c we give = su* an assumption8 ,i h tri$ to %[ t our own obs]vations c give u none1 unless we assume t "s ( ! s5sible qualities1 :i* we obs]ve z occupy+ c]ta9 places1 d really exi/ 9 ^? places4 ,&1 if ?is is s1 !n we mu/ admit t nei!r he :o believes 7) ,reid7 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r m9ds & ( matt] also1 nor he :o believes 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r m9ds & d5ies t ( matt]1 c h1 9 8 own obs]vations1 ! slighte/ reason ei!r = 8 ass]tion or = 8 d5ial3 we mu/ admit t he c h no reason = ei!r ass]tion or d5ial1 except "o :i* consi/s 9 ! assumption ( ! exi/5ce or nonexi/5ce ( some?+ :i* he does n obs]ve--some?+1 !re=e1 ( ! v same k9d z t = :i* he gives x z a reason4 ,i am v unwill+ to suppose t ?is is ! case3 ,i am v unwill+ to suppose t he :o believes t ,s9dbad ! ,sailor really saw :at ! ,arabian ,nights repres5t him z see+1 has j z good reason 7s f> z 8 own obs]vation goes7 = believ+ ?is z he :o d5ies x has = d5y+ x4 ,/ill ?is may be ! case4 ,we mu/1 p]haps1 be cont5t to assume z c]ta9 t = :i* our obs]vation gives no reason3 to assume su* propositions z t ,s9dbad did n see a ,roc1 & t y d he> my voice4 ,b if x is said t ^! ?+s are c]ta92 !n x also appe>s to me to be c]ta9 t ! col\rs :i* ,i p]ceive d exi/ 7"s ( !m7 :]e ,i p]ceive !m4 ,! m ,i look at objects r\nd me1 ! m ,i am unable to resi/ ! conviction t :at ,i see does exi/1 z truly & z really1 z my p]ception ( x ,! conviction is ov]:elm+4 ,?is be+1 !n1 ! /ate ( ! case1 ,i ?9k ,i may at lea/ plead t we h gr\nds = susp5se ( judgm5t z to :e!r :at ,i see does n really exi/2 gr\nds1 too1 = r5ew$ enquiry1 m c>eful ?an su* enquiry has sometimes be5 9 ! pa/4 #a ,n n[ 9 #aiba4 ,,william ,,james ,my object 9 ?is pap] is to discuss "s ( ! ?+s :i* ,pr(4 ,william ,james says ab\t tru? 9 ! rec5t book1 to :i* he has giv5 ! above "n4#a ,9 ,lecture ,,vi he pr(esses to give an acc\nt ( a !ory1 :i* he calls ! pragmati/ !ory ( tru?2 & he pr(esses to give a brief] prelim9>y acc\nt ( ! same !ory 9 ,lecture ,,ii4 ,moreov]1 9 ,lecture ,,vii1 he goes on to make "s fur!r rem>ks ab\t tru?4 ,9 all ^! ,lectures he seems to me to make /atem5ts to :i* !re are v obvi\s objections2 & my ma9 object is to po9t out1 z cle>ly & simply z ,i c1 :at seem to me to be ! pr9cipal objections to "s ( ^! /atem5ts4 ,we may1 ,i ?9k1 di/+ui% ?ree diff]5t ?+s :i* he seems p>ticul>ly anxi\s to ass]t ab\t tru?4 7,i7 ,9 ! fir/ place1 he is pla9ly anxi\s to ass]t "s connection betwe5 tru? & v]ification or utility4 ,our true ideas1 he seems to say1 are ^? t "w1 9 ! s5se t !y are or c be v]ifi$1 or are useful4 7,,ii7 ,9 ! second place1 he seems to object to ! view t tru? is some?+ /atic or immutable4 ,he is anxi\s to ass]t t tru?s are 9 "s s5se mutable4 7,,iii7 ,9 ! ?ird place1 he ass]ts t to an unasc]ta9able ext5t our tru?s are man-made products 7p4 #bdb74 ,to :at he ass]ts "u ea* ( ^! ?ree heads !re are1 ,i ?9k1 s]i\s objections2 & ,i n[ propose to po9t out :at seem to me to be ! pr9cipal ones1 "u ea* head sep>ately4 7,i7 ,pr(essor ,james is pla9ly anxi\s to ass]t "s connection betwe5 tru? & v]ification or utility4 ,& t !re is "s connection betwe5 !m ev]ybody w admit4 ,t _m ( our true ideas are v]ifi$2 t _m ( !m c be v]ifi$2 & t _m ( !m are useful1 is1 ,i take x1 q indisputable4 ,b ,pr(essor ,james seems pla9ly to wi% to ass]t some?+ m ?an ?is4 ,& "o m ?+ :i* he wi%es to ass]t is1 ,i ?9k1 pretty pla94 ,he sugge/s1 at ! beg9n+ ( ,lecture ,,vi1 t he is go+ to tell u 9 :at s5se x is t our true ideas agree ) reality4 ,tru?1 he says1 c]ta9ly means _! agreem5t ) reality2 ! only "q is z to :at we are to und]/& by ! words agreem5t & reality 9 ?is proposition4 ,& he fir/ briefly consid]s ! !ory1 t ! s5se 9 :i* our true ideas agree ) reality1 is t !y copy "s reality4 ,& he affirms t "s ( our true ideas really d d ?is4 ,b he rejects ! !ory1 z a !ory ( :at tru? means1 on ! gr\nd t !y d n all d s4 ,pla9ly1 !re=e1 he implies t no !ory ( :at tru? means w be correct1 unless x tells u ( "s prop]ty :i* belongs to all our true ideas )\t exception4 ,b 8 own !ory is a !ory ( :at tru? means4 ,app>5tly1 !re=e1 he wi%es to ass]t t n only _m b all our true ideas are or c be v]ifi$2 t all ( !m are useful4 ,& x is1 ,i ?9k1 pretty pla9 t ?is is "o ( ! ?+s :i* he wi%es to ass]t4 ,app>5tly1 !re=e1 ,pr(essor ,james wi%es to ass]t t all our true ideas are or c be v]ifi$--t all are useful4 ,& c]ta9ly ?is is n a truism l ! proposition t _m ( !m are s4 ,ev5 if ?is 7 all t he meant1 x w\ld be wor? discuss+4 ,b ev5 ?is1 ,i ?9k1 is n all4 ,! v fir/ proposition 9 :i* he expresses 8 !ory is ! foll[+4 ,true ideas1 he says 7p4 #bja7 are ^? t we c assimilate1 validate1 corroborate & v]ify4 ,false ideas are ^? t we _c4 ,& :at does ?is mean8 ,let u1 = brevity's sake1 sub/itute ! ^w v]ify alone = ! f\r words :i* ,pr(essor ,james uses1 z he himself subsequ5tly seems to d4 ,he ass]ts1 !n1 t true ideas are ^? :i* we c v]ify4 ,& pla9ly he does n mean by ?is m]ely t "s ( ! ideas :i* we c v]ify are true1 :ile pl5ty ( o!rs1 :i* we c v]ify1 are n true4 ,! pla9 mean+ ( 8 words is t all ! ideas :i* we c v]ify are true4 ,no "o w\ld use !m :o did n mean ?is4 ,app>5tly1 !re=e1 ,pr(essor ,james means to ass]t n m]ely t we c v]ify all our true ideas2 b also t all ! ideas1 :i* we c v]ify1 are true4 ,& s1 too1 ) utility or usefulness4 ,he seems to mean n m]ely t all our true ideas are useful2 b t all ^? :i* are useful are true4 ,?is w\ld foll[1 = "o ?+1 f ! fact t he seems to use ! words v]ification or v]ifiability & usefulness z if !y came to ! same ?+4 ,b1 9 ?is case too1 he ass]ts x 9 words t h b "o pla9 mean+4 ,! true he says 7p4 #bbb7 is only ! exp$i5t 9 ! way ( our ?9k+4 ,! true is ! exp$i5t3 t is1 all exp$i5t ?9k+ is true4 ,or aga93 ,an idea is 'true' s long z to believe x is pr(itable to our lives 7p4 #ge74 ,t is to say1 e idea1 :i* is pr(itable to our lives1 is1 :ile x is s1 true4 ,^! words c]ta9ly h a pla9 en\gh mean+4 ,app>5tly1 !re=e1 ,pr(essor ,james means to ass]t n m]ely t all true ideas are useful1 b also t all useful ideas are true4 ,pr(essor ,james' words1 !n1 d at lea/ sugge/ t he wi%es to ass]t all f\r ( ! foll[+ propositions4 ,he wi%es to ass]t1 x w\ld seem-- 7#a7 ,t we c v]ify all ^? ( our ideas1 :i* are true4 7#b7 ,t all ^? among our ideas1 :i* we c v]ify1 are true4 7#c7 ,t all our true ideas are useful4 7#d7 ,t all ^? ( our ideas1 :i* are useful1 are true4 ,^! f\r propositions are :at ,i propose fir/ to consid]4 ,he does mean to ass]t !m1 at lea/4 ,v likely he wi%es to ass]t some?+ m ev5 ?an ^!4 ,he does1 9 fact1 sugge/ t he means to ass]t1 9 addition1 t ^! prop]ties ( v]ifiability & utility are ! only prop]ties 7beside t ( be+ prop]ly call$ true7 :i* belong to all our true ideas & to none b true ideas4 ,b ?is obvi\sly _c be true1 unless all ^! f\r propositions are true4 ,& !re=e we may z well consid] !m fir/4 ,fir/1 !n1 c we v]ify all our true ideas8 ,i wi% only to po9t out ! pla9e/ & mo/ obvi\s reasons :y ,i ?9k x is d\btful :e!r we c4 ,we are v (t5 9 d\bt z to :e!r we did or did n d a c]ta9 ?+ 9 ! pa/4 ,we may h ! idea t we did1 & also ! idea t we did n2 & we may wi% to f9d out :i* idea is ! true "o4 ,v (t51 inde$1 ,i may believe v /rongly1 t ,i did d a c]ta9 ?+2 & somebody else1 :o has equally good reason to "k1 may believe equally /rongly t ,i did n4 ,= in/ance1 ,i may h writt5 a lett]1 & may believe t ,i us$ c]ta9 words 9 x4 ,b my correspond5t may believe t ,i did n4 ,c we always v]ify ei!r ( ^! ideas8 ,c]ta9ly sometimes we c4 ,! lett] may be produc$1 & prove t ,i did use ! words 9 "q4 ,& ,i %all !n h v]ifi$ my idea4 ,or x may prove t ,i did n use !m4 ,& !n we %all h v]ifi$ my correspond5t's idea4 ,b1 suppose ! lett] has be5 de/roy$2 suppose !re is no copy ( x1 nor any tru/wor?y record ( :at 0 said 9 x2 suppose !re is no o!r witness z to :at ,i said 9 x1 beside myself & my correspond5t8 ,c we !n always v]ify :i* ( our ideas is ! true "o8 ,i ?9k x is v d\btful :e!r we c ne>ly always4 ,c]ta9ly we may (t5 try to discov] any possible means ( v]ification1 & be q unable1 = a "t at lea/1 to discov] any4 ,su* cases1 9 :i* we are unable1 = a "t at lea/1 to v]ify ei!r ( two contradictory ideas1 occur v commonly inde$4 ,let u take an ev5 m trivial in/ance ?an ! la/4 ,bad :i/-play]s (t5 d n notice at all c>efully :i* c>ds !y h among ! l[] c>ds 9 a suit4 ,at ! end ( a h& !y _c be c]ta9 :e!r !y _h or _h n ! sev5 ( diamonds1 or ! five ( spades4 ,&1 aft] ! c>ds h be5 %uffl$1 a dispute w sometimes arise z to :e!r a p>ticul> play] _h ! sev5 ( diamonds or n4 ,8 p>tn] may ?9k t he _h1 & he himself may ?9k t he _h n4 ,bo? may be unc]ta91 & ! memory ( bo?1 on su* a po9t1 may be well kn[n to be untru/wor?y4 ,&1 moreov]1 nei!r ( ! o!r play]s may be able to rememb] any bett]4 ,is x always possible to v]ify :i* ( ^! ideas is ! true "o8 ,ei!r ! play] did or did n h ! sev5 ( diamonds4 ,?is mu* is c]ta94 ,"o p]son ?9ks t he did1 & ano!r ?9ks he did n2 & bo?1 s soon z ! "q is rais$1 h be=e _! m9ds bo? ( ^! ideas--! idea t he did1 & ! idea t he did n4 ,?is also is c]ta94 ,& x is c]ta9 t "o or o!r ( ^! two ideas is true4 ,b c !y always v]ify ei!r ( !m8 ,sometimes1 no d\bt1 !y c1 ev5 aft] ! c>ds h be5 %uffl$4 ,!re may h be5 a fif? p]son pres5t1 ov]look+ ! play1 ^: memory is p]fectly tru/wor?y1 & ^: ^w may be tak5 z settl+ ! po9t4 ,or ! play]s may !mselves be able1 by recall+ o!r incid5ts ( play1 to arrive at su* a c]ta9ty z may be said to v]ify ! "o hypo!sis or ! o!r4 ,b v (t5 nei!r ( ^! two ?+s w occur4 ,&1 9 su* a case1 is x always possible to v]ify ! true idea8 ,p]haps1 !oretically1 x may be /ill possible4 ,!oretically1 ,i suppose1 ! fact t "o play]1 & n any ( ! o!r ?ree1 _h ! c>d 9 8 h&1 may h made "s diff]5ce to ! c>d1 :i* might be discov]$ by "s possible me?od ( sci5tific inve/igation4 ,p]haps "s su* diff]5ce may rema9 ev5 aft] ! same c>d has be5 repeat$ly us$ 9 _m subsequ5t games4 ,b suppose ! same "q arises aga91 a week aft] ! orig9al game 0 play$4 ,did y1 or did y n1 la/ week h ! sev5 ( diamonds 9 t p>ticul> h&8 ,! "q has n be5 settl$ 9 ! meantime2 & n[1 p]haps1 ! orig9al pack ( c>ds has be5 de/roy$4 ,is x /ill possible to v]ify ei!r idea8 ,!oretically1 ,i suppose1 x may be /ill possible4 ,b ev5 ?is1 ,i ?9k1 is v d\btful4 ,& surely x is pla9 t1 humanly & practically speak+1 x w (t5 h become q impossible to v]ify ei!r idea4 ,9 all probability x nev] w be possible = any man to v]ify :e!r ,i _h ! c>d or n on ?is p>ticul> occasion4 ,no d\bt we are "h speak+ ( an idea1 :i* "s man c\ld h v]ifi$ at "o "t4 ,b ! hypo!sis ,i am consid]+ is ! hypo!sis t we nev] h a true idea1 :i* we c n v]ify2 t is to say1 :i* we _c v]ify aft] ! idea has occurr$4 ,& ) reg>d to ?is hypo!sis1 x seems to me q pla9 t v (t5 inde$ we h two ideas1 "o or o!r ( :i* is c]ta9ly true2 & yet t1 9 all probability1 x is no long] possible & nev] w be possible = any man to v]ify ei!r4 ,x seems to me1 !n1 t we v (t5 h true ideas :i* we _c v]ify2 true ideas1 :i*1 9 all probability1 no man ev] w be able to v]ify4 ,&1 s f>1 ,i h giv5 only comp>atively trivial in/ances4 ,b x is pla9 t1 9 ! same s5se1 hi/orians are v frequ5tly occupi$ ) true ideas1 :i* x is d\btful :e!r !y c v]ify4 ,"o hi/orian ?9ks t a c]ta9 ev5t took place1 & ano!r t x did n2 & bo? may admit t !y _c v]ify _! idea4 ,subsequ5t hi/orians may1 no d\bt1 sometimes be able to v]ify "o or ! o!r4 ,new evid5ce may be discov]$ or m5 may le>n to make a bett] use ( evid5ce already 9 exi/5ce4 ,b is x c]ta9 t ?is w always happ58 ,is x c]ta9 t e "q1 ab\t :i* hi/orians h d\bt$1 w "s day be able to be settl$ by v]ification ( "o or ! o!r hypo!sis8 ,surely ! probability is t 9 ! case ( an imm5se numb] ( ev5ts1 ) reg>d to :i* we %\ld l to "k :e!r !y happ5$ or n1 x nev] w be possible = any man to v]ify ei!r ! "o hypo!sis or ! o!r4 ,yet x may be c]ta9 t ei!r ! ev5ts 9 "q did happ5 or did n4 ,"h1 !re=e1 aga91 we h a l>ge numb] ( ideas--cases :]e _m m5 d\bt :e!r a ?+ did happ5 or did n1 & h !re=e ! idea bo? ( its hav+ happ5$ & ( its n hav+ happ5$--) reg>d to :i* x is c]ta9 t half ( !m are true1 b :]e x seems highly d\btful :e!r any s+le "o ( !m w ev] be able to be v]ifi$4 ,no d\bt x is j possible t m5 w "s day be able to v]ify e "o ( !m4 ,b surely x is v d\btful :e!r !y w4 ,& ! !ory aga9/ :i* ,i am prote/+ is ! positive ass]tion t we c v]ify all our true ideas--t "s "o "s day c]ta9ly w be able to v]ify e "o ( !m4 ,?is !ory1 ,i urge1 has all probability aga9/ x4 ,& s f> ,i h be5 deal+ only ) ideas ) reg>d to :at happ5$ 9 ! pa/4 ,^! seem to me to be ! cases :i* (f] ! mo/ num]\s & mo/ c]ta9 exceptions to ! rule t we c v]ify our true ideas4 ,) reg>d to p>ticul> pa/ ev5ts1 ei!r 9 _! own lives or 9 ^? ( o!r p1 m5 v frequ5tly h ideas1 :i* x seems highly improbable t any man w ev] be able to v]ify4 ,& yet x is c]ta9 t a great _m ( ^! ideas are true1 because 9 a great _m cases we h bo? ! idea t ! ev5t did happ5 & also ! idea t x did n1 :5 x is c]ta9 t "o or o!r ( ^! ideas is true4 ,& ^! ideas ) reg>d to pa/ ev5ts w\ld by !mselves be suffici5t = my purpose4 ,if1 z seems c]ta91 !re are _m true ideas ) reg>d to ! pa/1 :i* x is highly improbable t anyone w ev] be able to v]ify1 !n1 obvi\sly1 !re is no?+ 9 a true idea :i* makes x c]ta9 t we c v]ify x4 ,b x is1 ,i ?9k1 c]ta9ly n only 9 ! case ( ideas1 ) reg>d to ! pa/1 t x is d\btful :e!r we c v]ify all ! true ideas we h4 ,9 ! case ( _m g5]alisations deal+ n only ) ! pa/ b ) ! future1 x is1 ,i ?9k1 obvi\sly d\btful :e!r we %all ev] be able to v]ify all ^? :i* are true2 al?\gh "h1 p]haps1 9 mo/ cases1 ! probability t we %all n is n s great4 ,b is x q c]ta91 t 9 all cases :]e sci5tific m5 h consid]$ hypo!ses1 "o or o!r ( :i* mu/ be true1 ei!r w ev] be v]ifi$8 ,x seems to be obvi\sly d\btful4 ,take1 = in/ance1 ! "q :e!r our actual space is ,euclidean or n4 ,?is is a case :]e ! alt]native has be5 consid]$2 & :]e x is c]ta9 t1 :atev] be meant by our actual space1 x ei!r is ,euclidean or is n4 ,x has be5 held1 too1 t ! hypo!sis t x is n ,euclidean might1 conceivably1 be v]ifi$ by obs]vations4 ,b x is d\btful :e!r x ev] w be4 ,& ?\gh x w\ld be ra% to say t no man ev] w be able to v]ify ei!r hypo!sis2 x is also ra% to ass]t positively t we %all--t we c]ta9ly c v]ify ! true hypo!ses4 ,!re are1 ,i believe1 ev] s _m simil> cases1 :]e alt]native hypo!ses1 "o or o!r ( :i* mu/ be true1 h occurr$ to m5 ( sci5ce1 & :]e yet x is v d\btful :e!r ei!r ev] w be v]ifi$4 ,or take1 aga91 su* ideas z ! idea t !re is a ,god1 or ! idea t we are immortal4 ,_m m5 h _h n only contradictory ideas1 b contradictory beliefs1 ab\t ^! matt]s4 ,& "h we h cases :]e x is disput$ :e!r ^! ideas h n actually be5 v]ifi$4 ,b x seems to me d\btful :e!r !y h be54 ,& !re is a view1 :i* seems to me to des]ve respect1 t1 9 ^! matt]s1 we nev] %all be able to v]ify ! true hypo!sis4 ,is x p]fectly c]ta9 t ?is view is a false "o8 ,i d n say t x is true4 ,i ?9k x is q possible t we %all "s day be able to v]ify ei!r ! belief t we are immortal or ! belief t we are n4 ,b x seems to me d\btful :e!r we %all4 ,& = ?is reason alone ,i %\ld refuse to ass5t to ! positive ass]tion t we c]ta9ly c v]ify all our true ideas4 ,:51 !re=e1 ,pr(essor ,james tells u t ,true ideas are ^? t we c assimilate1 validate1 corroborate & v]ify4 ,false ideas are ^? t we _c1 !re seems to be a s]i\s objection to "p ( :at ^! words imply4 ,!y imply t no idea ( ours is true1 unless we c v]ify x4 ,!y imply1 !re=e1 t :5ev] a man wond]s :e!r or n he _h ! sev5 ( diamonds 9 ! ?ird h& at :i/ la/ night1 nei!r ( ^! ideas is true unless he c v]ify x4 ,b x seems c]ta9 t 9 ?is1 & an imm5se numb] ( simil> cases1 "o or o!r ( ! two ideas is true4 ,ei!r1 he did h ! c>d 9 8 h& or he did n4 ,if any?+ is a fact1 ?is is "o4 ,ei!r1 !re=e1 ,pr(essor ,james' words imply ! d5ial ( ?is obvi\s fact1 or else he implies t 9 all su* cases we c v]ify "o or o!r ( ! two ideas4 ,b to ?is ! objection is t1 9 any obvi\s s5se ( ! words1 x seems v d\btful :e!r we c4 ,on ! contr>y x seems extremely probable t 9 a v l>ge numb] ( su* cases no man ev] w be able to v]ify ei!r ( ! two ideas4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 a s]i\s objection to :at ,pr(essor ,james' words imply4 ,:e!r he himself really means to ass]t ^! ?+s :i* 8 words imply ,i d n "k4 ,p]haps he w\ld admit t1 9 ?is s5se1 we probably _c v]ify ne>ly all our true ideas4 ,all t ,i h wi%$ to make pla9 is t !re is1 at lea/1 an objection to :at he says1 :e!r to :at he means or n4 ,!re is ample reason :y we %\ld refuse ass5t to ! /atem5t t none ( our ideas are true1 except ^? :i* we c v]ify4 ,b to ano!r "p ( :at he implies by ! words quot$ above1 !re is1 ,i ?9k1 no s]i\s objection4 ,!re is reason to object to ! /atem5t t we c v]ify all our true ideas2 b to ! /atem5t t all ideas1 :i* we c assimilate1 validate1 corroborate & v]ify1 are true1 ,i see no s]i\s objection4 ,"h1 ,i ?9k1 we might say simply t all ideas :i* we c v]ify are true4 ,to ?is1 :i* is ! second ( ! f\r propositions1 :i* ,i di/+ui%$ above 7p4 #ce7 z :at ,pr(essor ,james seems to wi% to ass]t1 !re is1 ,i ?9k1 no s]i\s objection1 if we und]/& ! ^w v]ify 9 its prop] & natural s5se4 ,we may1 no d\bt1 sometimes say t we h v]ifi$ an idea or an hypo!sis1 :5 we h only obta9$ evid5ce :i* proves x to be probable1 & does n prove x to be c]ta94 ,&1 if we use ! ^w 9 ?is loose s5se = incomplete v]ification1 x is obvi\sly ! case t we may v]ify an idea :i* is n true4 ,b x seems sc>cely necess>y to po9t ?is out4 ,& :]e we really c completely v]ify an idea or an hypo!sis1 !re1 und\bt$ly1 ! idea :i* we c v]ify is always true4 ,! v mean+ ( ! ^w v]ify is to f9d evid5ce :i* does really prove an idea to be true2 & :]e an idea c be really prov$ to be true1 x is ( c\rse1 always true4 ,?is is all ,i wi% to say ab\t ,pr(essor ,james' fir/ two propositions1 namely3-- 7#a7 ,t no ideas ( ours are true1 except ^? :i* we c v]ify4 7#b7 ,t all ^? ideas1 :i* we c v]ify1 are true4 ,! fir/ seems to me extremely d\btful--9 fact1 almo/ c]ta9ly untrue2 ! second on ! o!r h&1 c]ta9ly true1 9 its mo/ obvi\s mean+4 ,& ,i %all say no m ab\t !m4 ,! fact is1 ,i d\bt :e!r ei!r ( !m expresses any?+ :i* ,pr(essor ,james is really anxi\s to ass]t4 ,i h m5tion$ !m1 only because 8 words d1 9 fact1 imply !m & because he gives ^? words a v prom95t place4 ,b ,i h already _h occasion to notice t he seems to speak z if to say t we c v]ify an idea came to ! same ?+ z say+ x is useful to u4 ,& x is ! connection ( tru? ) usefulness1 n its connection ) v]ification1 t he is1 ,i ?9k1 really anxi\s to ass]t4 ,he talks ab\t v]ification only1 ,i believe1 because he ?9ks t :at he says ab\t x w support 8 ma9 view t tru? is :at works1 is useful1 is exp$i5t1 pays4 ,x is ?is ma9 view we h n[ to consid]4 ,we h to consid] ! two propositions3-- 7#c7 ,t all our true ideas are useful4 7#d7 ,t all ideas1 :i* are useful1 are true4 ,fir/1 !n3 is x ! case t all our true ideas are useful8 ,is x ! case t none ( our ideas are true1 except ^? :i* are useful8 ,i wi% to introduce my discussion ( ?is "q by quot+ a passage 9 :i* ,pr(essor ,james seems to me to say some?+ :i* is indisputably true4 ,t[>ds ! end ( ,lecture ,,vi1 he attacks ! view t tru?s h an unconditional claim to be recognis$4 ,& 9 ! c\rse ( 8 attack ! foll[+ passage occurs3-- ,mu/ ,i1 he says1 con/antly be repeat+ ! tru? 'twice two are f\r' because ( its et]nal claim on recognition8 or is x sometimes irrelevant8 ,mu/ my ?\ghts dwell night & day on my p]sonal s9s & blemi%es1 because ,i truly h !m8--or may ,i s9k & ignore !m 9 ord] to be a dec5t social unit1 & n a mass ( morbid melan*oly & apology8 ,x is q evid5t1 he goes on1 t our obligation to ackn[l$ge tru?1 s f> f be+ unconditional1 is trem5d\sly conditional4 ,tru? ) a big ,t1 & 9 ! s+ul>1 claims ab/ractly to be recognis$1 ( c\rse2 b concrete tru?s 9 ! plural ne$ be recognis$ only :5 _! recognition is exp$i5t4 7pp4 #bca-bcb74 ,:at ,pr(essor ,james says 9 ?is passage seems to me s indisputably true z fully to ju/ify ! vig\r ( 8 language4 ,x is z cle> z any?+ c be t x w\ld n be useful = any man's m9d to be always occupi$ ) ! true idea t he _h c]ta9 faults & blemi%es2 or to be always occupi$ ) ! idea t twice two are f\r4 ,x is cle>1 t is1 t1 if !re are times at :i* a p>ticul> true idea is useful1 !re c]ta9ly are o!r times at :i* x w\ld n be useful1 b positively 9 ! way4 ,?is is pla9ly true ( ne>ly all1 if n q all1 our true ideas4 ,x is pla9ly true ) reg>d to ne>ly all ( !m t1 ev5 if ! occasions on :i* _! occurr5ce is useful are _m1 ! occasions on :i* _! occurr5ce w\ld n be useful are _m m4 ,) reg>d to mo/ ( !m x is true t on mo/ occasions !y w1 z ,pr(essor ,james says else:]e1 be practically irrelevant1 & _h bett] rema9 lat5t4 ,x is1 !n1 q cle> t almo/ any p>ticul> true idea w\ld n be useful at all times & t ! times at :i* x w\ld n be useful1 are _m m ?an ! times at :i* x w\ld4 ,& :at we h to consid] is :e!r1 9 j ?is s5se 9 :i* x is s cle> t mo/ true ideas w\ld n be useful at mo/ times1 x is nev]!less true t all our true ideas are useful4 ,is ?is s8 ,are all our true ideas useful8 ,pr(essor ,james1 we see1 has j told u t !re are ev] s _m occasions ^u :i* a p>ticul> true idea1 su* z t #b #b #d1 w\ld n be useful--:51 on ! contr>y1 x w\ld be positively 9 ! way4 ,& ?is seems to be indisputably cle>4 ,b is n some?+ else almo/ equally cle>8 ,is x n almo/ equally cle> t cases1 su* z he says w\ld n be useful1 d sometimes actually happ58 ,is x n cle> t we d actually sometimes h true ideas1 at times :5 !y are n useful1 b are positively 9 ! way8 ,x seems to me to be p]fectly cle> t ?is does sometimes occur2 & n sometimes only1 b v commonly4 ,! cases 9 :i* true ideas occur at times :5 !y are useful1 are1 p]haps1 f> m num]\s2 b1 if we look at m5 9 g5]al1 ! cases 9 :i* true ideas occur1 at times :5 !y are n useful1 d surely make up positively a v l>ge numb]4 ,is x n ! case t m5 d sometimes dwell on _! faults & blemi%es1 :5 x is n useful = !m to d s8 :5 !y w\ld mu* bett] be ?9k+ ( some?+ else8 ,is x n ! case t !y are (t5 unable to get _! m9ds away f a true idea1 :5 x is h>mful = !m to dwell on x8 ,/ill m commonly1 does x n happ5 t !y wa/e _! "t 9 acquir+ pieces ( in=mation :i* are no use to !m1 ?\gh p]haps v useful to o!r p8 ,all ?is seems to me to be und5iable--j z und5iable z :at ,pr(essor ,james himself has said2 &1 if ?is is s1 !n1 9 "o s5se ( ! words1 x is pla9ly n true t all1 or ne>ly all1 our true ideas are useful4 ,9 "o s5se ( ! words4 ,= if ,i h ! idea t #bbd on "o day1 & !n h x aga9 ! next1 ,i may c]ta9ly1 9 a s5se1 call ! idea ,i h on "o day "o idea1 & ! idea ,i h on ! next ano!r4 ,i h _h two ideas t #bbd1 & n "o only4 ,or if two diff]5t p]sons bo? ?9k t ,i h faults1 !re h be5 two ideas ( ?is tru? & n "o only4 ,& 9 ask+ :e!r all our true ideas are useful1 we might mean to ask :e!r bo? ( ^! ideas 7 useful & n m]ely :e!r "o ( !m 04 ,9 ?is s5se1 !n1 x is pla9ly n true t all our true ideas are useful4 ,x is n true1 t is1 t e true idea is useful1 :5ev] x occurs4 ,9 "o s5se1 !n1 x is pla9ly n true t all our true ideas are useful4 ,b !re /ill rema9s a p]fectly legitimate s5se 9 :i* x might be true4 ,x might be meant1 t is1 n t e occurr5ce ( a true idea is useful1 b t e true idea is useful on at lea/ "o ( ! occasions :5 x occurs4 ,b is ?is1 9 fact1 ! case8 ,x seems to me almo/ z pla9 t x is n1 z t ! o!r 0 n4 ,we h se5 t true ideas are n by any means always useful on e occasion :5 !y occur2 ?\gh mo/ t d occur _m times ov] & to _m diff]5t p are1 no d\bt1 useful on "s ( ^! occasions4 ,b !re seems to be an imm5se numb] ( true ideas1 :i* occur b once & to "o p]son1 & nev] aga9 ei!r to him or to anyone else4 ,i may1 = in/ance1 idly c\nt ! numb] ( dots on ! back ( a c>d1 & arrive at a true idea ( _! numb]2 & yet1 p]haps1 ,i may nev] ?9k ( _! numb] aga91 nor anybody else ev] "k x4 ,we are all1 x seems to me1 con/antly notic+ trivial details1 & gett+ true ideas ab\t !m1 ( :i* we nev] ?9k aga91 & :i* nobody else ev] gets4 ,& is x q c]ta9 t all ^! true ideas are useful8 ,x seems to me p]fectly cle>1 on ! contr>y1 t _m ( !m are n4 ,j z x is cle> t _m m5 sometimes wa/e _! "t 9 acquir+ in=mation :i* is useful to o!rs b n to !m1 surely x is cle> t !y sometimes wa/e _! "t 9 acquir+ in=mation1 :i* is useful to nobody at all1 because nobody else ev] acquires x4 ,i d n say t x is nev] useful idly to c\nt ! numb] ( dots on ! back ( a c>d4 ,pla9ly x is sometimes useful to be idle1 & "o idle employm5t may (t5 be z good z ano!r4 ,b surely x is true t m5 sometimes d ^! ?+s :5 _! "t w\ld h be5 bett] employ$ o!rwise8 ,surely !y sometimes get into ! habit ( att5d+ to trivial tru?s1 :i* x is z great a disadvantage t !y %\ld att5d to z t !y %\ld con/antly be ?9k+ ( _! own ?\ghts & blemi%es8 ,i _c see my way to d5y t ?is is s2 & !re=e ,i _c see my way to ass]t positively t all our true ideas are useful1 ev5 s mu* z on "o occasion4 ,x seems to me t !re are _m true ideas :i* occur b once1 & :i* are n useful :5 !y d occur4 ,& if ?is be s1 !n x is pla9ly n true t all our true ideas are useful 9 any s5se at all4 ,^! seem to me to be ! mo/ obvi\s objections to ! ass]tion t all our true ideas are useful4 ,x is cle>1 we saw to beg9 )1 t true ideas1 :i* are sometimes useful1 w\ld n be useful at all times4 ,& x seem$ almo/ equally cle> t !y d sometimes occur at times :5 !y are n useful4 ,our true ideas1 !re=e are n useful at e "t :5 !y actually occur4 ,b 9 j ?is s5se 9 :i* x is s cle> t true ideas :i* are sometimes useful1 nev]!less sometimes occur at times :5 !y are n1 x seems pretty pla9 t true ideas1 :i* occur b once1 are1 "s ( !m1 n useful4 ,if an idea1 :i* is sometimes useful1 does sometimes occur to a man at a "t :5 x is irrelevant & 9 ! way1 :y %\ld n an idea1 :i* occurs b once1 occur at a "t :5 x is irrelevant & 9 ! way8 ,x seems h>dly possible to d\bt t ?is does sometimes happ54 ,b1 if ?is be s1 !n x is n true t all our true ideas are useful1 ev5 s mu* z on "o occasion4 ,x is n true t none ( our ideas are true1 except ^? :i* are useful4 ,b n[1 :at are we to say ( ! conv]se proposition--! proposition t all ^? among our ideas1 :i* are useful1 are true8 ,t we nev] h a useful idea1 :i* is n true8 ,i confess ! matt] seems to me equally cle> "h4 ,! ass]tion %\ld mean t e idea1 :i* is at any "t useful1 is true2 t no idea1 :i* is n true1 is ev] useful4 ,& x seems h>dly possible to d\bt t ?is ass]tion is false4 ,x ,is1 9 ! fir/ place1 commonly held t x is sometimes "r positively to deceive ano!r p]son4 ,9 w>1 = in/ance x is held t "o army is ju/ifi$ 9 try+ to give ! enemy a false idea z to :]e x w be at a giv5 "t4 ,su* a false idea is sometimes giv51 & x seems to me q cle> t x is sometimes useful4 ,9 su* a case1 no d\bt1 x may be said t ! false idea is useful to ! p>ty :o h giv5 x1 b n useful to ^? :o actually believe 9 x4 ,& ! "q :e!r x is useful on ! :ole w dep5d ^u ! "q :i* side x is desirable %\ld w94 ,b x seems to me unque/ionable t ! false idea is sometimes useful on ! :ole4 ,take1 = in/ance1 ! case ( a p>ty ( savages1 :o wi% to make a night attack & massacre a p>ty ( ,europeans b are deceiv$ z to ! position 9 :i* ! ,europeans are encamp$4 ,x is surely pla9 t su* a false idea is sometimes useful on ! :ole4 ,b q ap>t f ! "q :e!r deception is ev] ju/ifiable1 x is n v difficult to ?9k ( cases :]e a false idea1 n produc$ by deception1 is pla9ly useful--& useful1 n m]ely on ! :ole1 b to ! p]son :o has x z well4 ,a man (t5 ?9ks t 8 wat* is "r1 :51 9 fact1 x is sl[1 & 8 false idea may cause him to miss 8 tra94 ,& 9 su* cases1 no d\bt1 8 false idea is g5]ally disadvantage\s4 ,b1 9 a p>ticul> case1 ! tra9 :i* he w\ld h caught b = 8 false idea may be de/roy$ 9 a railway accid5t1 or some?+ may sudd5ly occur at home1 :i* r5d]s x mu* m useful t he %\ld be !re1 ?an x w\ld h be5 = him to cat* 8 tra94 ,d su* cases nev] occur8 ,& is n ! false idea sometimes useful 9 "s ( !m8 ,x seems to me p]fectly cle> t x is sometimes useful = a man to ?9k 8 wat* is "r :5 x is wrong4 ,& su* in/ances w\ld be suffici5t to %[ t x is n ! case t e idea ( ours1 :i* is ev] useful1 is a true idea4 ,b let u take cases1 n1 l ^!1 ( an idea1 :i* occurs b a few times or to "o man1 b ( ideas :i* h occurr$ to _m m5 at _m times4 ,x seems to me v difficult to be sure t ! belief 9 an et]nal hell has n be5 (t5 useful to _m m51 & yet x may be d\bt$ :e!r ?is idea is true4 ,& s1 too1 ) ! belief 9 a happy life aft] dea?1 or ! belief 9 ! exi/5ce ( a ,god2 x is1 ,i ?9k1 v difficult to be sure t ^! beliefs h n be51 & are n /ill1 (t5 useful1 & yet x may be d\bt$ :e!r !y are true4 ,^! beliefs1 ( c\rse1 are matt]s ( controv]sy4 ,"s m5 believe t !y are bo? useful & true2 & o!rs1 aga91 t !y are nei!r4 ,& ,i d n ?9k we are ju/ifi$ 9 giv+ !m z c]ta9 in/ances ( beliefs1 :i* are n true1 b1 nev]!less1 h (t5 be5 useful4 ,b !re is a view t ^! beliefs1 ?\gh n true1 h1 nev]!less1 be5 (t5 useful2 & ?is view seems to me to des]ve respect1 especially s9ce1 z we h se51 "s beliefs1 :i* are n true1 c]ta9ly are sometimes useful4 ,are we ju/ifi$ 9 ass]t+ positively t x is false8 ,is x p]fectly c]ta9 t beliefs1 :i* h (t5 be5 useful to _m m51 may n1 nev]!less1 be untrue8 ,is x p]fectly c]ta9 t beliefs1 :i* are n true1 h n (t5 be5 useful to _m m58 ,! c]ta9ty may at lea/ be d\bt$1 & 9 any case x seems c]ta9 t "s beliefs1 :i* are n true1 are1 nev]!less1 sometimes useful4 ,= ^! reasons1 x seems to me almo/ c]ta9 t bo? ! ass]tions :i* ,i h be5 consid]+ are false4 ,x is almo/ c]ta9ly false t all our true ideas are useful1 & almo/ c]ta9ly false t all our useful ideas are true4 ,b ,i h only urg$ :at seem to me to be ! mo/ obvi\s objections to ^! two /atem5ts2 ,i h n tri$ to su/a9 ^! objections by elaborate argum5ts1 & ,i h omitt$ elaborate argum5t1 p>tly because ( a reason :i* ,i n[ wi% to /ate4 ,! fact is1 ,i am n at all sure t ,pr(essor ,james w\ld n himself admit t bo? ^! /atem5ts are false4 ,i ?9k x is q possible he w\ld admit t !y are1 & w\ld say t he nev] meant ei!r to ass]t or to imply ! contr>y4 ,he compla9s t "s ( ! critics ( ,pragmatism are unwill+ to read any b ! sillie/ ( possible mean+s into ! /atem5ts ( ,pragmatism2 &1 p]haps1 he w\ld say t ?is is ! case "h4 ,i c]ta9ly hope t he w\ld4 ,i c]ta9ly hope he w\ld say t ^! /atem5ts1 to :i* ,i h object$1 are silly4 ,= x does seem to me int5sely silly to say t we c v]ify all our true ideas2 int5sely silly to say t e "o ( our true ideas is at "s "t useful2 int5sely silly to say t e idea :i* is ev] useful is true4 ,i hope ,pr(essor ,james w\ld admit all ^! ?+s to be silly1 = if he & o!r ,pragmati/s w\ld admit ev5 z mu* z ?is1 ,i ?9k a good deal w\ld be ga9$4 ,b x by no means foll[s t because a philosoph] w\ld admit a view to be silly1 :5 x is def9itely put be=e him1 he has n himself be5 con/antly hold+ & imply+ t v view4 ,he may q s9c]ely prote/ t he nev] has ei!r held or impli$ x1 & yet he may all ! "t h be5 n only imply+ x b hold+ x--vaguely1 p]haps1 b really4 ,a man may assure u1 q s9c]ely t he is n angry2 he may really ?9k t he is n1 & yet we may be able to judge q c]ta9ly f :at he says t he really is angry4 ,he may assure u q s9c]ely t he nev] meant any?+ to our discr$it by :at he said--t he 0 n ?9k+ ( any?+ 9 ! lea/ discr$itable to u1 & yet x may be pla9 f 8 words t he 0 actually condemn+ u v sev]ely4 ,& s ) a philosoph]4 ,he may prote/1 q angrily1 :5 a view is put be=e him 9 o!r words ?an 8 own1 t he nev] ei!r meant or impli$ any su* ?+1 & yet x may be possible to judge1 f :at he says1 t ?is v view1 wrapp$ up 9 o!r words1 0 n only held by him b 0 precisely :at made 8 ?\ghts seem to him to be int]e/+ & important4 ,c]ta9ly he may q (t5 imply a giv5 ?+ :i*1 at ano!r "t1 he d5ies4 ,unless x 7 possible = a philosoph] to d ?is1 !re w\ld be v little inconsi/5cy 9 philosophy1 & surely ev]yone w admit t o!r philosoph]s are v (t5 inconsi/5t4 ,& s 9 ?is case1 ev5 if ,pr(essor ,james w\ld say t he nev] meant to imply ! ?+s to :i* ,i h be5 object+1 yet 9 ! case ( two ( ^! ?+s1 ,i _c help ?9k+ t he does actually imply !m--nay m1 t he is frequ5tly actually vaguely ?9k+ ( !m1 & t 8 !ory ( tru? owes its int]e/1 9 v great "p1 to ! fact t he is imply+ !m4 ,9 ! case ( ! two views t all our true ideas are useful1 & t all our useful ideas are true1 ,i ?9k ?is is s1 & ,i d n mean m]ely t 8 words imply !m4 ,a man's words may (t5 imply a ?+1 :5 he himself is 9 no way1 h[ev] vaguely1 ?9k+ ei!r ( t ?+ or ( any?+ :i* implies x2 he may simply h express$ himself un=tunately4 ,b 9 ! case ( ! two views t all our true ideas are useful1 & all our useful ideas true1 ,i d n ?9k ?is is s ) ,pr(essor ,james4 ,i ?9k t 8 ?\ghts seem int]e/+ to him & o!rs1 l>gely because he is ?9k+1 n m]ely ( words1 b ( ?+s :i* imply ^! two views1 9 ! v =m 9 :i* ,i h object$ to !m4 ,& ,i wi% n[ to give "s reasons = ?9k+ ?is4 ,pr(essor ,james c]ta9ly wi%es to ass]t t !re is "s connection betwe5 tru? & utility4 ,& ! connection :i* ,i h sugge/$ t he has vaguely be=e 8 m9d is ?is3 t e true idea is1 at "s "t or o!r1 useful1 & conv]sely t e idea1 :i* is ev] useful1 is true4 ,& ,i h urg$ t-!re are obvi\s objections to bo? ^! views4 ,b n[1 suppos+ ,pr(essor ,james does n mean to ass]t ei!r ( ^! two ?+s1 :at else c he mean to ass]t8 ,:at else c he mean1 t w\ld acc\nt = ! int]e/ & importance he seems to atta* to 8 ass]tion ( connection betwe5 tru? & utility8 ,let u consid] ! alt]natives4 ,&1 fir/ ( all1 he might mean t mo/ ( our true ideas are useful1 & mo/ ( our useful ideas true4 ,he might mean t mo/ ( our true ideas are useful at "s "t or o!r2 & ev5 t mo/ ( !m are useful1 :5ev] !y actually occur4 ,& he might mean1 moreov]1 t if we consid] ! :ole range ( ideas1 :i* are useful to u1 we %all f9d t by f> ! great] numb] ( !m are true ones2 t true ideas are f> m (t5 useful to u1 ?an ^? :i* are n true4 ,& all ?is1 ,i ?9k1 may be readily admitt$ to be true4 ,if ?is 7 all t he meant1 ,i d n ?9k t anyone w\ld be v anxi\s to dispute x4 ,b is x conceivable t ?is is all t he means8 ,is x conceivable t he %\ld h be5 s anxi\s to insi/ ^u ?is admitt$ commonplace8 ,is x conceivable t he %\ld h be5 (f]+ u ?is1 & no?+ m1 z a !ory ( :at tru? means1 & a !ory wor? mak+ a fuss ab\t1 & be+ pr\d (8 ,x seems to me q inconceivable t ?is %\ld h be5 all t he meant4 ,he mu/ h _h some?+ m ?an ?is 9 8 m9d4 ,b1 if s1 :at m8 ,9 ! passage :i* ,i quot$ at ! beg9n+1 z %[+ t he does mean to ass]t t all useful ideas are true1 he imm$iately goes on to ass]t a qualification1 :i* mu/ n[ be notic$4 ,! true1 he says1 is only ! exp$i5t 9 ! way ( our ?9k+ 7p4 #bbb74 ,b he imm$iately adds3 ,exp$i5t 9 ! long run1 & on ! :ole1 ( c\rse2 = :at meets exp$i5tly all ! exp]i5ce 9 sight won't necess>ily meet all fur!r exp]i5ces equally satisfactorily4 ,"h1 !re=e1 we h some?+ else t he might mean4 ,:at is exp$i5t 9 ! long run1 he means to say1 is true4 ,& :at exactly does ?is mean8 ,x seems to mean t an idea1 :i* is n true1 may be exp$i5t = "s "t4 ,t is to say1 x may occur once1 & be exp$i5t !n2 & aga91 & be exp$i5t !n2 & s on1 ov] a consid]able p]iod4 ,b 7,pr(essor ,james seems to prophesy7 if x is n true1 !re w come a "t1 :5 x w cease to be exp$i5t4 ,if x occurs aga9 & aga9 ov] a long en\gh p]iod1 !re w at la/1 if x is n true1 come a "t :5 x w 7= once at lea/7 fail to be useful1 & w 7p]haps he means7 nev] be useful aga94 ,?is is1 #a ?9k1 :at ,pr(essor ,james means 9 ?is passage4 ,he means1 ,i ?9k1 t ?\gh an idea1 :i* is n true1 may = "s "t be repeat$ly exp$i5t1 !re w at la/ come a "t :5 its occurr5ce w1 p]haps1 nev] be exp$i5t aga91 c]ta9ly w1 = a "t1 n be g5]ally exp$i5t4 ,& ?is a view :i*1 x seems to me1 may possibly be true4 ,x is c]ta9ly possible t a "t may come1 9 ! f> future1 :5 ideas1 :i* are n true1 w h>dly ev]1 if ev]1 be exp$i5t4 ,& ?is is all t ,pr(essor ,james seems "h positively to mean4 ,he seems to mean t1 if y take "t en\gh1 false ideas w "s day cease to be exp$i5t4 ,& x is v difficult to be sure t ?is is n true2 s9ce x is v difficult to prophesy z to :at may happ5 9 ! f> future4 ,i am sure ,i hope t ?is prophesy w come true4 ,b 9 ! meantime 7,pr(essor ,james seems to admit7 ideas1 :i* are n true1 may1 = an indef9itely long "t1 aga9 & aga9 be exp$i5t4 ,& is x conceivable t a !ory1 :i* admits ?is1 is all t he has meant to ass]t8 ,is x conceivable t :at int]e/s him1 9 8 !ory ( tru?1 is m]ely ! belief t1 "s day or o!r1 false ideas w cease to be exp$i5t8 ,9 ! long run1 ( c\rse1 he says1 z if ?is 7 :at he _h meant all along4 ,b ,i ?9k x is q pla9 t ?is is n all t he has meant4 ,?is may be "o ?+ :i* he is anxi\s to ass]t1 b x c]ta9ly does n expla9 ! :ole ( 8 int]e/ 9 8 !ory ( tru?4 ,&1 9 fact1 !re is q a diff]5t !ory :i* he seems pla9ly to h 9 8 m9d 9 o!r places4 ,:5 ,pr(essor ,james says1 9 ! long run1 ( c\rse1 he implies t ideas :i* are exp$i5t only = a %ort run1 are v (t5 n true4 ,b 9 :at he says else:]e he ass]ts ! v opposite ( ?is4 ,he says else:]e t a belief is true s long z to believe x is pr(itable to our lives 7p4 #ge74 ,t is to say1 a belief w be true1 s long z x is useful1 ev5 if x is n useful 9 ! long run6 ,?is is c]ta9ly q a diff]5t !ory2 &1 /rictly speak+1 x implies t an idea1 :i* is useful ev5 on "o occasion1 w be true4 ,b p]haps ?is is only a v]bal implication4 ,i ?9k v likely t "h ,pr(essor ,james 0 only ?9k+ ( ideas1 :i* c be said to h a run1 ?\gh only a comp>atively %ort "o--( ideas1 t is1 :i* are exp$i5t1 n m]ely on "o occasion1 b = "s "t4 ,t is to say1 ! !ory :i* he n[ sugge/s1 is t ideas1 :i* occur aga9 & aga91 p]haps to "o man only1 p]haps to sev]al diff]5t p1 ov] "s space ( "t are1 if !y are exp$i5t on mo/ occasions )9 t space ( "t1 true4 ,?is is a view :i* he is1 ,i ?9k1 really anxi\s to ass]t2 & if x 7 true1 x w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 be important4 ,& x is difficult to f9d in/ances :i* %[1 ) c]ta9ty1 t x is false4 ,i believe t x is false2 b x is difficult to prove x1 because1 9 ! case ( "s ideas x is s difficult to be c]ta9 t !y ev] 7 useful1 & 9 ! case ( o!rs s difficult to be c]ta9 t !y are n true4 ,a belief su* z ,i spoke ( be=e--! belief 9 et]nal hell--is an in/ance4 ,i ?9k ?is belief has be51 = a long "t1 useful1 & t yet x is false4 ,b x is1 p]haps1 arguable t x nev] has be5 useful2 & _m p on ! o!r h&1 w\ld /ill ass]t t x is true4 ,x _c1 !re=e1 p]haps1 fairly be us$ z an in/ance ( a belief1 :i* is c]ta9ly n true1 & yet has = "s "t be5 useful4 ,b :e!r ?is view t all beliefs1 :i* are exp$i5t = "s "t1 are true1 be true or false2 c x be all t ,pr(essor ,james means to ass]t8 ,c x con/itute ! :ole ( :at int]e/s him 9 8 !ory ( tru?8 ,i d n ?9k x c4 ,i ?9k x is pla9 t he has 9 8 m9d some?+ m ?an any ( ^! alt]natives1 or ?an all ( !m tak5 toge!r4 ,& ,i ?9k s p>tly = ! foll[+ reason4 ,he speaks f ! outset z if he int5d$ to tell u :at di/+ui%es true ideas f ^? :i* are n true2 to tell u1 t is to say1 n m]ely ( "s prop]ty :i* belongs to all our true ideas2 nor yet m]ely ( "s prop]ty1 :i* belongs to none b true ideas2 b ( "s prop]ty :i* satisfies bo? ^! requirem5ts at once--:i* bo? belongs to all our true ideas1 & also belongs to none b true ones4 ,tru?1 he says to beg9 )1 means ! agreem5t ( our ideas ) reality2 & he adds z falsity _! disagreem5t4 ,& he expla9s t he is go+ to tell u :at prop]ty x is t is meant by ^! words agreem5t ) reality4 ,s aga9 9 ! next passage :i* ,i quot$3 ,true ideas1 he says are ^? t we c assimilate1 validate1 corroborate & v]ify4 ,b1 he also adds1 ,false ideas are ^? t we _c4 ,& no "o1 ,i ?9k1 c\ld possibly speak 9 ?is way1 :o _h n 9 8 head ! int5tion ( tell+ u :at prop]ty x is :i* di/+ui%es true ideas f ^? :i* are n true1 & :i*1 !re=e1 n only belongs to all ideas :i* are true1 b also to none t are n4 ,& t he has ?is idea 9 8 head & ?9ks t ! prop]ty ( be+ useful or pay+ is su* a prop]ty1 is aga9 cle>ly %[n by a lat] passage4 ,our acc\nt ( tru?1 he says 7p4 #bah7 is an acc\nt ( tru?s 9 ! plural1 ( processes ( lead+1 realis$ 9 rebus1 & hav+ only ?is quality 9 common1 t !y pay4 ,only ?is quality 9 common6 ,if ?is be s1 ! quality mu/ obvi\sly be "o1 :i* is n %>$ by any ideas :i* are n true2 =1 if true ideas h any quality 9 common at all1 !y mu/ h at lea/ "o su* quality1 :i* is n %>$ by ^? :i* are n true4 ,pla9ly1 !re=e1 ,pr(essor ,james is int5d+ to tell u ( a prop]ty :i* belongs bo? to all true ideas & only to true ideas4 ,& ?is prop]ty1 he says1 is t ( pay+4 ,b n[ let u suppose t he means by pay+1 n pay+ once at lea/1 b1 accord+ to ! alt]native he sugge/s1 pay+ 9 ! long run or pay+ = "s "t4 ,c he possibly h suppos$ t ^! 7 prop]ties :i* belong$ bo? to all true ideas & also to none b true ones8 ,!y may1 p]haps1 be prop]ties :i* belong to none b true ones4 ,i d\bt1 z ,i h said1 :e!r ! latt] does2 b /ill x is difficult to prove ! opposite4 ,b ev5 if we grant$ t !y belong to none b true ones1 surely x is only too obvi\s t !y d n fulfil ! o!r requirem5t--t !y d n belong to ne>ly all true ones4 ,c anyone suppose t all our true ideas pay 9 ! long run or repeat$ly = "s "t8 ,surely x is pla9 t an enorm\s numb] d n = ! simple reason t an enorm\s numb] ( !m h no run at all1 ei!r long or %ort1 b occur b once1 & nev] recur4 ,i believe truly t a c]ta9 book is on a p>ticul> %elf ab\t #aj4ae p4m4 on ,decemb] #ba/1 #aijg2 & ?is true belief s]ves me well & helps me to f9d x ,b ! belief t t book is !re at t p>ticul> "t occurs to no "o else1 & nev] aga9 to me4 ,surely !re are ?\s&s ( useful true beliefs :i*1 l ?is1 are useful b once1 & nev] occur aga92 & x w\ld1 !re=e1 be prepo/]\s to say t e true idea is useful 9 ! long run or repeat$ly = "s "t4 ,if1 !re=e1 we suppos$ ,pr(essor ,james to mean t pay+ 9 ! long run or pay+ repeat$ly ov] a consid]able p]iod 7 prop]ties :i* belong$ to all true ideas & to none b true ones1 we %\ld be suppos+ him to mean some?+ /ill m mon/r\s ?an if we suppose him to mean t pay+ at lea/ once 0 su* a prop]ty4 ,to sum up !n3 ,i ?9k !re is no d\bt t ,pr(essor ,james' int]e/ 9 ! pragmati/ !ory ( tru? is l>gely due to ! fact t he ?9ks x tells u :at di/+ui%es true ideas f ^? :i* are n true4 ,& he ?9ks ! di/9ction is t true ideas pay1 & false ones don't4 ,! mo/ natural int]pretation ( ?is view is3 ,t e true idea pays at lea/ once2 & t e idea1 :i* pays at lea/ once1 is true4 ,^! 7 ! propositions ,i consid]$ fir/1 & ,i gave reasons = ?9k+ t bo? are false4 ,b ,pr(essor ,james sugge/$ else:]e t :at he means by pay+ is pay+ 9 ! long run4 ,& "h x seems possibly true t all ideas :i* pay 9 ! long run are true2 b x is c]ta9ly false t all our true ideas pay 9 ! long run1 if by ?is be meant any?+ m ?an pay at lea/ once4 ,aga91 he sugge/$ t :at he meant by pay+ 0 pay+ = "s "t4 ,& "h1 aga91 ev5 if x is true 7& x seems v d\btful7 t all ideas :i* pay = "s "t are true1 x is c]ta9ly false t all our true ideas pay = "s "t1 if by ?is be meant any?+ m ?an t !y pay at lea/ once4 ,?is1 ,i ?9k1 is ! simple/ & mo/ obvi\s objection to ,pr(essor ,james' in/rum5tal view ( tru?--! view t tru? is :at works1 pays1 is useful4 ,he seems c]ta9ly to h 9 8 m9d ! idea t ?is !ory tells u :at di/+ui%es true ideas f false ones1 & to be int]e/$ 9 x ma9ly = ?is reason4 ,he has vaguely 9 8 m9d t he has told u ( "s prop]ty :i* belongs to all true ideas & to none b true ones2 & t ?is prop]ty is t ( pay+4 ,& ! objection is1 t1 :atev] we und]/& by pay+1 :e!r pay+ at lea/ once1 or pay+ 9 ! long run1 or pay+ = "s "t1 x seems c]ta9 t none ( ^! prop]ties w satisfy bo? requirem5ts4 ,z reg>ds ! fir/1 t ( pay+ at lea/ once1 x seems almo/ c]ta9 t x satisfies nei!r3 x is nei!r true t all our true ideas pay at lea/ once1 nor yet t e idea :i* pays at lea/ once1 is true4 ,on ! contr>y1 _m true ideas nev] pay at all2 & _m ideas1 :i* are n true1 d pay on at lea/ "o occasion4 ,& z reg>ds ! o!rs1 pay+ 9 ! long run & pay+ = "s "t1 ev5 if ^! d belong to none b true ideas 7& ev5 ?is seems v d\btful71 !y c]ta9ly nei!r ( !m satisfy ! o!r requirem5t--nei!r ( !m belong to all our true ideas4 ,=1 9 ord] t ei!r ( !m may belong to an idea1 t idea mu/ pay at lea/ once2 &1 z we h se51 _m true ideas d n pay ev5 once1 & _c1 !re=e1 pay ei!r 9 ! long run or = "s "t4 ,&1 moreov]1 _m true ideas1 :i* d pay on "o occasion1 seem to pay on "o occasion & "o only4 ,&1 if ,pr(essor ,james does n mean to ass]t any ( ^! ?+s1 :at is !re left = him to mean8 ,!re is left 9 ! fir/ place1 ! !ory t mo/ ( our true ideas d pay2 & t mo/ ( ! ideas :i* pay are true4 ,?is seems to me to be true1 &1 inde$1 to be all t is c]ta9ly true 9 :at he says4 ,b is x conceivable t ?is is all he has meant8 ,obvi\sly1 ^! ass]tions tell u ( no prop]ty at all :i* belongs to all true ideas1 & to none b true ones2 &1 moreov]1 x seems impossible t he %\ld h be5 s anxi\s to ass]t ?is g5]ally admitt$ commonplace4 ,:at a v diff]5t complexion 8 :ole discussion w\ld h worn1 _h he m]ely ass]t$ ?is--?is q cle>ly1 & no?+ b ?is1 :ile admitt+ op5ly t _m true ideas d n pay1 & t _m1 :i* d pay1 are n true6 ,&1 besides ?is commonplace1 !re is only left = him to mean two "o-sid$ & d\btful ass]tions to ! effect t c]ta9 prop]ties belong to none b true ideas4 ,!re is ! ass]tion t all ideas :i* pay 9 ! long run are true1 & ! ass]tion t all ideas :i* pay = "s consid]able "t are true4 ,& z to ! fir/1 x may be true2 b x may also be d\bt$1 & ,pr(essor ,james gives u no reason at all = ?9k+ t x is true4 ,assum+ t religi\s ideas h be5 useful 9 ! pa/1 is x q c]ta9 t !y may n p]man5tly cont9ue to be useful1 ev5 ?\gh !y are false8 ,t1 9 %ort1 ev5 ?\gh !y are n true1 !y nev]!less w be useful1 n only = a "t1 b 9 ! long run8 ,& z = ! ass]tion t all ideas1 :i* pay = a consid]able "t1 are true1 ?is is obvi\sly m d\btful /ill4 ,:e!r c]ta9 religi\s ideas w or w n be useful 9 ! long run1 x seems difficult to d\bt t _m ( !m h be5 useful = a consid]able "t4 ,& :y %\ld we be told dogmatically t all ( ^! are true8 ,?is1 x seems to me1 is by f> ! mo/ int]e/+ ass]tion1 :i* is left = ,pr(essor ,james to make1 :5 we h reject$ ! !ory t ! prop]ty ( be+ useful belongs to all true ideas1 z well z to none b true ones4 ,b he has giv5 no reason = ass]t+ x4 ,he seems1 9 fact1 to base x m]ely ^u ! g5]al unt5able !ory1 t utility belongs to all true ideas1 & to none b true ones2 t ?is is :at tru? means4 ,^!1 !n1 seem to me ! pla9e/ & mo/ obvi\s objections to :at ,pr(essor ,james says ab\t ! connection betwe5 tru? & utility4 ,& !re are only two fur!r po9ts1 9 :at he says "u ?is head1 t ,i wi% to notice4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 we h hi!rto be5 consid]+ only :e!r x is true1 z a matt] ( empirical fact1 t all our true ideas are useful1 & ^? :i* are n true1 nev]4 ,pr(essor ,james seems1 at lea/1 to mean t1 z a matt] ( fact1 ?is is s2 & ,i h only urg$ hi!rto t z a matt] ( fact1 x is n s4 ,b z we h se51 he also ass]ts some?+ m ?an ?is--he also ass]ts t ?is prop]ty ( utility is ! only "o :i* belongs to all our true ideas4 ,& ?is fur!r ass]tion _c possibly be true1 if1 z ,i h urg$1 !re are _m true ideas :i* d n possess ?is prop]ty2 or if1 z ,i h urg$1 _m ideas1 :i* d possess x1 are nev]!less n true4 ,! objections already consid]$ are1 !n1 suffici5t to ov]?r[ ?is fur!r ass]tion also4 ,if !re are any true ideas1 :i* are n useful1 or if any1 :i* are useful1 are n true1 x _c be ! case t utility is ! only prop]ty :i* true ideas h 9 common4 ,!re mu/ be "s prop]ty1 o!r ?an utility1 :i* is common to all true ideas2 & a correct !ory z to :at prop]ty x is t does belong to all true ideas1 & to none b true ones1 is /ill to seek4 ,! empirical objections1 hi!rto giv51 are !n suffici5t objections to ?is fur!r ass]tion also2 b !y are n ! only objections to x4 ,!re is ano!r & /ill m s]i\s objection to ! ass]tion t utility is ! only prop]ty :i* all true ideas h 9 common4 ,= ?is ass]tion does n m]ely imply t1 z a matt] ( fact1 all our true ideas & none b true ideas are useful4 ,x does1 inde$1 imply ?is2 & !re=e ! fact t ^! empirical ass]tions are n true is suffici5t to refute x4 ,b x also implies some?+ m4 ,if utility 7 ! only prop]ty :i* all true ideas _h 9 common1 x w\ld foll[ n m]ely t all true ideas are useful1 b also t any idea1 :i* 0 useful1 w\ld be true no matt] :at o!r prop]ties x might h or might fail to h4 ,!re c1 ,i ?9k1 be no d\bt t ,pr(essor ,james does frequ5tly speak z if ?is 7 ! case2 & !re is an indep5d5t & /ill m s]i\s objection to ?is implication4 ,ev5 if x 7 true 7z x is n7 t all our true ideas & none b true ideas are1 z a matt] ( fact1 useful1 we %\ld /ill h a /rong reason to object to ! /atem5t t any idea1 :i* 0 useful1 w\ld be true4 ,= x implies t if su* an idea z m9e1 t ,pr(essor ,james exi/s1 & has c]ta9 ?\ghts1 7 useful1 ?is idea w\ld be true1 ev5 if no su* p]son z ,pr(essor ,james ev] did exi/4 ,x implies t1 if ! idea t ,i _h ! sev5 ( diamonds 9 my h& at c>ds la/ night1 7 useful1 ?is idea w\ld be true1 ev5 if1 9 fact1 ,i did n h t c>d 9 my h&4 ,& we c1 ,i ?9k1 see q pla9ly t ?is is n ! case4 ,) reg>d to "s k9ds ( ideas1 at all ev5ts--ideas ) reg>d to ! exi/5ce ( o!r p1 or ) reg>d to pa/ exp]i5ces ( our own--x seems q pla9 t !y w\ld n be true1 unless !y agre$ ) reality 9 "s o!r s5se ?an t :i* ,pr(essor ,james decl>es to be ! only "o 9 :i* true ideas mu/ agree ) x4 ,ev5 if my idea t ,pr(essor ,james exi/s 7 to agree ) reality1 9 ! s5se t1 ow+ to x1 ,i h&l$ o!r realities bett] ?an ,i %\ld h done )\t x1 x w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 pla9ly n be true1 unless ,pr(essor ,james really did exi/--unless he 7 a reality4 ,& ?is1 ,i ?9k1 is "o ( ! two mo/ s]i\s objections to :at he seems to hold ab\t ! connection ( tru? ) utility4 ,he seems to hold t any idea1 :i* 0 useful1 w\ld be true1 no matt] :at o!r prop]ties x might fail to h4 ,& ) reg>d to "s ideas1 at all ev5ts1 x seems pla9 t !y _c be true1 unless !y h ! prop]ty t :at !y believe to exi/1 really does or did exi/4 ,beliefs 9 ! exi/5ce ( o!r p might be useful to me1 ev5 if ,i alone exi/$2 b1 nev]!less1 9 su* a case1 !y w\ld n be true4 ,& !re is only "o o!r po9t1 9 :at ,pr(essor ,james says 9 connection ) ! in/rum5tal view ( tru?1 ^u :i* ,i wi% to rem>k4 ,we h se5 t he seems sometimes to hold t beliefs are true1 s long z !y are pr(itable to our lives4 ,& ?is implies1 z we h se51 ! d\btful proposition ?an any belief :i* is useful = "s l5g? ( "t1 is true4 ,b ?is is n all t x implies4 ,x also implies t beliefs are true only s long z !y are pr(itable4 ,nor does ,pr(essor ,james appe> to mean by ?is t !y occur1 only s long z !y are pr(itable4 ,he seems to hold1 on ! contr>y1 t beliefs1 :i* are pr(itable = "s "t1 d sometimes f9ally occur at a "t :5 !y are n pr(itable4 ,he implies1 !re=e1 t a belief1 :i* occurs at sev]al diff]5t times1 may be true at "s ( ! times at :i* x occurs1 & yet untrue at o!rs4 ,i ?9k !re is no d\bt t ?is view is :at he is sometimes ?9k+ (4 ,& ?is1 we see1 con/itutes a q new view z to ! connection betwe5 tru? & utility--a view q diff]5t f any t we h hi!rto consid]$4 ,?is view ass]ts n t e true idea is useful at "s "t1 or 9 ! long run1 or = a consid]able p]iod2 b t ! tru? ( an idea may come & g1 z its utility comes & goes4 ,x admits t "o & ! same idea sometimes occurs at times :5 x is useful1 & sometimes at times :5 x is n2 b x ma9ta9s t ?is same idea is true1 at ^? times :5 x is useful1 & n true1 at ^? :5 x is n4 ,& ! fact t ,pr(essor ,james seems to sugge/ ?is view1 con/itutes1 ,i ?9k1 a second mo/ s]i\s objection to :at he says ab\t ! connection ( tru? & utility4 ,x seems s obvi\s t utility is a prop]ty :i* comes & goes--:i* belongs to a giv5 idea at "o "t1 & does n belong to x at ano!r1 t anyone :o says t ! true is ! useful naturally seems n to be ov]look+ ?is obvi\s fact1 b to be sugge/+ t tru? is a prop]ty :i* comes & goes 9 ! same way4 ,x is1 9 ?is way ,i ?9k1 t ! in/rum5tal view ( tru? is connect$ ) ! view t tru? is mutable4 ,pr(essor ,james does1 ,i ?9k1 imply t tru? is mutable 9 j ?is s5se--namely1 t "o & ! same idea may be true at "s ( ! times at :i* x occurs1 & n true at o!rs1 & ?is is ! view :i* ,i h next to consid]4 7,,ii7 ,pr(essor ,james seems to hold1 g5]ally1 t tru? is mutable4 ,& by ?is he seems sometimes to mean t an idea :i*1 :5 x occurs at "o "t1 is true1 may1 :5 x occurs at ano!r "t1 n be true4 ,he seems to hold t "o & ! same idea may be true at "o "t & false at ano!r4 ,t x may be1 = ,i d n suppose he means t all ideas d actually und]go ?is *ange f true to false4 ,_m true ideas seem to occur b once1 &1 if s1 !y1 at lea/1 w n actually be true at "o "t & false at ano!r1 ?\gh1 ev5 ) reg>d to ^!1 p]haps ,pr(essor ,james means to ma9ta9 t !y might be false at ano!r "t1 if !y 7 to occur at x4 ,b ,i am n sure t he ev5 means to ma9ta9 ?is ) reg>d to all our true ideas4 ,p]haps he does n mean to say1 ) reg>d to all ( !m1 ev5 t !y c *ange f true to false4 ,he speaks1 g5]ally1 inde$1 z if tru? 7 mutable2 b1 9 "o passage1 he seems to insi/ t !re is a c]ta9 class ( true ideas1 none ( :i* are mutable 9 ?is respect4 ,relations among purely m5tal ideas1 he says 7p4 #bji71 =m ano!r sph]e :]e true & false beliefs obta91 & "h ! beliefs are absolute or unconditional4 ,:5 !y are true !y be> ! "n ei!r ( def9itions or ( pr9ciples4 ,x is ei!r a pr9ciple or a def9ition t #a & #a make #b1 t #b & #a make #c1 & s on2 t :ite diff]s less f grey ?an x does f black2 t :5 ! cause beg9s to act ! effect also comm5ces4 ,su* propositions hold ( all possible 'ones1' ( all conceivable ':ites1' 'greys1' & 'causes4' ,! objects "h are m5tal objects4 ,_! relations are p]ceptually obvi\s at a glance1 & no s5se-v]ification is necess>y4 ,moreov]1 once true1 always true1 ( ^? same m5tal objects4 ,tru? "h has an 'et]nal' "*4 ,if y c f9d a concrete ?+ any:]e t is '"o' or ':ite' or 'grey' or an 'effect1' !n y\r pr9ciples w ev]la/+ly apply to x4 ,pr(essor ,james does seem "h to hold t !re are true ideas1 :i* once true1 are always true4 ,p]haps1 !n1 he does n hold t all true ideas are mutable4 ,p]haps he does n ev5 hold t all true ideas1 except ideas ( ?is k9d1 are s4 ,b he does seem to hold at lea/ t _m ( our true ideas are mutable4 ,& ev5 ?is proposition seems to me to be disputable4 ,x seems to me t !re is a s5se 9 :i* x is ! case ) e true idea t1 if once true1 x is always true4 ,t is to say1 t e idea1 :i* is true once1 w\ld be true at any o!r "t at :i* x 7 to occur2 & t e idea :i* does occur m ?an once1 if true once1 is true at e "t at :i* x does occur4 ,!re seems to me1 ,i say1 to be a s5se 9 :i* ?is is s4 ,& ?is seems to me to be ! s5se 9 :i* x is mo/ commonly & mo/ naturally ma9ta9$ t all tru?s are immutable4 ,pr(essor ,james seems to mean to d5y x1 ev5 9 ?is s5se4 ,he seems to me con/antly to speak z if !re 7 no s5se 9 :i* all tru?s are immutable4 ,& ,i only wi% to po9t out :at seems to me to be ! pla9e/ & mo/ obvi\s objection to su* language4 ,&1 fir/ ( all1 !re is "o doctr9e1 :i* he seems to connect ) ?is ( 8 t tru?s are mutable1 ) reg>d to :i* ,i fully agree ) him4 ,he seems v anxi\s to insi/ t reality is mutable3 t x does *ange1 & t x is n irrational to hope t 9 ! future x w be diff]5t f & mu* bett] ?an x is n[4 ,& ?is seems to me to be q und5iable4 ,x seems to me q c]ta9 t ,i d h ideas at "o "t :i* ,i did n h at ano!r2 t *ange1 !re=e1 does really occur4 ,x seems to me q c]ta9 t 9 ! future _m ?+s w be diff]5t f :at !y are n[2 & ,i see no reason to ?9k t !y may n be mu* bett]4 ,!re is mu* mis]y 9 ! _w n[2 & ,i ?9k x is q possible t "s day !re w really be mu* less4 ,?is view t reality is mutable1 t facts d *ange1 t "s ?+s h prop]ties at "o "t :i* !y d n h at o!r times1 seems to me c]ta9ly true4 ,& s f>1 !re=e1 z ,pr(essor ,james m]ely means to ass]t ?is obvi\s fact1 ,i h no objection to 8 view4 ,"s philosoph]s1 ,i ?9k1 h really impli$ ! d5ial ( ?is fact4 ,all ^? :o d5y ! reality ( "t d seem to me to imply t no?+ really *anges or c *ange--t1 9 fact1 reality is :olly immutable4 ,& s f> z ,pr(essor ,james is m]ely prote/+ aga9/ ?is view1 ,i %\ld1 !re=e1 agree ) him4 ,b ,i ?9k x is q pla9 t he does n mean m]ely ?is1 :5 he says t tru? is mutable4 ,no "o w\ld *oose ?is way ( express+ himself if he m]ely meant to say t "s ?+s are mutable4 ,tru?1 ,pr(essor ,james has told u1 is a prop]ty ( c]ta9 ( our ideas4 ,& ^? ( our ideas1 :i* are true or false1 are c]ta9ly only a "p ( ! ,univ]se4 ,o!r ?+s 9 ! ,univ]se might1 !re=e1 *ange1 ev5 if our ideas nev] *ang$ 9 respect ( ?is prop]ty4 ,& our ideas !mselves d und\bt$ly *ange 9 "s respects4 ,a giv5 idea exi/s 9 my m9d at "o mom5t & does n exi/ 9 x at ano!r4 ,at "o mom5t x is 9 my m9d & n 9 somebody else's1 & at ano!r 9 somebody else's & n 9 m9e4 ,i sometimes ?9k ( ! tru? t twice two are f\r :5 ,i am 9 "o mood1 & sometimes :5 ,i am 9 ano!r4 ,i sometimes ?9k ( x 9 connection ) "o set ( ideas & sometimes 9 connection ) ano!r set4 ,ideas1 !n1 are con/antly *ang+ 9 "s respects4 ,!y come & g2 & at "o "t !y /& 9 a giv5 relation to o!r ?+s or ideas1 to :i* at ano!r "t !y d n /& 9 t relation4 ,9 ?is s5se1 any giv5 idea may c]ta9ly h a prop]ty at "o "t :i* x has n got at ano!r "t4 ,all ?is seems obvi\s2 & all ?is _c be admitt$1 )\t admitt+ t reality is mutable--t "s ?+s *ange4 ,b obvi\sly x does n seem to foll[ f ?is t !re is no respect 9 :i* ideas are immutable4 ,x does n seem to foll[ t because ideas1 & o!r ?+s1 *ange "s ( _! prop]ties1 !y necess>ily *ange t "o :i* we are consid]+--namely1 tru?4 ,x does n foll[ t a giv5 idea1 :i* has ! prop]ty ( tru? at "o "t1 ev] exi/s at any o!r "t )\t hav+ t prop]ty4 ,& yet t ?is does happ5 seems to be "p ( :at is meant by say+ t tru? is mutable4 ,pla9ly1 !re=e1 to say ?is is to say some?+ q diff]5t f say+ t "s ?+s are mutable4 ,ev51 !re=e1 if we admit t "s ?+s are mutable1 x is /ill op5 to consid] :e!r tru? is s4 ,& ?is is :at ,i want n[ to consid]4 ,is x ! case t an idea :i* exi/s at "o "t1 & is true !n1 ev] exi/s at any o!r "t1 )\t be+ true8 ,is x ! case t any idea ev] *anges f true to false8 ,t x has ! prop]ty ( be+ true on "o ( ! occasions :5 x exi/s1 & t x has n ?is prop]ty1 b t ( be+ false in/ead1 on "s o!r occasion :5 x exi/s8 ,9 ord] to answ] ?is "q cle>ly1 x is1 ,i ?9k1 necess>y to make /ill ano!r di/9ction4 ,x does c]ta9ly seem to be true1 9 a s5se1 t a giv5 idea may be true on "o occasion & false on ano!r4 ,we con/antly speak z if !re 7 cases 9 :i* a giv5 ?+ 0 true on "o occasion & false on ano!r2 & ,i ?9k x _c be d5i$ t1 :5 we s speak1 we are (t5 express+ 9 a p]fectly prop] & legitimate mann] some?+ :i* is und5iably true4 ,x is true n[1 ,i might say1 t ,i am 9 ?is room2 b to-morr[ ?is w n be true4 ,x is true n[ t m5 are (t5 v mis]able2 b p]haps 9 "s future /ate ( society ?is w n be true4 ,^! are p]fectly natural =ms ( expression1 & :at !y express is some?+ :i* c]ta9ly may be true4 ,& yet :at !y d app>5tly ass]t is t some?+ or o!r1 :i* is true at "o "t1 w n1 or p]haps w n1 be true at ano!r4 ,we con/antly use su* expressions1 :i* imply t :at is true at "o "t is n true at ano!r2 & x is c]ta9ly legitimate to use !m4 ,& h5ce1 ,i ?9k1 we mu/ admit t1 9 a s5se1 x is true t a ?+ may be true at "o "t :i* is n true at ano!r2 9 t s5se1 namely1 9 :i* we use ^! expressions4 ,& x is1 ,i ?9k1 also pla9 t ^! ?+s1 :i* may be true at "o "t & false at ano!r1 may1 9 a s5se1 be ideas4 ,we might ev5 say3 ,! idea t ,i am 9 ?is room1 is true n[2 b to-morr[ x w n be true4 ,we might say ?is )\t any /ra9 on language4 ,9 any ord9>y book--inde$1 9 any philosophical book1 :]e ! subject we are at pres5t discuss+ 0 n be+ expressly discuss$--su* expressions d1 ,i ?9k1 con/antly occur4 ,& we %\ld pass !m1 )\t any objection4 ,we %\ld at once und]/& :at !y meant1 & treat !m z p]fectly natural expressions ( ?+s und5iably true4 ,we mu/1 !n1 ,i ?9k1 admit t1 9 a s5se1 an idea may be true at "o "t1 & false at ano!r4 ,! "q is3 ,9 :at s5se8 ,:at is ! tru? = :i* ^! p]fectly legitimate expressions /&8 ,x seems to me t 9 all ^! cases1 s f> z we are n m]ely talk+ ( facts1 b ( true ideas1 t ! idea :i* we truly say to be true at "o "t & false at ano!r1 is m]ely ! idea ( a s5t5ce--t is1 ( c]ta9 words4 ,& we d und\bt$ly call words true4 ,! words ,i am at a meet+ ( ! ,ari/otelian ,society are true1 if ,i use !m n[2 b if ,i use ! same words to-morr[1 !y w\ld n be true4 ,! words ,george ,,iii is k+ ( ,engl& 7 true 9 #ahjj1 b !y are n true n[4 ,t is to say1 a giv5 set ( words may und\bt$ly be true at "o "t1 & false at ano!r2 & s9ce we may h ideas ( words z well z ( o!r ?+s1 we may1 9 ?is s5se1 say ! same ( c]ta9 ( our ideas4 ,we may say t "s ( our ideas 7namely ^? ( words7 are true at "o "t & n true at ano!r4 ,b is x conceivable t ,pr(essor ,james m]ely meant to ass]t t ! same words are sometimes true at "o "t & false at ano!r8 ,c ?is be all he means by say+ t tru? is mutable8 ,i d n ?9k x c possibly be s4 ,no "o1 ,i ?9k1 9 def9itely discuss+ ! mutability ( tru?1 c\ld say t true ideas 7 mutable1 & yet mean 7al?\gh he did n say s7 t ?is proposition appli$ solely to ideas ( words4 ,pr(essor ,james mu/1 ,i ?9k1 h be5 sometimes ?9k+ t o!r ideas1 & n m]ely ideas ( words1 d sometimes *ange f true to false4 ,& ?is is ! proposition :i* ,i am conc]n$ to dispute4 ,x seems to me t if we mean by an idea1 n m]ely ! idea ( c]ta9 words1 b ! k9d ( idea :i* words express1 x is v d\btful :e!r su* an idea ev] *anges f true to false--:e!r any su* idea is ev] true at "o "t & false at ano!r4 ,& pla9ly1 9 ! fir/ place1 ! m]e fact t ! same set ( words1 z 9 ! in/ances ,i h giv51 really are true at "o "t & false at ano!r1 does n af=d any presumption t any?+ :i* !y /& = is true at "o "t & false at ano!r4 ,= ! same words may obvi\sly be us$ 9 diff]5t s5ses at diff]5t times2 & h5ce ?\gh ! same words1 :i* =m]ly express$ a tru?1 may cease to express "o1 t may be because !y n[ express a diff]5t idea1 & n because ! idea :i* !y =m]ly express$ has ceas$ to be true4 ,& t1 9 in/ances su* z ,i h giv51 ! words d *ange _! mean+ accord+ to ! "t at :i* !y are utt]$ or ?\ght (1 is ,i ?9k1 evid5t4 ,if ,i use n[ ! words ,i am 9 ?is room1 ^! words c]ta9ly express 7among o!r ?+s7 ! idea t my be+ 9 ?is room is contempor>y ) my pres5t use ( ! words2 & if ,i 7 to use ! same words to-morr[1 !y w\ld express ! idea t my be+ 9 ?is room to-morr[1 0 contempor>y ) ! use ( !m !n4 ,& s9ce my use ( !m !n w\ld n be ! same fact z my use ( !m n[1 !y w\ld c]ta9ly !n express a diff]5t idea f t :i* !y express n[4 ,& 9 g5]al1 :5ev] we use ! pres5t t5se 9 its prim>y s5se1 x seems to me pla9 t we d mean some?+ diff]5t by x ea* "t we use x4 ,we always mean 7among o!r ?+s7 to express ! idea t a giv5 ev5t is contempor>y ) our actual use ( x2 & s9ce our actual use ( x on "o occasion is always a diff]5t fact f our actual use ( x on ano!r1 we express by x a diff]5t idea ea* "t we use x4 ,& simil>ly ) ! pa/ & future t5ses4 ,if anybody _h said 9 #ahjg ,napoleon is dead1 he w\ld c]ta9ly h meant by ^! words some?+ diff]5t f :at ,i mean by !m :5 ,i use !m n[4 ,he w\ld h meant t ,napoleon's dea? occurr$ at a "t previ\s to 8 use ( ^? words2 & ?is w\ld n h be5 true4 ,b 9 ?is fact !re is no?+ to %[ t if he _h meant by !m :at ,i mean n[1 8 idea w\ld n h be5 z true !n z m9e is n[4 ,& s1 if ,i say ,x w ra9 to-morr[1 ^! words h a diff]5t mean+ to-day f :at !y w\ld h if ,i us$ !m to-morr[4 ,:at we mean by to-morr[ is obvi\sly a diff]5t day1 :5 we use ! ^w on "o day1 f :at we mean by x :5 we use x on ano!r4 ,b 9 ?is !re is no?+ to %[ t if ! idea1 :i* ,i n[ mean by ,x w ra9 to-morr[1 7 to occur aga9 to-morr[1 x w\ld n be true !n1 if x is true n[4 ,all ?is is surely v obvi\s4 ,b1 if we take acc\nt ( x1 & if we conc5trate our att5tion n on ! words b on :at is meant by !m1 is x s c]ta9 t :at we mean by !m on any "o occasion ev] *anges f true to false8 ,if !re 7 to occur to me to-morr[ ! v same idea :i* ,i n[ express by ! words ,i am 9 ?is room1 is x c]ta9 t ?is idea w\ld n be z true !n z x is n[8 ,x is p]haps true t ! :ale ( :at ,i mean by su* a phrase z ?is nev] does recur4 ,b "p ( x does1 & t a "p :i* is true4 ,"p ( :at ,i mean is ,c]ta9ly id5tical ) "p ( :at ,i %\ld mean to-morr[ by say+ ,i 0 9 t room la/ night4 ,& ?is "p w\ld be z true !n1 z x is n[4 ,& is !re any "p1 :i*1 if x 7 to recur at any "t1 w\ld n !n be true1 ?\gh x ,is true n[8 ,9 ! case ( all ideas or p>ts ( ideas1 :i* ev] d actually recur1 c we f9d a s+le in/ance ( "o1 :i* is pla9ly true at "o ( ! times :5 x occurs1 & yet n true at ano!r8 ,i _c ?9k ( any su* in/ance4 ,& on ! o!r h& ?is v proposition t any idea 7o!r ?an m]e words7 :i* is true once1 w\ld be true at any "t1 seems to me to be "o ( ^? tru?s ( :i* ,pr(essor ,james has spok5 z hav+ an et]nal1 absolute1 unconditional "*--z be+ p]ceptually obvi\s at a glance & ne$+ no s5se-v]ification4 ,j z we "k t1 if a p>ticul> col\r diff]s m f black ?an f grey at "o "t1 ! same col\r w\ld diff] m f black ?an f grey at any "t1 s1 x seems to me1 we c see t1 if a p>ticul> idea is true at "o "t1 ! same idea w\ld be true at any "t4 ,x seems to me1 !n1 t if we mean by an idea1 n m]e words1 b ! k9d ( idea :i* words express1 any idea1 :i* is true at "o "t :5 x occurs1 w\ld be true at any "t :5 x 7 to occur2 & t ?is is s1 ev5 ?\gh x is an idea1 :i* ref]s to facts :i* are mutable4 ,my be+ 9 ?is room is a fact :i* is n[1 b :i* c]ta9ly has n be5 at e "t & w n be at e "t4 ,& ! words ,i am 9 ?is room1 ?\gh !y express a tru? n[1 w\ld n h express$ "o if ,i _h us$ !m ye/]day1 & w n if ,i use !m to-morr[4 ,b if we consid] ! idea :i* ^! words n[ express--namely1 ! idea ( ! connection ( my be+ 9 ?is room ) ?is p>ticul> "t--x seems to me evid5t t anybody :o _h ?\ght ( t connection at any "t 9 ! pa/1 w\ld h be5 ?9k+ truly1 & t anybody :o 7 to ?9k ( x at any "t 9 ! future w\ld be ?9k+ truly4 ,?is seems to me to be ! s5se 9 :i* tru?s are immutable--9 :i* no idea c *ange f true to false4 ,& ,i ?9k ,pr(essor ,james means to d5y ( tru?s g5]ally1 if n ( all tru?s1 t !y are immutable ev5 9 ?is s5se4 ,if he does n mean ?is !re seems no?+ left = him to mean1 :5 he says t tru?s are mutable1 except 7#a7 t "s facts are mutable1 & 7#b7 t ! same words may be true at "o "t & false at ano!r4 ,& x seems to me impossible t he c\ld speak z he does1 if he meant no?+ m ?an ^! two ?+s4 ,i believe1 !re=e1 t he is really ?9k+ t ideas :i* h be5 once true 7ideas1 & n m]ely words7 d sometimes aft]w>ds become false3 t ! v same idea is at "o "t true & at ano!r false4 ,b he c]ta9ly gives no in/ance :i* %[s t ?is does ev] occur4 ,& h[ f> does he mean 8 pr9ciple to c>ry him8 ,does he hold t ?is idea t ,julius ,caes> 0 murd]$ 9 ! ,s5ate-,h\se1 ?\gh true n[1 may1 at "s future "t cease to be true1 if x %\ld be m pr(itable to ! lives ( future g5]ations to believe t he di$ 9 8 b$8 ,?+s l ?is are :at 8 words seem to imply2 &1 ev5 if he does hold t tru?s l ?is are n mutable1 he nev] tries to tell u to :at k9ds ( tru?s he w\ld limit mutability1 nor h[ !y diff] f su* z ?is4 7,,iii7 ,f9ally1 !re rema9s ! view t to an unasc]ta9able ext5t our tru?s are man-made products4 ,& ! only po9t ,i want to make ab\t ?is view may be put v briefly4 ,x is noticeable t all ! in/ances :i* ,pr(essor ,james gives ( ! ways 9 :i*1 accord+ to him1 our tru?s are made are in/ances ( ways 9 :i* our beliefs come into exi/5ce4 ,9 _m ( ^! ways1 x w\ld seem1 false beliefs sometimes come into exi/5ce z well z true ones2 & ,i take x ,pr(essor ,james does n always wi% to d5y ?is4 ,false beliefs1 ,i ?9k he w\ld say1 are j z mu* man-made products z true ones3 x is suffici5t = 8 purpose if true beliefs d come into exi/5ce 9 ! ways he m5tions4 ,& ! only po9t :i* seems to be illu/rat$ by all ^! in/ances1 is t 9 all ( !m ! exi/5ce ( a true belief does dep5d 9 "s way or o!r ^u ! previ\s exi/5ce ( some?+ 9 "s man's m9d4 ,!y are all ( !m cases 9 :i* we may truly say3 ,?is man w\ld n h _h j t belief1 _h n "s man previ\sly _h su* & su* exp]i5ces1 or int]e/s1 or purposes4 ,9 "s cases !y are in/ances ( ways 9 :i* ! exi/5ce ( a p>ticul> belief 9 a man dep5ds ^u 8 own previ\s exp]i5ces or int]e/s or volitions4 ,b ?is does n seem to be ! case 9 all4 ,pr(essor ,james seems also anxi\s to illu/rate ! po9t t "o man's beliefs (t5 dep5d ^u ! previ\s exp]i5ces or int]e/s or volitions ( o!r m54 ,&1 z ,i say1 ! only po9t :i* seems to be def9itely illu/rat$ 9 all cases is t ! exi/5ce ( a true belief does dep5d1 9 "s way or o!r1 ^u some?+ :i* has previ\sly exi/$ 9 "s man's m9d4 ,almo/ any k9d ( dep5d5ce1 x w\ld seem1 is suffici5t to illu/rate ,pr(essor ,james' po9t4 ,& z reg>ds ?is g5]al !sis t almo/ all our beliefs1 true z well z false1 dep5d1 9 "s way or o!r1 ^u :at has previ\sly be5 9 "s human m9d1 x w1 ,i ?9k1 be readily admitt$4 ,x is a commonplace1 :i*1 s f> z ,i "k1 h>dly anyone w\ld d5y4 ,if ?is is all t is to be meant by say+ t our true beliefs are man-made1 x mu/1 ,i ?9k1 be admitt$ t almo/ all1 ,if n q all1 really are man-made4 ,& ?is is all t ,pr(essor ,james' in/ances seem to me1 9 fact1 to %[4 ,b is ?is all t ,pr(essor ,james means1 :5 he says t our tru?s are man-made8 ,is x conceivable t he only means to insi/ ^u ?is und5iable1 & g5]ally admitt$1 commonplace8 ,x seems to me q pla9 t ?is is n all t he means4 ,i ?9k he c]ta9ly means to sugge/ t1 f ! fact t we make our true beliefs1 some?+ else foll[s4 ,& ,i ?9k x is n h>d to see "o ?+ m :i* he does mean4 ,i ?9k he c]ta9ly means to sugge/ t we n only make our true beliefs1 b also t we make !m true4 ,at lea/ z mu* z ?is is c]ta9ly naturally sugge/$ by 8 words4 ,no "o w\ld p]si/5tly say t we make our tru?s1 unless he meant1 at lea/1 n m]ely t we make our true beliefs1 b also t we make !m true--unless he meant n m]ely t ! exi/5ce ( our true beliefs1 b also t _! tru?1 dep5d$ ^u human conditions4 ,?is1 x seems to me1 is "o consequ5ce :i* ,pr(essor ,james means u to draw f ! commonplace t ! exi/5ce ( our true beliefs dep5ds ^u human conditions4 ,b does ?is consequ5ce1 9 fact1 foll[ f t commonplace8 ,f ! fact t we make our true beliefs1 does x foll[ t we make !m true8 ,9 "o s5se1 und\bt$ly1 ev5 ?is does foll[4 ,if we say 7z we may say7 t no belief c be true1 unless x exi/s1 !n x foll[s t1 9 a s5se1 ! tru? ( a belief mu/ always dep5d ^u any conditions ^u :i* its exi/5ce dep5ds4 ,if1 !re=e1 ! occurr5ce ( a belief dep5ds ^u human conditions1 s1 too1 mu/ its tru?4 ,if ! belief _h nev] exi/$1 x w\ld nev] h be5 true2 & !re=e its tru? mu/1 9 a s5se1 dep5d ^u human conditions 9 exactly ! same degree 9 :i* its exi/5ce dep5ds ^u !m4 ,?is is obvi\s4 ,b is ?is all t is meant8 ,is ?is all t w\ld be sugge/$ to u by tell+ u t we make our beliefs true8 ,x is easy to see t x is n4 ,i may h ! belief t x w ra9 to-morr[4 ,& ,i may h made myself h ?is belief4 ,x may be ! case t ,i %\ld n h _h x1 b = peculi>ities 9 my pa/ exp]i5ces1 9 my int]e/s & my volitions4 ,x may be ! case t ,i %\ld n h _h x1 b = a delib]ate attempt to consid] ! "q :e!r x w ra9 or n4 ,?is may easily happ54 ,& c]ta9ly ?is p>ticul> belief ( m9e w\ld n h be5 true1 unless x exi/$4 ,its tru?1 !re=e1 dep5ds1 9 a s5se1 ^u any conditions ^u :i* its exi/5ce dep5ds4 ,& ?is belief may be true4 ,x w be true1 if ,x does ra9 to-morr[4 ,b1 9 spite ( all ^! reasons1 w\ld anyone ?9k ( say+ t1 9 case x is true1 ,i _h made x true8 ,w\ld anyone say t ,i _h _h any h& at all 9 mak+ x true8 ,pla9ly no "o w\ld4 ,we %\ld say t ,i _h a h& 9 mak+ x true1 if & only ,if ,i _h a h& 9 mak+ ! ra9 fall4 ,9 e case 9 :i* we believe 9 ! exi/5ce ( any?+1 pa/ or future1 we %\ld say t we _h help$ to make ! belief true1 if & only if we _h help$ to cause ! exi/5ce ( ! fact :i*1 9 t belief1 we believ$ did exi/ or w\ld exi/4 ,surely ?is is pla94 ,i may believe t ! sun w rise to-morr[4 ,& ,i may h _h a h& 9 mak+ ?is belief2 c]ta9ly x (t5 dep5ds = its exi/5ce ^u :at has be5 previ\sly 9 my m9d4 ,& if ! sun does rise1 my belief w h be5 true4 ,i h1 !re=e1 _h a h& 9 mak+ a true belief4 ,b w\ld anyone say t1 !re=e1 ,i _h a h& 9 mak+ ?is belief true8 ,c]ta9ly no "o w\ld4 ,no "o w\ld say t any?+ _h contribut$ to make ?is belief true1 except ^? conditions 7:atev] !y may be7 :i* contribut$ to mak+ ! sun actually rise4 ,x is pla91 !n1 t by mak+ a belief true1 we mean some?+ q diff]5t f :at ,pr(essor ,james means by mak+ t belief4 ,conditions :i* h a h& 9 mak+ a giv5 true belief1 may 7x appe>s7 h no h& at all 9 mak+ x true2 & conditions :i* h a h& 9 mak+ x true may h no h& at all 9 mak+ x4 ,c]ta9ly ?is is h[ we use ! words4 ,we %\ld nev] say t we _h made a belief true1 m]ely because we _h made ! belief4 ,b n[1 :i* ( ^! two ?+s does ,pr(essor ,james mean8 ,does he mean m]ely ! accept$ commonplace t we make our true beliefs1 9 ! s5se t almo/ all ( !m dep5d = _! exi/5ce on :at has be5 previ\sly 9 "s human m9d8 ,or does he mean also t we make !m true--t _! tru? also dep5ds on :at has be5 previ\sly 9 "s human m9d8 ,i _c help ?9k+ t he has ! latt]1 & n only ! =m] 9 8 m9d4 ,b1 !n1 :at does ?is involve8 ,if 8 in/ances ( tru?-mak+ are to be any?+ to ! purpose1 x %\ld mean t1 :5ev] ,i h a h& 9 caus+ "o ( my own beliefs1 ,i always h to t ext5t a h& 9 mak+ x true4 ,t1 !re=e1 ,i h a h& 9 actually mak+ ! sun rise1 ! w9d bl[1 & ! ra9 fall1 :5ev] ,i cause my beliefs 9 ^! ?+s4 ,nay1 m1 x %\ld mean t1 :5ev] ,i make a true belief ab\t ! pa/1 ,i mu/ h _h a h& 9 mak+ ?is true4 ,& if s1 !n c]ta9ly ,i mu/ h _h a h& 9 caus+ ! ,fr5* ,revolution1 9 caus+ my fa!r's bir?1 9 mak+ ,pr(essor ,james write ?is book4 ,c]ta9ly he implies t "s man or o!r mu/ h help$ 9 caus+ almo/ e ev5t1 9 :i* any man ev] truly believ$4 ,t x 0 we :o made ! planets revolve r\nd ! sun1 :o made ! ,alps rise1 & ! floor ( ! ,pacific s9k--all ^! ?+s1 & o!rs l !m1 seem to be involv$4 ,& x is ^! consequ5ces :i* seem to me to ju/ify a d\bt :e!r1 9 fact our tru?s are to an unasc]ta9able ext5t man-made4 ,t "s ( our tru?s are man-made--inde$1 a great _m--,i fully admit4 ,we c]ta9ly d make "s ( our beliefs true4 ,! ,secret>y probably _h a belief t ,i %\ld write ?is pap]1 & ,i h made 8 belief true by writ+ x4 ,m5 c]ta9ly h ! p[] to alt] ! _w to a c]ta9 ext5t2 &1 s f> z !y d ?is1 !y c]ta9ly make true any beliefs1 :i* are beliefs 9 ! occurr5ce ( ^! alt]ations4 ,b ,i c see no reason = suppos+ t !y make true ne>ly all ^? ( _! beliefs :i* are true4 ,& c]ta9ly ! only reason :i* ,pr(essor ,james seems to give = believ+ ?is--namely1 t ! exi/5ce ( almo/ all _! beliefs dep5ds on !m--seems to be no reason = x at all4 ,= unque/ionably a man does n make true ne>ly e belief ^: exi/5ce dep5ds on him2 & if s1 ! "q :i* ( _! beliefs & h[ _m1 m5 d make true mu/ be settl$ by q o!r consid]ations4 ,9 conclusion1 ,i wi% to sum up :at seems to me to be ! mo/ important po9ts ab\t ?is pragmati/ !ory ( tru?1 z ,pr(essor ,james repres5ts x4 ,x seems to me t1 9 :at he says ab\t x1 he has 9 8 m9d "s ?+s :i* are true & o!rs :i* are false2 & ,i wi% to tabulate sep>ately ! pr9cipal ones :i* ,i take to be true1 & ! pr9cipal ones :i* ,i take to be false4 ,! true ones seem to me to be ^!3-- ,t mo/ ( our true beliefs are useful to u2 & t mo/ ( ! beliefs t are useful to u are true4 ,t ! _w really does *ange 9 "s respects2 t facts exi/ at "o "t1 :i* didn't & won't exi/ at o!rs2 & t h5ce ! _w may be bett] at "s future "t ?an x is n[ or has be5 9 ! pa/4 ,t ! v same words may be true at "o "t & false at ano!r--t !y may express a tru? at "o "t & a falsehood at ano!r4 ,t ! exi/5ce ( mo/1 if n all1 ( our beliefs1 true z well z false1 does dep5d ^u previ\s ev5ts 9 our m5tal hi/ory2 t we %\ld nev] h _h ! p>ticul> beliefs we d h1 _h n our previ\s m5tal hi/ory be5 su* z x 04 ,t ! tru?1 & n m]ely ! exi/5ce1 ( "s ( our beliefs1 does dep5d ^u u4 ,t we really d make "s alt]ations 9 ! _w1 & t h5ce we d help to make true all ^? ( our beliefs :i* are beliefs 9 ! exi/5ce ( ^! alt]ations4 ,to all ( ^! propositions ,i h no objection to (f]4 ,& !y seem to me to be g5]ally admitt$ commonplaces4 ,a c]ta9 class ( philosoph]s d1 inde$1 imply ! d5ial ( e "o ( !m--namely1 ^? philosoph]s :o d5y ! reality ( "t4 ,& ,i ?9k t "p ( ,pr(essor ,james' object is to prote/ aga9/ ! views ( ^! philosoph]s4 ,all ( ^! propositions d con/itute a prote/ aga9/ su* views2 & s f> !y might be all t ,pr(essor ,james meant to ass]t4 ,b ,i d n ?9k t anyone1 fairly read+ ?r\gh :at he says1 c\ld get ! impression t ^! ?+s1 & no?+ m1 7 :at he _h 9 8 m9d4 ,:at gives col\r & int]e/ to :at he says1 seems to be obvi\sly some?+ q diff]5t4 ,&1 if we try to f9d out :at exactly ! *ief ?+s are :i* give 8 discussion its col\r & int]e/1 x seems to me we may di/+ui% t :at he has 9 8 m9d1 wrapp$ up 9 m or less ambigu\s language1 are ! foll[+ propositions1 to all ( :i* ,i h tri$ to urge :at seem to me ! mo/ obvi\s objections3-- ,t utility is a prop]ty :i* di/+ui%es true beliefs f ^? :i* are n true2 t1 !re=e1 all true beliefs are useful1 & all beliefs1 :i* are useful1 are true--by utility be+ sometimes meant utility on at lea/ "o occasion1 sometimes utility 9 ! long run1 sometimes utility = "s l5g? ( "t4 ,t all beliefs :i* are useful = "s l5g? ( "t are true4 ,t utility is ! only prop]ty :i* all true beliefs h 9 common3 t1 !re=e1 if x 7 useful to me to believe 9 ,pr(essor ,james' exi/5ce1 ?is belief w\ld be true1 ev5 if he didn't exi/2 & t1 if x 7 n useful to me to believe ?is1 ! belief w\ld be false1 ev5 if he did4 ,t ! beliefs1 :i* we express by words1 & n m]ely ! words !mselves1 may be true at "o "t & n true at ano!r2 & t ?is is a g5]al rule1 ?\gh p]haps !re may be "s exceptions4 ,t :5ev] ! exi/5ce ( a belief dep5ds to "s ext5t on u1 !n also ! tru? ( t belief dep5ds to "s ext5t on u2 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ?is implies1 t1 :5 ! exi/5ce ( my belief t a %[] w fall dep5ds ^u me1 !n1 if ?is belief is true1 ,i mu/ h _h a h& 9 mak+ ! %[] fall3 t1 !re=e1 m5 mu/ h _h a h& 9 mak+ to exi/ almo/ e fact :i* !y ev] believe to exi/4 #a ,pragmatism3 ,a ,new ,"n = "s ,old ,ways ( ,?9k+3 ,popul> ,lectures on ,philosophy4 ,by ,william ,james4 ,longmans1 ,gre51 & ,co41 #aijg ,,hume',s ,,philosophy ,9 bo? ( 8 two books on ! ,human ,und]/&+1 ,hume _h1 ,i ?9k1 "o ma9 g5]al object4 ,he tells u t x 0 8 object to discov] ! ext5t & =ce ( human und]/&+1 to give u an exact analysis ( its p[]s & capacity4 ,& we may1 ,i ?9k1 express :at he meant by ?is 9 ! foll[+ way4 ,he pla9ly held 7z we all d7 t "s m5 sometimes ent]ta9 op9ions :i* !y _c "k to be true4 ,& he wi%$ to po9t out :at *>act]i/ics are possess$ by ^? ( our op9ions :i* we c "k to be true1 ) a view ( p]suad+ u t any op9ion :i* does n possess any ( ^! *>act]i/ics is ( a k9d :i* we _c "k to be s4 ,he ?us tries to lay d[n c]ta9 rules to ! effect t ! only propositions :i* we c1 any ( u1 "k to be true are ( c]ta9 def9ite k9ds4 ,x is 9 ?is s5se1 ,i ?9k1 t he tries to def9e ! limits ( human und]/&+4 ,) ?is object he1 fir/ ( all1 divides all ! propositions1 :i* we c ev5 s mu* z conceive1 into two classes4 ,!y are all1 he says1 ei!r propositions ab\t relations ( ideas or else ab\t matt]s ( fact4 ,by propositions ab\t relations ( ideas he means su* propositions z t twice two are f\r1 or t black diff]s f :ite2 & x is1 ,i ?9k1 easy en\gh to see1 ?\gh by no means easy to def9e1 :at k9d ( propositions x is t he means to include 9 ?is division4 ,!y are1 he says1 ! only k9d ( propositions ) reg>d to :i* we c h intuitive or demon/rative c]ta9ty4 ,b ! va/ majority ( ! propositions 9 :i* we believe & :i* int]e/ u mo/1 belong to ! o!r division3 !y are propositions ab\t matt]s ( fact4 ,& ^! aga9 he divides into two classes4 ,s f> z 8 words g1 ?is latt] division is betwe5 matt]s ( fact1 beyond ! pres5t te/imony ( our s5ses1 or ! records ( our memory1 on ! "o h&1 & matt]s ( fact = :i* we h ! evid5ce ( our memory or s5ses1 on ! o!r4 ,b x is1 ,i ?9k1 q pla9 t ^! words d n repres5t q accurately ! division :i* he really means to make4 ,he pla9ly int5ds to reckon along ) facts = :i* we h ! evid5ce ( our s5ses all facts = :i* we h ! evid5ce ( direct obs]vation--su* facts1 = in/ance1 z ^? :i* ,i obs]ve :5 ,i obs]ve t ,i am angry or afraid1 & :i* _c be /rictly said to be appreh5d$ by my s5ses4 ,! division1 !n1 :i* he really int5ds to make is 7to put x q /rictly7 into ! two classes--7#a7 propositions :i* ass]t "s matt] ( fact :i* ,i am 79 ! /ricte/ s5se7 obs]v+ at ! mom5t1 or :i* ,i h s obs]v$ 9 ! pa/ & n[ rememb]2 & 7#b7 propositions :i* ass]t any matt] ( fact :i* ,i am n n[ obs]v+ & nev] h obs]v$1 or1 if ,i h1 h q =gott54 ,we h1 !n1 ! ?ree classes--7#a7 propositions :i* ass]t relations ( ideas2 7#b7 propositions :i* ass]t matt]s ( fact = :i* we h ! evid5ce ( direct obs]vation or p]sonal memory2 7#c7 propositions :i* ass]t matt]s ( fact = :i* we h n ?is evid5ce4 ,& z reg>ds propositions ( ! fir/ two classes1 ,hume does n seem to d\bt our capacity = k4 ,he does n d\bt t we c "k "s 7?\gh1 ( c\rse1 n all7 propositions ab\t relations ( ideas to be true2 he nev] d\bts1 = in/ance1 t we c "k t twice two are f\r4 ,& he g5]ally assumes also t ea* ( u c "k ! tru? ( all propositions :i* m]ely ass]t "s matt] ( fact :i* we ourselves are1 9 ! /ricte/ s5se1 directly obs]v+1 or :i* we h s obs]v$ & n[ rememb]4 ,he does1 inde$1 9 "o place1 sugge/ a d\bt :e!r our memory is ev] to be implicitly tru/$1 b he g5]ally assumes t x always c4 ,x is ) reg>d to propositions ( ! ?ird class t he is *iefly anxi\s to det]m9e :i* ( !m 7if any7 we c "k to be true & :i* n4 ,9 :at cases c any man "k any matt] ( fact :i* he himself has n directly obs]v$8 ,x is ,hume's views on ?is "q :i* =m1 ,i ?9k1 ! ma9 int]e/ ( 8 philosophy4 ,he proposes1 fir/ ( all1 by way ( answ] to x1 a rule1 :i* may1 ,i ?9k1 be express$ z foll[s3 ,no man1 he says1 c ev] "k any matt] ( fact1 :i* he has n himself obs]v$1 unless he c "k t x is connect$ by ! relation ( cause & effect1 ) "s fact :i* he has obs]v$4 ,& no man c ev] "k t any two facts are connect$ by ?is relation1 except by ! help ( 8 own pa/ exp]i5ce4 ,9 o!r words1 if ,i am to "k any fact1 ,a1 :i* ,i h n myself obs]v$1 my pa/ exp]i5ce mu/ give me "s f\ndation = ! belief t ,a is causally connect$ ) "s fact1 ,b1 :i* ,i h obs]v$4 ,& ! only k9d ( pa/ exp]i5ce :i* c give me any f\ndation = su* a belief is1 ,hume seems to say1 z foll[s3 ,i mu/1 he says1 h f\nd facts l ,a con/antly conjo9$ 9 ! pa/ ) facts l ,b4 ,?is is :at he says2 b we mu/ n1 ,i ?9k1 press 8 words too /rictly4 ,i may1 = in/ance1 "k t ,a is probably a fact1 ev5 :]e ! conjunction ( facts l x ) facts l ,b has n be5 q con/ant4 ,or in/ead ( obs]v+ facts l ,a conjo9$ ) facts l ,b1 ,i may h obs]v$ a :ole s]ies ( conjunctions--= in/ance1 betwe5 ,a & ,c1 ,c & ,d1 ,d & ,e1 & ,e & ,b2 & su* a s]ies1 h[ev] long1 w d q z well to e/abli% a causal connection betwe5 ,a & ,b1 z if ,i _h directly obs]v$ conjunctions betwe5 ,a & ,b !mselves4 ,su* modifications z ?is1 ,hume w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 c]ta9ly all[4 ,b1 all[+ = !m1 8 pr9ciple is1 ,i ?9k1 q cle>4 ,i c1 he holds1 nev] "k any fact :atev]1 :i* ,i h n myself obs]v$1 unless ,i h obs]v$ simil> facts 9 ! pa/ & h obs]v$ t !y 7 conjo9$ 7directly or indirectly7 ) facts simil> to "s fact :i* ,i d n[ obs]ve or rememb]4 ,9 ?is s5se1 he holds1 all our k ( facts1 beyond ! rea* ( our own obs]vation1 is f\nd$ on exp]i5ce4 ,?is is ,hume's prim>y pr9ciple4 ,b :at consequ5ces does he ?9k w foll[ f x1 z to ! k9d ( facts1 beyond our own obs]vation1 :i* we c "k8 ,we may1 ,i ?9k1 di/+ui% ?ree entirely diff]5t views z to its consequ5ces1 :i* he sugge/s 9 diff]5t p>ts ( 8 "w4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 :]e he is specially engag$ 9 expla9+ ?is prim>y pr9ciple1 he c]ta9ly seems to suppose t all propositions ( ! k9d1 :i* we assume mo/ univ]sally 9 ev]yday life1 may be f\nd$ on exp]i5ce 9 ! s5se requir$4 ,he supposes t we h ?is f\ndation 9 exp]i5ce = su* beliefs z t a /one w fall1 or fire burn2 t ,julius ,caes> 0 murd]$2 t ! sun w rise to-morr[2 t all m5 are mortal ,he speaks z if exp]i5ce did n m]ely r5d] su* beliefs probable1 b actually prov$ !m to be true4 ,! argum5ts f exp]i5ce 9 _! fav\r are1 he says1 su* z leave no room = d\bt or opposition4 ,! only k9ds ( belief1 :i* he def9itely m5tions z n f\nd$ on exp]i5ce1 are popul> sup]/itions on ! "o h&1 & c]ta9 religi\s & philosophical beliefs1 on ! o!r4 ,he seems to suppose t a few 7a v few7 religi\s beliefs may1 p]haps1 be f\nd$ on exp]i5ce4 ,b z reg>ds mo/ ( ! specific doctr9es ( ,*ri/ianity1 = example1 he seems to be cle> t !y are n s f\nd$4 ,! belief 9 miracles is n f\nd$ on exp]i5ce2 nor is ! philosophical belief t e ev5t is caus$ by ! direct volition ( ! ,deity4 ,9 %ort1 x w\ld seem1 t 9 ?is doctr9e t our k ( unobs]v$ facts is conf9$ to su* z are f\nd$ on exp]i5ce1 he means to draw ! l9e v mu* :]e x is drawn by ! famili> doctr9e :i* is call$ ,agno/icism4 ,we c "k su* facts z are ass]t$ 9 books on hi/ory1 geography or a/ronomy1 or on politics1 physics & *emi/ry1 because su* ass]tions may be f\nd$ on exp]i5ce2 b we _c "k ! great] "p ( ! facts ass]t$ 9 books ( div9ity or s*ool metaphysics1 because su* ass]tions h no f\ndation 9 exp]i5ce4 ,?is1 ,i ?9k1 0 cle>ly "o ( ,hume's views4 ,he meant to fix ! limits ( our k at a po9t :i* w\ld exclude mo/ religi\s propositions & a great _m philosophical ones1 z incapable ( be+ kn[n2 b :i* w\ld include all ! o!r k9ds ( propositions1 :i* are mo/ univ]sally accept$ by common-s5se1 z capable ( be+ kn[n4 ,& he ?\ght t1 s f> z matt]s ( fact beyond ! rea* ( our p]sonal obs]vation are conc]n$1 ?is po9t co9cid$ ) t at :i* ! possibility ( f\ndation on exp]i5ce ceases4 ,b1 if we turn to ano!r "p ( 8 "w1 we f9d a v diff]5t view sugge/$4 ,9 a q di/9ct section ( bo? 8 books1 he inve/igates ! beliefs :i* we ent]ta9 conc]n+ ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal objects4 ,& he di/+ui%es two diff]5t k9ds ( belief :i* may be held on ?is subject4 ,almo/ all mank9d1 & philosoph]s !mselves1 = ! greate/ "p ( _! lives1 believe1 he says1 t ! v ?+s !y feel & see are ext]nal objects1 9 ! s5se t !y cont9ue to exi/1 ev5 :5 we cease to feel or see !m4 ,philosoph]s1 on ! o!r h&1 h be5 l$ to reject ?is op9ion & to suppose 7:5 !y reflect7 t :at we actually p]ceive by ! s5ses nev] exi/s except :5 we p]ceive x1 b t !re are o!r ext]nal objects1 :i* d exi/ indep5d5tly ( u1 & :i* cause u to p]ceive :at we d p]ceive4 ,hume inve/igates bo? ( ^! op9ions1 at great l5g? 9 ! ,treatise1 & mu* m briefly 9 ! ,enquiry1 & comes to ! conclusion1 9 bo? books1 t nei!r ( !m c be f\nd$ on exp]i5ce1 9 ! s5se he has def9$4 ,z reg>ds ! fir/ ( !m1 ! vulg> op9ion1 he does seem to admit 9 ! ,treatise t x is1 9 a s5se1 f\nd$ on exp]i5ce2 b n1 he insi/s1 9 ! s5se def9$4 ,& he seems also to ?9k t1 ap>t f ?is fact1 !re are conclusive reasons = hold+ t ! op9ion _c be true4 ,& z reg>ds ! philosophical op9ion1 he says t any belief 9 ext]nal objects1 :i* we nev] p]ceive b :i* cause our p]ceptions1 _c possibly be f\nd$ on exp]i5ce1 = ! simple reason t if x 71 we %\ld ne$ to h directly obs]v$ "s ( ^! objects & _! conjunction ) :at we d p]ceive1 :i* ex hypo!si1 we _c h done1 s9ce we nev] d directly obs]ve any ext]nal object4 ,hume1 !re=e1 concludes1 9 ?is "p ( 8 "w1 t we _c "k ( ! exi/5ce ( any ext]nal object :atev]4 ,& ?\gh 9 all t he says ^u ?is subject1 he is pla9ly ?9k+ only ( mat]ial objects1 ! pr9ciples by :i* he tries to prove t we _c "k ^! mu/1 ,i ?9k1 prove equally well t we _c "k any ext]nal object :atev]--n ev5 ! exi/5ce ( any o!r human m9d4 ,8 argum5t is3 ,we _c directly obs]ve any object :atev]1 except su* z exi/ only :5 we obs]ve !m2 we _c1 !re=e1 obs]ve any con/ant conjunctions except betwe5 objects ( ?is k9d3 & h5ce we c h no f\ndation 9 exp]i5ce = any proposition :i* ass]ts ! exi/5ce ( any o!r k9d ( object1 & _c1 !re=e1 "k any su* proposition to be true4 ,& ?is argum5t mu/ pla9ly apply to all ! feel+s1 ?\ghts & p]ceptions ( o!r m5 j z mu* z to mat]ial objects4 ,i c nev] "k t any p]ception ( m9e1 or any?+ :i* ,i d obs]ve1 mu/ h be5 caus$ by any o!r man1 because ,i c nev] directly obs]ve a con/ant conjunction betwe5 any o!r man's ?\ghts or feel+s or int5tions & any?+ :i* ,i directly obs]ve3 ,i _c1 !re=e1 "k t any o!r man ev] _h any ?\ghts or feel+s--or1 9 %ort1 t any man beside myself ev] exi/$4 ,! view1 !re=e1 :i* ,hume sugge/s 9 ?is "p ( 8 "w1 flatly contradicts ! view :i* he at fir/ seem$ to hold4 ,he n[ says we _c "k t a /one w fall1 t fire w burn1 or ! sun w rise to-morr[4 ,all t ,i c possibly "k1 accord+ to 8 pres5t pr9ciples1 is t ,i %all see a /one fall1 %all feel ! fire burn1 %all see ! sun rise to-morr[4 ,i _c ev5 "k t any o!r m5 w see ^! ?+s2 = ,i _c "k t any o!r m5 exi/4 ,= ! same reason1 ,i _c "k t ,julius ,caes> 0 murd]$1 or t all m5 are mortal4 ,= ^! are propositions ass]t+ ext]nal facts--facts :i* don't exi/ only at ! mom5t :5 ,i obs]ve !m2 &1 accord+ to 8 pres5t doctr9e1 ,i _c possibly "k any su* proposition to be true4 ,no man1 9 %ort1 c "k any proposition ab\t matt]s ( fact to be true1 except su* z m]ely ass]t some?+ ab\t 8 own /ates ( m9d1 pa/1 pres5t or future--ab\t ^! or ab\t :at he himself has directly obs]v$1 is obs]v+1 or w obs]ve4 ,"h1 !re=e1 we h a v diff]5t view sugge/$1 z to ! limits ( human k4 ,& ev5 ?is is n all4 ,!re is yet a ?ird view1 inconsi/5t ) bo? ( ^!1 :i* ,hume sugge/s 9 "s p>ts ( 8 "w4 ,s f> z we h yet se51 he has n 9 any way contradict$ 8 orig9al supposition t we c "k "s matt]s ( fact1 :i* we h nev] ourselves obs]v$4 ,9 ! second !ory1 :i* ,i h j /at$1 he does n call 9 "q ! view t ,i c "k all su* matt]s ( fact z ,i "k to be causally connect$ ) facts :i* ,i h obs]v$1 nor ! view t ,i c "k "s facts to be ?us causally connect$4 ,all t he has done is to "q :e!r ,i c "k any ext]nal fact to be causally connect$ ) any?+ :i* ,i obs]ve2 he w\ld /ill all[ t ,i may be able to "k t future /ates ( my own1 or pa/ /ates1 :i* ,i h =gott51 are causally connect$ ) ^? :i* ,i n[ obs]ve or rememb]2 & t ,i may "k !re=e1 9 "s cases1 :at ,i %all exp]i5ce 9 ! future1 or h exp]i5c$ 9 ! pa/ b h n[ =gott54 ,b 9 "s p>ts ( 8 "w he does seem to "q :e!r any man c "k ev5 z mu* z ?is3 he seems to "q :e!r we c ev] "k any fact :atev] to be causally connect$ ) any o!r fact4 ,=1 aft] lay+ x d[n1 z we saw above1 t we _c "k any fact1 ,a1 to be causally connect$ ) ano!r1 ,b1 unless we h exp]i5c$ 9 ! pa/ a con/ant conjunction betwe5 facts l ,a & facts l ,b1 he goes on to ask :at f\ndation we h = ! conclusion t ,a & ,b are causally connect$1 ev5 :5 we h 9 ! pa/ exp]i5c$ a con/ant conjunction betwe5 !m4 ,he po9ts out t f ! fact t ,a has be5 con/antly conjo9$ ) ,b 9 ! pa/1 x does n foll[ t x ev] w be s aga94 ,x does n foll[1 !re=e1 t ! two really are causally connect$ 9 ! s5se t1 :5 ! "o occurs1 ! o!r always w occur also4 ,& he concludes1 = ?is & o!r reasons1 t no argum5t c assure u t1 because !y h be5 con/antly conjo9$ 9 ! pa/1 !re=e !y really are causally connect$4 ,:at1 !n1 he asks1 is ! f\ndation = su* an inf]5ce8 ,cu/om1 he concludes1 is ! only f\ndation4 ,x is no?+ b cu/om :i* induces u to believe t1 because two facts h be5 con/antly conjo9$ on _m occasions1 !re=e !y w be s on all occasions4 ,we h1 !re=e1 no bett] f\ndation ?an cu/om = any conclusion :atev] z to facts :i* we h n obs]v$4 ,& c we be said really to "k any fact1 = :i* we h no bett] f\ndation ?an ?is8 ,hume himself1 x mu/ be obs]v$1 nev] says t we c't4 ,b he has be5 con/antly int]pret$ z if ! conclusion t we c't really "k any "o fact to be causally connect$ ) any o!r1 did foll[ f ?is doctr9e ( 84 ,& !re is1 ,i ?9k1 c]ta9ly mu* excuse = ?is int]pretation 9 ! tone 9 :i* he speaks4 ,he does seem to sugge/ t a belief :i* is m]ely f\nd$ on cu/om1 c sc>cely be "o :i* we "k to be true4 ,&1 inde$1 he owns himself t1 :5 he consid]s t ?is is our only f\ndation = any su* belief1 he is sometimes tempt$ to d\bt :e!r we d "k any fact :atev]1 except ^? :i* we directly obs]ve4 ,he does1 !re=e1 at lea/ sugge/ ! view t e man's k is entirely conf9$ to ^? facts1 :i* he is directly obs]v+ at ! mom5t1 or :i* he has obs]v$ 9 ! pa/1 & n[ rememb]s4 ,we see1 !n1 t ,hume sugge/s1 at lea/1 ?ree entirely diff]5t views z to ! consequ5ces ( 8 orig9al doctr9e4 ,8 orig9al doctr9e 0 t1 z reg>ds matt]s ( fact beyond ! rea* ( our own actual obs]vation1 ! k ( ea* ( u is /rictly limit$ to ^? = :i* we h a basis 9 our own exp]i5ce4 ,& 8 fir/ view z to ! consequ5ces ( ?is doctr9e 0 t x does %[ u to be incapable ( kn[+ a good _m religi\s & philosophical propositions1 :i* _m m5 h claim$ t !y knew2 b t x by no means d5ies our capacity ( kn[+ ! va/ majority ( facts beyond our own obs]vation1 :i* we all commonly suppose t we "k4 ,8 second view1 on ! o!r h&1 is t x cuts (f at once all possibility ( our kn[+ ! va/ majority ( ^! facts2 s9ce he implies t we _c h any basis 9 exp]i5ce = ass]t+ any ext]nal fact :atev]--any fact1 t is1 except facts relat+ to our own actual pa/ & future obs]vations4 ,& 8 ?ird view is m sceptical /ill1 s9ce x sugge/s t we _c really "k any fact :atev]1 beyond ! rea* ( our pres5t obs]vation or memory1 ev5 :]e we h a basis 9 exp]i5ce = su* a fact3 x sugge/s t exp]i5ce _c ev] let u "k t any two ?+s are causally connect$1 & !re=e t x _c give u k ( any fact bas$ on ?is relation4 ,:at are we to ?9k ( ^! ?ree views1 & ( ! orig9al doctr9e f :i* ,hume seems to inf] !m8 ,z reg>ds ! la/ two views1 x may p]haps be ?\ght t !y are too absurd to des]ve any s]i\s consid]ation4 ,x is1 9 fact1 absurd to sugge/ t ,i d n "k any ext]nal facts :atev]2 t ,i d n "k1 = in/ance1 ev5 t !re are any m5 beside myself4 ,& ,hume himself1 x might seem1 does n s]i\sly expect or wi% u to accept ^! views4 ,he po9ts out1 ) reg>d to all su* excessively sceptical op9ions t we _c cont9ue to believe !m = long toge!r--t1 at lea/1 we _c1 = long toge!r1 avoid believ+ ?+s flatly inconsi/5t ) !m4 ,! philosoph] may believe1 :5 he is philosophis+1 t no man kn[s ( ! exi/5ce ( any o!r man or ( any mat]ial object2 b at o!r times he w inevitably believe1 z we all d1 t he does "k ( ! exi/5ce ( ?is man & ( t1 & ev5 ( ?is & t mat]ial object4 ,!re c1 !re=e1 be no "q ( mak+ all our beliefs consi/5t ) su* views z ?is ( nev] believ+ any?+ t is inconsi/5t ) !m4 ,& x may1 !re=e1 seem useless to discuss !m4 ,b 9 fact1 x by no means foll[s t1 because we are n able to adh]e consi/5tly to a giv5 view1 !re=e t view is false2 nor does x foll[ t we may n s9c]ely believe x1 :5ev] we are philosophis+1 ev5 ?\gh ! mom5t we cease to philosophise1 or ev5 be=e1 we may be =c$ to contradict x4 ,& philosoph]s d1 9 fact1 s9c]ely believe su* ?+s z ?is--?+s :i* flatly contradict ! va/ majority ( ! ?+s :i* !y believe at o!r times4 ,ev5 ,hume1 ,i ?9k1 does s9c]ely wi% to p]suade u t we _c "k ( ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal mat]ial objects--t ?is is a philosophic tru?1 :i* we ought1 if we c1 s long z we are philosophis+1 to believe4 ,_m p1 ,i ?9k1 are c]ta9ly tempt$1 9 _! philosophic mom5ts1 to believe su* ?+s2 &1 s9ce ?is is s1 x is1 ,i ?9k1 wor? :ile to consid] s]i\sly :at argum5ts c be br\ght aga9/ su* views4 ,x is wor? :ile to consid] :e!r !y are views :i* we ought to hold z philosophical op9ions1 ev5 if x be q c]ta9 t we %all nev] be able to make ! views :i* we ent]ta9 at o!r times consi/5t ) !m4 ,& x is ! m wor? :ile1 because ! "q h[ we c prove or disprove su* extreme views z ^!1 has a be>+ on ! "q h[ we c1 9 any case :atev]1 prove or disprove t we d really "k1 :at we suppose ourselves to "k4 ,:at argum5ts1 !n1 are !re = or aga9/ ! extreme view t no man c "k any ext]nal fact :atev]2 & ! /ill m extreme view t no man c "k any matt] ( fact :atev]1 except ^? :i* he is directly obs]v+ at ! mom5t1 or has obs]v$ 9 ! pa/ & n[ rememb]s8 ,x may be po9t$ out1 9 ! fir/ place1 t1 if ^! views are true1 !n at lea/ no man c possibly "k !m to be s4 ,:at ^! views ass]t is t ,i _c "k any ext]nal fact :atev]4 ,x foll[s1 !re=e1 t ,i _c "k t !re are any o!r m51 beside myself1 & t !y are l me 9 ?is respect4 ,any philosoph] :o ass]ts positively t o!r m51 equally ) himself1 are incapable ( kn[+ any ext]nal facts1 is1 9 t v ass]tion1 contradict+ himself1 s9ce he implies t he does "k a great _m facts ab\t ! k ( o!r m54 ,no "o1 !re=e1 c be entitl$ to ass]t positively t human k is limit$ 9 ?is way1 s9ce1 9 ass]t+ x positively1 he is imply+ t 8 own k is n s limit$4 ,x _c be prop]1 ev5 9 our philosophic mom5ts1 to take up su* an attitude z ?is4 ,no "o1 !re=e1 c "k positively t m5 9 g5]al1 are incapable ( kn[+ ext]nal facts4 ,b /ill1 al?\gh we _c "k x1 x rema9s possible t ! view %\ld be a true "o4 ,nay1 m1 x rema9s possible t a man %\ld "k t he himself is incapable ( kn[+ any ext]nal facts1 & t1 if !re are any o!r m5 ^: faculties are only simil> to 8 own1 !y also mu/ be incapable ( kn[+ any4 ,! argum5t j us$ obvi\sly does n apply aga9/ su* a position z ?is4 ,x only applies aga9/ ! position t m5 9 g5]al positively are incapable ( kn[+ ext]nal facts3 x does n apply aga9/ ! position t ! philosoph] himself is incapable ( kn[+ any1 or aga9/ ! position t !re are possibly o!r m5 9 ! same case1 & t1 if _! faculties are simil> to ! philosoph]'s1 !y c]ta9ly w\ld be 9 x4 ,i d n contradict myself by ma9ta9+ positively t ,i "k no ext]nal facts1 ?\gh ,i d contradict myself if ,i ma9ta9 t ,i am only "o among o!r m51 & t no man kn[s any ext]nal facts4 ,s f>1 !n1 z ,hume m]ely ma9ta9s t he is incapable ( kn[+ any ext]nal facts1 & t !re may be o!r m5 l him 9 ?is respect1 ! argum5t j us$ is n valid aga9/ 8 position4 ,c any conclusive argum5ts be f\nd aga9/ x8 ,x seems to me t su* a position mu/1 9 a c]ta9 s5se1 be q incapable ( dispro(4 ,s mu* mu/ be grant$ to any sceptic :o feels incl9$ to hold x4 ,any valid argum5t :i* c be br\ght aga9/ x mu/ be ( ! nature ( a petitio pr9cipii3 x mu/ beg ! "q at issue4 ,h[ is ! sceptic to prove to himself t he does "k any ext]nal facts8 ,he c only d x by br++ =w>d "s in/ance ( an ext]nal fact1 :i* he does "k2 &1 9 assum+ t he does "k ?is "o1 he is1 ( c\rse1 begg+ ! "q4 ,x is !re=e q impossible = any "o to prove1 9 "o /rict s5se ( ! t]m1 t he does "k any ext]nal facts4 ,i c only prove t ,i d1 by assum+ t 9 "s p>ticul> in/ance1 ,i actually d "k "o4 ,t is to say1 ! s-call$ pro( mu/ assume ! v ?+ :i* x pret5ds to prove4 ,! only pro( t we d "k ext]nal facts lies 9 ! simple fact t we d "k !m4 ,& ! sceptic c1 ) p]fect int]nal consi/5cy1 d5y t he does "k any4 ,b x c1 ,i ?9k1 be %[n t he has no reason = d5y+ x4 ,& 9 p>ticul> x may1 ,i ?9k1 be easily se5 t ! argum5ts :i* ,hume uses 9 fav\r ( ?is position h no conclusive =ce4 ,to beg9 )1 8 argum5ts1 9 bo? cases1 dep5d ^u ! two orig9al assumptions1 7#a7 t we _c "k any fact1 :i* we h n obs]v$1 unless we "k x to be causally connect$ ) "s fact :i* we h obs]v$1 & 7#b7 t we h no reason = assum+ any causal connection1 except :]e we h exp]i5c$ "s in/ances ( conjunction betwe5 ! two facts connect$4 ,& bo? ( ^! assumptions may1 ( c\rse1 be d5i$4 ,x is j z easy to d5y !m1 z to d5y t ,i d "k any ext]nal facts4 ,&1 if ^! two assumptions did really lead to ! conclusion t ,i _c "k any1 x w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 be prop] to d5y !m3 we might fairly reg>d ! fact t !y l$ to ?is absurd conclusion z disprov+ !m4 ,b1 9 fact1 ,i ?9k x may be easily se5 t !y d n lead to x4 ,let u consid]1 fir/ ( all1 ,hume's mo/ sceptical argum5t 7! argum5t :i* he m]ely sugge/s74 ,?is argum5t sugge/s t1 s9ce our only reason = suppos+ two facts to be causally connect$ is t we h f\nd !m con/antly conjo9$ 9 ! pa/1 & s9ce x does n foll[ f ! fact t !y h be5 conjo9$ ev] s _m times1 t !y always w be s1 !re=e we _c "k t !y always w be s1 & h5ce _c "k t !y are causally connect$4 ,b obvi\sly ! conclusion does n foll[4 ,we mu/1 ,i ?9k1 grant ! premiss t1 f ! fact t two ?+s h be5 conjo9$1 no matt] h[ (t51 x does n /rictly foll[ t !y always are conjo9$4 ,b x by no means foll[s f ?is t we may n "k t1 z a matt] ( fact1 :5 two ?+s are conjo9$ suffici5tly (t51 !y are also always conjo9$4 ,we may q well "k _m ?+s :i* d n logically foll[ f any?+ else :i* we "k4 ,& s1 9 ?is case1 we may "k t two ?+s are causally connect$1 al?\gh ?is does n logically foll[ f our pa/ exp]i5ce1 nor yet f any?+ else t we "k4 ,&1 z = ! cont5tion t our belief 9 causal connections is m]ely bas$ on cu/om1 we may1 inde$1 admit t cu/om w\ld n be a suffici5t reason = conclud+ ! belief to be true4 ,b ! m]e fact 7if x be a fact7 t ! belief is only caus$ by cu/om1 is also no suffici5t reason = conclud+ t we c n "k x to be true4 ,cu/om may produce beliefs1 :i* we d "k to be true1 ev5 ?\gh x be admitt$ t x does n necess>ily produce !m4 ,& z = ,hume's argum5t to prove t we c nev] "k any ext]nal object to be causally connect$ ) any?+ :i* we actually obs]ve1 x is1 ,i ?9k1 obvi\sly fallaci\s4 ,9 ord] to prove ?is1 he has1 z he recognises1 to disprove bo? ( two !ories4 ,he has1 fir/ ( all1 to disprove :at he calls ! vulg> !ory--! !ory t we c "k ! v ?+s :i* we see or feel to be ext]nal objects2 t is to say1 c "k t ^! v ?+s exi/ at times :5 we d n obs]ve !m4 ,& ev5 "h1 ,i ?9k1 8 argum5ts are obvi\sly inconclusive4 ,b we ne$ n /ay to consid] !m1 because1 9 ord] to prove t we _c "k any ext]nal objects1 he has also to disprove :at he calls ! philosophic !ory--! !ory t we c "k ?+s :i* we d obs]ve1 to be caus$ by ext]nal objects :i* we nev] obs]ve4 ,if1 !re=e1 8 attempt to disprove ?is !ory fails1 8 pro( t we _c "k any ext]nal objects also fails2 & ,i ?9k x is easy to see t 8 dispro( does fail4 ,x am\nts m]ely to ?is3 ,t we _c1 ex hypo!si1 ev] obs]ve ^! suppos$ ext]nal objects1 & !re=e _c obs]ve !m to be con/antly conjo9$ ) any objects :i* we d obs]ve4 ,b :at foll[s f ?is8 ,8 own !ory ab\t ! k ( causal connection is n t 9 ord] to "k ,a to be ! cause ( ,b1 we mu/ h obs]v$ ,a itself to be conjo9$ ) ,b2 b only t we mu/ h obs]v$ objects l ,a to be con/antly conjo9$ ) objects l ,b4 ,& :at is to prev5t an ext]nal object f be+ l "s object :i* we h =m]ly obs]v$8 ,suppose ,i h frequ5tly obs]v$ a fact l ,a to be conjo9$ ) a fact l ,b3 & suppose ,i n[ obs]ve ,b1 on an occasion :5 ,i d n obs]ve any?+ l ,a4 ,!re is no reason1 on ,hume's pr9ciples1 :y ,i %\ld n conclude t ,a does exi/ on ?is occasion1 ev5 ?\gh ,i d n obs]ve x2 & t x is1 !re=e1 an ext]nal object4 ,x w1 ( c\rse1 diff] f any object :i* ,i h ev] obs]v$1 9 respect ( ! simple fact t x is n obs]v$ by me1 :]eas !y 74 ,!re is1 !re=e1 ?is "o respect 9 :i* x mu/ be unlike any?+ :i* ,i h ev] obs]v$4 ,b ,hume has nev] said any?+ to %[ t unlik5ess 9 ?is s+le respect is suffici5t to invalidate ! inf]5ce4 ,x may q well be l objects :i* ,i h obs]v$ 9 all o!r respects2 & ?is degree ( lik5ess may1 accord+ to 8 pr9ciples1 be q suffici5t to ju/ify u 9 conclud+ its exi/5ce4 ,9 %ort1 :5 ,hume argues t we _c possibly le>n by exp]i5ce ( ! exi/5ce ( any ext]nal objects1 he is1 ,i ?9k1 pla9ly committ+ ! fallacy ( suppos+ t1 because we _c1 ex hypo!sis h ev] obs]v$ any object :i* actually is ext]nal1 !re=e we c nev] h obs]v$ any object l an ext]nal "o4 ,b pla9ly we may h obs]v$ objects l !m 9 all respects except ! s+le "o t ^! h be5 obs]v$ :]eas ! o!rs h n4 ,& ev5 a less degree ( lik5ess ?an ?is w\ld1 accord+ to 8 pr9ciples1 be q suffici5t to ju/ify an inf]5ce ( causal connection4 ,hume does n1 !re=e1 br+ =w>d any argum5ts at all suffici5t to prove ei!r t he _c "k any "o object to be causally connect$ ) any o!r or t he _c "k any ext]nal fact4 ,&1 inde$1 ,i ?9k x is pla9 t no conclusive argum5t c\ld possibly be advanc$ 9 fav\r ( ^! positions4 ,x w\ld always be at lea/ z easy to d5y ! argum5t z to d5y t we d "k ext]nal facts4 ,we may1 !re=e1 ea* "o ( u1 safely conclude t we d "k ext]nal facts2 &1 if we d1 !n !re is no reason :y we %\ld n also "k t o!r m5 d ! same4 ,!re is no reason :y we %\ld n1 9 ?is respect1 make our philosophical op9ions agree ) :at we necess>ily believe at o!r times4 ,!re is no reason :y ,i %\ld n confid5tly ass]t t ,i d really "k "s ext]nal facts1 al?\gh ,i _c prove ! ass]tion except by simply assum+ t ,i d4 ,i am1 9 fact1 z c]ta9 ( ?is z ( any?+2 & z reasonably c]ta9 ( x4 ,b j z ,i am c]ta9 t ,i d "k "s ext]nal facts1 s ,i am also c]ta9 t !re are o!rs :i* ,i d n "k4 ,& ! "q rema9s3 ,does ! l9e betwe5 ! two fall1 :]e ,hume says x falls8 ,is x true t ! only ext]nal facts ,i "k are facts = :i* ,i h a basis 9 my own exp]i5ce8 ,& t ,i _c "k any facts :atev]1 beyond ! rea* ( my own obs]vation & memory1 except ^? = :i* ,i h su* a basis8 ,?is1 x seems to me1 is ! mo/ s]i\s "q :i* ,hume raises4 ,& x %\ld be obs]v$ t 8 own attitude t[>ds x is v diff]5t f 8 attitude t[>ds ! sceptical views :i* we h j be5 consid]+4 ,^! sceptical views he did n expect or wi% u to accept1 except 9 philosophic mom5ts4 ,he decl>es t we _c1 9 ord9>y life1 avoid believ+ ?+s :i* are inconsi/5t ) !m2 &1 9 s decl>+1 he1 ( c\rse1 implies incid5tally t !y are false3 s9ce he implies t he himself has a great deal ( k z to :at we c & _c believe 9 ord9>y life4 ,b1 z reg>ds ! view t our k ( matt]s ( fact beyond our own obs]vation is entirely conf9$ to su* z are f\nd$ on exp]i5ce1 he nev] sugge/s t x is impossible t all our beliefs %\ld be consi/5t ) ?is view1 & he does seem to ?9k x em95tly desirable t !y %\ld be4 ,he decl>es t any ass]tion ) reg>d to su* matt]s1 :i* is n f\nd$ on exp]i5ce1 c be no?+ b sophi/ry & illusion2 & t all books :i* are compos$ ( su* ass]tions %\ld be committ$ to ! flames4 ,he seems1 !re=e1 to ?9k t "h we really h a te/ by :i* we may det]m9e :at we %\ld or %\ld n believe1 on all occasions3 any view on su* matt]s1 = :i* we h no f\ndation 9 exp]i5ce1 is a view :i* we _c "k to be ev5 probably true1 & :i* we %\ld nev] accept1 if we c help x4 ,is !re any ju/ification = ?is /rong view8 ,x is1 ( c\rse1 ab/ractly possible t we d really "k1 )\t ! help ( exp]i5ce1 "s matt]s ( fact1 :i* we nev] h obs]v$4 ,j z we "k matt]s ( fact1 :i* we h obs]v$1 )\t ! ne$ ( any fur!r evid5ce1 & j z we "k1 = in/ance1 t #bbd1 )\t ! ne$ ( any pro(1 x is possible t we may "k1 directly & imm$iately1 )\t ! ne$ ( any basis 9 exp]i5ce1 "s facts :i* we nev] h obs]v$4 ,?is is c]ta9ly possible1 9 ! same s5se 9 :i* x is possible t ,i d n really "k any ext]nal facts3 no conclusive dispro( c be br\ght aga9/ ei!r position4 ,we mu/ make assumptions z to :at facts we d "k & d n "k1 be=e we c proce$ to discuss :e!r or n all ( ! =m] are bas$ on exp]i5ce2 & none ( ^! assumptions c1 9 ! la/ resort1 be conclusively prov$4 ,we may (f] "o ( !m 9 pro( ( ano!r2 b x w always be possible to dispute ! "o :i* we (f] 9 pro(4 ,b !re are1 9 fact1 c]ta9 k9ds ( ?+s :i* we univ]sally assume t we d "k or d n "k1 j z we assume t we d "k "s ext]nal facts2 & if among all ! ?+s :i* we "k z c]ta9ly z ?is1 !re %\ld turn out to be none = :i* we h no basis 9 exp]i5ce1 ,hume's view w\ld ,i ?9k1 be z fully prov$ z x is capable ( be+4 ,! "q is3 ,c x be prov$ 9 ?is s5se8 ,among all ! facts beyond our own obs]vation1 :i* we "k mo/ c]ta9ly1 are !re any :i* are c]ta9ly n bas$ ^u exp]i5ce8 ,= my "p1 ,i confess1 ,i _c feel c]ta9 :at is ! "r answ] to ?is "q3 ,i _c tell :e!r ,hume 0 "r or wrong4 ,b if he 0 wrong--if !re are any matt]s ( fact1 beyond our own obs]vation1 :i* we "k = c]ta91 & :i* yet we "k directly & imm$iately1 )\t any basis 9 exp]i5ce1 we are1 ,i ?9k1 fac$ ) an em95tly int]e/+ problem4 ,= x is1 ,i ?9k1 z c]ta9 z any?+ c be t !re are "s k9ds ( facts ) reg>d to :i* ,hume 0 "r--t !re are "s k9ds ( facts :i* we _c "k )\t ! evid5ce ( exp]i5ce4 ,i c\ld n "k1 = in/ance1 )\t "s su* evid5ce1 su* a fact z t ,julius ,caes> 0 murd]$4 ,= su* a fact ,i mu/1 9 ! fir/ in/ance1 h ! evid5ce ( o!r p]sons2 & if ,i am to "k t _! evid5ce is tru/wor?y1 ,i mu/ h "s gr\nd 9 exp]i5ce = suppos+ x to be s4 ,!re are1 !re=e1 "s k9ds ( facts :i* we _c "k )\t ! evid5ce ( exp]i5ce & obs]vation4 ,& if x is to be ma9ta9$ t !re are o!rs1 :i* we c "k )\t any su* evid5ce1 x ought to be po9t$ out exactly :at k9d ( facts ^! are1 & 9 :at respects !y diff] f ^? :i* we _c "k )\t ! help ( exp]i5ce4 ,hume gives u a v cle> division ( ! k9ds ( propositions :i* we c "k to be true4 ,!re are1 fir/ ( all1 "s propositions :i* ass]t relations ( ideas 2 !re are1 secondly1 propositions :i* ass]t matt]s ( fact :i* we ourselves are actually obs]v+1 or h obs]v$ & n[ rememb]2 & !re are1 ?irdly1 propositions :i* ass]t matt]s ( fact :i* we h nev] actually obs]v$1 b = believ+ 9 :i* we h "s f\ndation 9 our pa/ obs]vations4 ,& x is1 ,i ?9k1 c]ta9 t "s propositions1 :i* we "k z c]ta9ly z we "k any?+1 d belong to ea* ( ^! ?ree classes4 ,i "k1 = in/ance1 t twice two are f\r2 ,i "k by direct obs]vation t ,i am n[ see+ ^! words1 t ,i am writ+1 & by memory t ?is aft]noon ,i saw ,/4 ,paul's2 & ,i "k also t ,julius ,caes> 0 murd]$1 & ,i h "s f\ndation 9 exp]i5ce = ?is belief1 ?\gh ,i did n myself witness ! murd]4 ,d any ( ^? propositions1 :i* we "k z c]ta9ly z we "k ^! & _! l1 n belong to ei!r ( ^! ?ree classes8 ,mu/ we add a f\r? class consi/+ ( propositions :i* resemble ! two la/1 9 respect ( ! fact t !y d ass]t matt]s ( fact1 b :i* diff] f !m1 9 t we "k !m nei!r by direct obs]vation nor by memory1 nor yet z a result ( previ\s obs]vations8 ,!re may1 p]haps1 be su* a f\r? class2 b1 if !re is1 x is1 ,i ?9k1 em95tly desirable t x %\ld be po9t$ out exactly :at propositions !y are :i* we d "k 9 ?is way2 & ?is1 s f> z ,i "k1 has nev] yet be5 done1 at all cle>ly1 by any philosoph]4 ,,! ,,/atus ,,( ,,s5se-,,data ,! t]m s5se-data is ambigu\s2 & !re=e ,i ?9k ,i _h bett] beg9 by try+ to expla9 :at ! class ( entities is ^: /atus ,i propose to discuss4 ,!re are sev]al diff]5t classes ( m5tal ev5ts1 all ( :i*1 ow+ to _! intr9sic resemblance to "o ano!r 9 c]ta9 respects1 may1 9 a wide s5se1 be call$ s5sory exp]i5ces1 al?\gh only "s among !m w\ld usually be call$ s5sations4 ,!re are 7#a7 ^? ev5ts1 happ5+ 9 our m9ds :ile we are awake1 :i* consi/ 9 ! exp]i5c+ ( "o ( ^? entities1 :i* are usually call$ images1 9 ! n>r[e/ s5se ( ! t]m4 ,ev]ybody di/+ui%es ^! ev5ts f s5sations prop]2 & yet ev]ybody admits t images intr9sically resemble ! entities :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 s5sations prop] 9 "s v important respect4 ,!re are 7#b7 ! s5sory exp]i5ces we h 9 dreams1 "s ( :i* w\ld c]ta9ly be said to be exp]i5ces ( images1 :ile o!rs might be said to be s5sations4 ,!re are 7#c7 halluc9ations1 & c]ta9 classes ( illusory s5sory exp]i5ces4 ,!re are 7#d7 ^? exp]i5ces1 :i* us$ to be call$ ! hav+ ( aft]-images1 b :i* psy*ologi/s n[ say ought r to be call$ aft]-s5sations4 ,& !re are1 f9ally1 7#e7 t class ( s5sory exp]i5ces1 :i* are imm5sely common] ?an any ( ! above1 & :i* may be call$ s5sations prop]1 if we agree to use ?is t]m 9 su* a way z to exclude exp]i5ces ( my fir/ f\r sorts4 ,e ev5t1 ( any "o ( ^! five classes1 consi/s 9 ! fact t an entity1 ( "s k9d or o!r1 is exp]i5c$4 ,! entity :i* is exp]i5c$ may be ( _m diff]5t k9ds2 x may1 = in/ance1 be a pat* ( col\r1 or a s\nd1 or a smell1 or a ta/e1 etc2 or x may be an image ( a pat* ( col\r1 an image ( a s\nd1 an image ( a smell1 an image ( a ta/e1 etc4 ,b1 :atev] be its nature1 ! entity :i* is exp]i5c$ mu/ 9 all cases be di/+ui%$ f ! fact or ev5t :i* consi/s 9 its be+ exp]i5c$2 s9ce by say+ t x is exp]i5c$ we mean t x has a relation ( a c]ta9 k9d to some?+ else4 ,we c1 !re=e1 speak n only ( exp]i5ces ( ^! five k9ds1 b also ( ! entities :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 exp]i5ces ( ^! k9ds2 & ! entity :i* is exp]i5c$ 9 su* an exp]i5ce is nev] id5tical ) ! exp]i5ce :i* consi/s 9 its be+ exp]i5c$4 ,b we c speak n only ( ! entities :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 exp]i5ces ( ?is k9d1 b also ( ! sort ( entities :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 exp]i5ces ( ?is k9d2 & ^! two classes may aga9 be diff]5t4 ,= a pat* ( col\r1 ev5 if x 7 n actually exp]i5c$1 w\ld be an entity ( ! same sort z "s :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 exp]i5ces ( ?is k9d3 & !re is no contradiction 9 suppos+ t !re are pat*es ( col\r1 :i* yet are n exp]i5c$2 s9ce by call+ a ?+ a pat* ( col\r we m]ely make a /atem5t ab\t its intr9sic quality1 & 9 no way ass]t t x has to any?+ else any ( ! relations :i* may be meant by say+ t x is exp]i5c$4 ,9 speak+1 !re=e1 ( ! sort ( entities :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 exp]i5ces ( ! five k9ds ,i h m5tion$1 we d n necess>ily conf9e ourselves to ^? :i* actually are exp]i5c$ 9 "s su* exp]i5ce3 we leave x an op5 "q :e!r ! two classes are id5tical or n4 ,& ! class ( entities1 ^: /atus ,i wi% to discuss1 consi/s precisely ( all ^?1 :e!r exp]i5c$ or n1 :i* are ( ! same sort z ^? :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 exp]i5ces ( ^! five k9ds4 ,i int5d to call ?is class ( entities ! class ( s5sibles2 s t ! "q ,i am to discuss c be express$ 9 ! =m3 ,:at is ! /atus ( s5sibles8 ,& x mu/ be rememb]$ t images & aft]-images are j z mu* s5sibles1 9 my s5se ( ! t]m1 z ! entities :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 s5sations prop]2 & s1 too1 are any pat*es ( col\r1 or s\nds1 or smells1 etc1 7if su* !re be71 :i* are n exp]i5c$ at all4 ,9 speak+ ( s5sibles z ! sort ( entities :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 s5sory exp]i5ces ,i seem to imply t all ! entities :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 s5sory exp]i5ces h "s common *>act]i/ic o!r ?an t :i* consi/s 9 _! be+ s exp]i5c$4 ,& ,i _c help ?9k+ t ?is is ! case1 9 spite ( ! fact t x is difficult to see :at intr9sic "* c be %>$ 9 common by entities s diff]5t f "o ano!r z are pat*es ( col\r1 s\nds1 smells1 ta/es1 etc4 ,=1 s f> z ,i c see1 "s non-s5sory exp]i5ces may be exactly simil> to s5sory ones 9 all intr9sic respects1 except t :at is exp]i5c$ 9 !m is diff]5t 9 k9d f :at is exp]i5c$ 9 any s5sory exp]i5ce3 ! relation meant by say+ t 9 !m some?+ is exp]i5c$ may be exactly ! same 9 k9d1 & s may ! exp]i5t4 ,&1 if ?is be s1 x seems to compel u to admit t ! di/9ction betwe5 s5sory & non-s5sory exp]i5ces is d]iv$ f t betwe5 s5sibles1 & non-s5sibles & n vice v]s4 ,i am incl9$1 !re=e1 to ?9k t all s5sibles1 9 spite ( ! great diff]5ces betwe5 !m1 h "s common intr9sic prop]ty1 :i* we recognise1 b :i* is unanalysable2 & t1 :5 we call an exp]i5ce s5sory1 :at we mean is n only t 9 x some?+ is exp]i5c$ 9 a p>ticul> way1 b also t ?is some?+ has ?is unanalysable prop]ty4 ,if ?is be s1 ! ultimate def9ition ( s5sibles w\ld be m]ely all entities :i* h ?is unanalysable prop]ty4 ,x seems to me t ! t]m s5se-data is (t5 us$1 & may be correctly us$1 simply z a synonym = s5sibles2 & ev]ybody1 ,i ?9k1 w\ld expect me1 9 discuss+ ! /atus ( s5se-data1 to discuss1 among o!r ?+s1 ! "q :e!r !re are any s5sibles :i* are n giv54 ,x is true t ! etymology ( ! t]m s5se-data sugge/s t no?+ %\ld be call$ a s5se-datum1 b :at is giv52 s t to talk ( a non-giv5 s5se-datum w\ld be a contradiction 9 t]ms4 ,b1 ( c\rse1 etymology is no safe guide ei!r z to ! actual or ! correct use ( t]ms2 & x seems to me t ! t]m s5se-data is (t51 & q prop]ly1 us$ m]ely = ! sort ( entities t are giv5 9 s5se1 & n 9 any way limit$ to ^? :i* are actually giv54 ,b ?\gh ,i ?9k ,i might ?us h us$ s5se-data q correctly in/ead ( s5sibles1 ,i ?9k ! latt] t]m is p]haps m conv5i5t2 because ?\gh nobody ought to be misl$ by etymologies1 s _m p 9 fact are s4 ,moreov] ! t]m s5se-data is sometimes limit$ 9 yet ano!r way1 viz1 to ! sort ( s5sibles :i* are exp]i5c$ 9 s5sations prop]2 s t 9 ?is s5se images w\ld n be s5se-data4 ,= bo? ^! reasons1 ,i ?9k x is p]haps bett] to drop ! t]m s5se-data altoge!r1 & to speak only ( s5sibles4 ,my discussion ( ! /atus ( s5sibles w be divid$ into two p>ts4 ,i %all fir/ consid] h[1 9 c]ta9 respects1 !y are relat$ to our m9ds2 & !n ,i %all consid] h[1 9 c]ta9 respects1 !y are relat$ to physical objects4 7,i7 7#a7 ,we c1 ,i ?9k1 di/+ui% pretty cle>ly at lea/ "o k9d ( relation :i* s5sibles1 ( all ! k9ds ,i h m5tion$1 d und\bt$ly sometimes h to our m9ds4 ,i d n[ see c]ta9 blacki% m>ks on a :iti% gr\nd1 & ,i he> c]ta9 s\nds :i* ,i attribute to ! tick+ ( my clock4 ,9 bo? cases ,i h to c]ta9 s5sibles--c]ta9 blacki% m>ks1 9 ! "o case1 & c]ta9 s\nds1 9 ! o!r--a k9d ( relation ) :i* we are all p]fectly famili>1 & :i* may be express$1 9 ! "o case1 by say+ t ,i actually see ! m>ks1 & 9 ! o!r1 by say+ t ,i actually he> ! s\nds4 ,x seems to me q evid5t t ! relation to ! m>ks :i* ,i express by say+ t ,i see !m1 is n diff]5t 9 k9d f ! relation to ! s\nds :i* ,i express by say+ t ,i he> !m4 ,see+ & he>+1 :5 ?us us$ z names = a relation :i* we may h to s5sibles1 are n names = diff]5t relations1 b m]ely express ! fact t1 9 ! "o case1 ! k9d ( s5sible to :i* ,i h a c]ta9 k9d ( relation is a pat* ( col\r1 :ile1 9 ! o!r case1 ! k9d ( s5sible to :i* ,i h ! same k9d ( relation is a s\nd4 ,& simil>ly :5 ,i say t ,i feel w>m or smell a smell ^! diff]5t v]bs d n express ! fact t ,i h a diff]5t k9d ( relation to ! s5sibles conc]n$1 b only t ,i h ! same k9d ( relation to a diff]5t k9d ( s5sible4 ,ev5 :5 ,i call up a visual image ( a s5sible ,i saw ye/]day1 or an auditory image ( a s\nd ,i he>d ye/]day1 ,i h to ^? images exactly ! same k9d ( relation :i* ,i h to ! pat*es ( col\r ,i n[ see & :i* ,i _h ye/]day to ^? ,i saw !n4 ,b ?is k9d ( relation1 :i* ,i sometimes h to s5sibles ( all sorts ( diff]5t k9ds1 images z well z o!rs1 is evid5tly q diff]5t 9 k9d f ano!r relation :i* ,i may also h to s5sibles4 ,aft] look+ at ?is black m>k1 ,i may turn away my head or close my eyes1 & !n ,i no long] actually see ! m>k ,i saw j n[4 ,i may1 inde$1 h 7,i myself actually d h at ?is mom5t7 a visual image ( ! m>k be=e my m9d2 & to ?is image ,i d n[ h exactly ! same k9d ( relation :i* ,i _h j n[ to ! m>k itself4 ,b ! image is n id5tical ) ! m>k ( :i* x is an image2 & to ! m>k itself x is q c]ta9 t ,i h n n[ got ! same k9d ( relation z ,i _h j n[1 :5 ,i 0 actually see+ x4 ,& yet ,i c]ta9ly may n[ h to t m>k itself a k9d ( relation1 :i* may be express$ by say+ t ,i am ?9k+ ( x or rememb]+ x4 ,i c n[ make judgm5ts ab\t x itself--! v s5sible :i* ,i did see j n[ & am no long] see+3 z1 = in/ance1 t ,i did !n see x & t x 0 diff]5t f ! image ( x :i* ,i am n[ see+4 ,x is1 !re=e1 q c]ta9 t !re is a mo/ important diff]5ce betwe5 ! relation ,i h to a s5sible :5 ,i am actually see+ or he>+ x1 & any relation 7= !re may be sev]al7 :i* ,i may h to ! same s5sible :5 ,i am only ?9k+ or or rememb]+ x4 ,& ,i want to express ?is diff]5ce by us+ a p>ticul> t]m = ! =m] relation4 ,i %all express ?is relation1 :i* ,i c]ta9ly d h to a s5sible :5 ,i actually see or he> x1 & mo/ c]ta9ly d n h to x1 :5 ,i only ?9k ( or rememb] x1 by say+ t !re is 9 my m9d a direct appreh5sion ( x4 ,i h expressly *os5 ?is t]m because1 s f> z ,i "k1 x has n be5 us$ hi!rto z a te*nical t]m2 :]eas all ! t]ms :i* h be5 s us$1 su* z pres5t$1 giv51 p]ceiv$1 seem to me to h be5 spoilt by ambiguity4 ,p sometimes1 no d\bt1 use ^! t]ms z names = ! k9d ( relation ,i am conc]n$ )4 ,b y c nev] be sure1 :5 an entity is said to be giv5 or pres5t$ or p]ceiv$1 t :at is meant is simply & solely t x has to someone t relation :i* s5sibles d und\bt$ly h to me :5 ,i actually see or he> !m1 & :i* !y d n h to me :5 ,i only ?9k ( or rememb] !m4 ,i h us$ ! r awkw>d expression ,!re is 9 my m9d a direct appreh5sion ( ?is black m>k1 because ,i want to insi/ t ?\gh1 :5 ,i see ! m>k1 ! m>k c]ta9ly has to some?+ ! fundam5tal relation :i* ,i wi% to express by say+ t x is directly appreh5d$1 & ?\gh ! ev5t :i* consi/s 9 its be+ directly appreh5d$ by t some?+ is c]ta9ly a m5tal act ( m9e or :i* occurs 9 my m9d1 yet ! some?+ :i* directly appreh5ds x may q possibly n be any?+ :i* des]ves to be call$ ,i or me4 ,x is q possible1 ,i ?9k1 t !re is no entity :atev] :i* des]ves to be call$ ,i or me or my m9d2 & h5ce t no?+ :atev] is ev] directly appreh5d$ by me4 ,:e!r ?is is s or n1 dep5ds on ! nature ( t relation :i* c]ta9ly does hold betwe5 all ^? m5tal acts :i* are m9e1 & does n hold betwe5 any ( m9e & any ( y\rs2 & :i* holds aga9 betwe5 all ^? m5tal acts :i* are y\rs1 b does n hold betwe5 any ( y\rs & any ( m9e4 ,& ,i d n feel at all sure :at ! correct analysis ( ?is relation is4 ,x may be ! case t ! relation :i* unites all ^? acts ( direct appreh5sion :i* are m9e1 & :i* is :at we mean to say t !y h to "o ano!r :5 we say !y are all m9e1 really does consi/ 9 ! fact t "o & ! same entity is :at directly appreh5ds 9 ea* ( !m3 9 :i* case ?is entity c\ld prop]ly be call$ me1 & x w\ld be true to say t1 :5 ,i see ?is black m>k1 ,i directly appreh5d x4 ,b x is also q possible 7& ?is seems to me to be ! view :i* is commone/ among/ psy*ologi/s7 t ! entity :i* directly appreh5ds1 9 ^? acts ( direct appreh5sion :i* are m9e1 is num]ically diff]5t 9 e diff]5t act2 & t :at ,i mean by call+ all ^! diff]5t acts m9e is ei!r m]ely t !y h "s k9d ( relation to "o ano!r or t !y all h a common relation to "s o!r entity1 ext]nal to !m1 :i* may or may n be some?+ :i* des]ves to be call$ me4 ,on any su* view1 :at ,i ass]t to be true ( ?is black m>k1 :5 ,i say t x is se5 by me1 w\ld n be simply t x is directly appreh5d$ by me1 b some?+ m complex 9 :i*1 besides direct appreh5sion1 "s o!r q diff]5t relation 0 also involv$4 ,i %\ld be ass]t+ bo? 7#a7 t ! black m>k is be+ directly appreh5d$ by some?+1 & 7#b7 t ?is act ( direct appreh5sion has to some?+ else1 ext]nal to x1 a q diff]5t relation1 :i* is :at makes x an act ( m9e4 ,i d n "k h[ to decide betwe5 ^! views1 & t is :y ,i wi%$ to expla9 t ! fundam5tal relation :i* ,i wi% to call direct appreh5sion1 is "o :i* q possibly nev] holds betwe5 me & any s5sible4 ,b1 once ?is has be5 expla9$1 ,i ?9k no h>m c result f us+ ! expression ,i directly appreh5d ,a z a synonym = ,a direct appreh5sion ( ,a occurs 9 my m9d4 ,& 9 future ,i %all s speak1 because x is mu* m conv5i5t4 ,! only o!r po9t1 :i* seems to me to ne$ explanation1 9 ord] to make x q cle> :at ! relation ,i call direct appreh5sion is1 conc]ns its relation to att5tion2 & z to ?is ,i mu/ confess ,i don't feel cle>4 ,9 e case :]e x is q cle> to me t ,i am directly appreh5d+ a giv5 entity1 x seems also cle> to me t ,i am1 m or less1 att5d+ to x2 & x seems to me possible t :at ,i mean by direct appreh5sion may be simply id5tical ) :at is meant by att5tion1 9 "o ( ! s5ses 9 :i* t ^w c be us$4 ,t x c1 at mo/1 only be id5tical ) "o ( ! relations meant by att5tion seems to me cle>1 because ,i c]ta9ly c be said to att5d1 9 "s s5se or o!r1 to entities1 :i* ,i am n directly appreh5d+3 ,i may1 = in/ance1 ?9k1 ) att5tion1 ( a s5sible1 :i* ,i saw ye/]day1 & am c]ta9ly n see+ n[4 ,x is1 !re=e1 cle> t to say ,i am att5d+ to a ?+ & yet am n directly appreh5d+ x1 is n a contradiction 9 t]ms3 & ?is fact alone is suffici5t to ju/ify ! use ( ! special t]m direct appreh5sion4 ,b :e!r to say t ,i am directly appreh5d+ a giv5 ?+ & yet am n att5d+ to x1 9 any degree at all1 is or is n a contradiction 9 t]ms1 ,i admit ,i don't feel cle>4 ,h[ev] t may be1 "o relation1 9 :i* s5sibles ( all sorts d sometimes /& to our m9ds1 is ! relation con/itut$ by ! fact t we directly appreh5d !m3 or1 to speak m accurately1 by ! fact t ev5ts :i* consi/ 9 _! be+ directly appreh5d$ are 9 our m9ds1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* to say t an ev5t is 9 our m9ds means m]ely t x is a m5tal act ( ours--t x has to our o!r m5tal acts t relation 7:atev] x may be7 :i* we mean by say+ t !y are all m5tal acts ( ! same individual4 ,& x is cle> t to say ( a s5sible t x is directly appreh5d$ by me1 is to say ( x some?+ q diff]5t f :at ,i say ( a m5tal act ( m9e1 :5 ,i say t ?is m5tal act is 9 my m9d3 = no?+ is m c]ta9 ?an t an act ( direct appreh5sion or belief may be 9 my m9d1 )\t be+ itself directly appreh5d$ by me4 ,if1 !re=e1 by say+ t a s5sible is 9 our m9ds or is ours1 we mean m]ely t x is directly appreh5d$ by u1 we mu/ recognise t we are "h us+ ! phrases 9 our m9ds or ours 9 q a diff]5t s5se f t 9 :i* we use !m :5 we talk ( our m5tal acts be+ 9 our m9ds or ours4 ,& :y ,i say ?is is because ,i ?9k t ^! two relations are v apt to be confus$4 ,:51 = in/ance1 we say ( a giv5 entity t x is exp]i5c$1 or :5 ! ,g]mans say t x is erlebt1 x is sometimes meant1 ,i ?9k1 m]ely t x is directly appreh5d$1 b sometimes t x is 9 my m9d1 9 ! s5se 9 :i*1 :5 ,i ent]ta9 a belief1 ?is act ( belief is 9 my m9d4 ,b 7#b7 x seems to me to be commonly held t s5sibles are (t5 9 our m9ds 9 "s s5se q o!r ?an t ( be+ directly appreh5d$ by u or t ( be+ ?\ght ( by u4 ,?is seems to me to be (t5 :at is meant :5 p say t !y are imm$iately exp]i5c$ or are subjective modifications2 ?\gh1 ( c\rse1 bo? expressions are s ambigu\s1 t :5 p say t a giv5 entity is imm$iately exp]i5c$ or is a subjective modification1 !y may mean m]ely t x is directly appreh5d$4 ,& s9ce ,i ?9k ?is view is held1 ,i want to expla9 t ,i see no reason :atev] = ?9k+ t s5sibles ev] are exp]i5c$ by u 9 any o!r s5se ?an t ( be+ directly appreh5d$ by u4 ,two k9ds ( argum5t1 ,i ?9k1 are sometimes us$ to %[ t !y are4 7a7 ,x is a famili> fact t1 :51 = in/ance1 we are 9 a room ) a tick+ clock1 we may seem sudd5ly to become aw>e ( ! ticks1 :]eas1 s f> z we c tell1 we _h previ\sly n he>d !m at all4 ,& x may be urg$ t 9 ^! cases1 s9ce ! same k9d ( /imulus 0 act+ on our e>s all ! "t1 we mu/ h exp]i5c$ ! same k9d ( s5sible s\nds1 al?\gh we did n directly appreh5d !m4 ,b ,i ?9k mo/ psy*ologi/s are n[ agre$ t ?is argum5t is q wor?less4 ,!re seem to me to be two possible alt]natives to ! conclusion drawn4 ,x may1 ,i ?9k1 possibly be ! case t we did directly appreh5d ! ticks all ! "t1 b t we _c aft]w>ds rememb] t we did1 because ! degree ( att5tion 7if any7 ) :i* we he>d !m 0 s small1 t 9 ord9>y life we %\ld say t we did n att5d to !m at all4 ,b1 :at1 ,i ?9k1 is mu* m likely is t1 ?\gh ! same /imulus 0 act+ on our e>s1 x fail$ to produce any m5tal effect :atev]1 because our att5tion 0 o!rwise engag$4 7b7 ,x is said t sometimes :5 we sudd5ly become aw>e1 say1 ( ! eigh? /roke ( a /rik+ clock1 we c rememb] e>li] /rokes1 al?\gh we seem to ourselves n to h directly appreh5d$ !m4 ,i _c say t ,i h ev] notic$ ?is exp]i5ce 9 myself1 b ,i h no d\bt t x is possible4 ,& p seem incl9$ to argue t1 s9ce we c rememb] ! e>li] /rokes1 we mu/ h exp]i5c$ !m1 ?\gh we did n directly appreh5d !m4 ,b "h aga91 ! argum5t does n seem to me at all conclusive4 ,i %\ld say1 aga91 t x is possible t we did directly appreh5d !m1 b only ) a v slight degree ( att5tion 7if any74 ,&1 z an alt]native1 ,i %\ld urge t !re is no reason :y we %\ld n be able to rememb] a ?+1 :i* we nev] exp]i5c$ at all4 ,i d n "k :at o!r argum5ts c be us$ to %[ t we sometimes exp]i5ce s5sibles 9 a s5se q o!r ?an t ( directly appreh5d+ !m4 ,b ,i d n "k h[ to %[ t we d n2 & s9ce p ^: judgm5t ,i respect1 seem to hold t we d1 ,i ?9k x is wor? :ile to say some?+ z to :at ?is s5se ( exp]i5ce c be1 9 case x does occur4 ,i h said t sometimes :5 p say t a giv5 entity is exp]i5c$ !y seem to mean t x belongs to "s individual1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* my acts ( belief belong to me4 ,to say t s5sibles 7 exp]i5c$ by me 9 ?is s5se w\ld1 !re=e1 be to say t !y sometimes h to my acts ( belief & acts ( direct appreh5sion ! same relation :i* ^! h to "o ano!r--! relation :i* con/itutes !m m9e4 ,b t s5sibles ev] h ?is k9d ( relation to my m5tal acts1 is a ?+ :i* ,i _c believe4 ,^? :o hold t !y are ev] exp]i5c$ at all1 9 "s s5se o!r ?an t ( be+ directly appreh5d$1 always hold1 ,i ?9k1 t1 :5ev] !y are directly appreh5d$ by u1 !y also1 at ! same "t1 h to u ?is o!r relation z well4 ,& x seems to me pretty cle> t :5 ,i d directly appreh5d a s5sible1 x does n h to me ! same relation :i* my direct appreh5sion ( x has4 ,if1 !re=e1 s5sibles are ev] exp]i5c$ by u at all1 9 any s5se o!r ?an t ( be+ directly appreh5d$ by u1 we mu/1 ,i ?9k1 hold t !y are s 9 an entirely new s5se1 q diff]5t bo? f t 9 :i* to be exp]i5c$ means to be directly appreh5d$1 & f t 9 :i* to be exp]i5c$ means to occur 9 "s individual's m9d4 ,& ,i c only say t ,i see no reason to ?9k t !y ev] are exp]i5c$ 9 any su* s5se4 ,if !y are1 ! fact t !y are s is presumably op5 to ! inspection ( u all2 b ,i _c di/+ui% any su* fact z occurr+ 9 myself1 z ,i c di/+ui% ! fact t !y are directly appreh5d$4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ,i see no way ( %[+ t !y are n exp]i5c$ 9 "s su* s5se2 & p]haps somebody w be able to po9t x out to me4 ,i d n wi% to assume1 !re=e1 t !re is no su* s5se2 & h5ce1 ?\gh ,i am incl9$ to ?9k t ! only s5se 9 :i* !y are exp]i5c$ is t ( be+ directly appreh5d$1 ,i %all1 9 :at foll[s1 use ! phrase exp]i5c$ to mean ei!r directly appreh5d$ or hav+ to some?+ ?is suppos$ diff]5t relation1 if su* a relation !re be4 7#c7 ,we may n[1 !re=e1 raise ! "q3 ,d s5sibles ev] exi/ at times :5 !y are n be+ exp]i5c$ at all8 ,to ?is "q x is usual to give a negative answ]1 & two diff]5t a priori reasons may be urg$ 9 fav\r ( t answ]4 ,! fir/ is :at %\ld be meant by ,b]keley's dictum t ! esse ( s5sibles is p]cipi4 ,?is %\ld mean1 :atev] else x may mean1 at lea/ ?is3 t to suppose a s5sible to exi/ & yet n to be exp]i5c$ 9 self-contradictory4 ,& ?is at lea/ seems to me to be cle>ly false4 ,any?+ :i* 0 a pat* ( col\r w\ld be a s5sible2 & to suppose t !re are pat*es ( col\r :i* are n be+ exp]i5c$ is cle>ly n self-contradictory1 h[ev] false x may be4 ,x may1 h[ev]1 be urg$ 7& ?is is ! second argum5t7 t1 ?\gh to suppose a ?+ to be a s5sible & yet n exp]i5c$ is n self-contradictory1 yet we c cle>ly see t no?+ c h ! "o prop]ty )\t hav+ ! o!r4 ,& ,i d n see my way to d5y t we may be able to "k1 a priori t su* a connection holds betwe5 two su* prop]ties4 ,9 ! pres5t case1 h[ev]1 ,i _c see t x does hold1 & !re=e1 s f> z a priori reasons g1 ,i conclude t !re is no reason :y s5sibles %\ld n exi/ at times :5 !y are n exp]i5c$4 ,x may1 h[ev]1 be ask$3 ,is !re any reason to suppose t !y ev] d8 ,& ! reason1 :i* weighs ) me mo/1 is "o :i* applies1 ,i ?9k1 to a c]ta9 class ( s5sibles only2 a class :i* ,i w try to def9e by say+ t x consi/s ( ^? :i* w\ld 7"u c]ta9 conditions :i* actually exi/7 be exp]i5c$ 9 a s5sation prop]1 if only a liv+ body1 hav+ a c]ta9 con/itution1 exi/$ "u ^? conditions 9 a position 9 :i* no su* body does actually exi/4 ,i ?9k x is v probable t ?is def9ition does n def9e at all accurately ! k9d ( s5sibles ,i mean2 b ,i ?9k t :at ! def9ition aims at w become cle>] :5 ,i proce$ to give my reasons = suppos+ t s5sibles1 ( a k9d to be def9$ 9 "s su* way1 d exi/ unexp]i5c$4 ,! reason is simply t1 9 ,hume's phrase1 ,i h a /rong prop5sity to believe t1 e4g41 ! visual s5sibles :i* ,i directly appreh5d 9 look+ at ?is pap]1 /ill exi/ un*ang$ :5 ,i m]ely alt] ! position ( my body by turn+ away my head or clos+ my eyes1 provid$ t ! physical conditions outside my body rema9 un*ang$4 ,9 su* a case x is c]ta9ly true 9 "s s5se t ,i %\ld see s5sibles l :at ,i saw ! mom5t be=e1 if only my head 7 /ill 9 ! position x 0 at t mom5t or my eyes unclos$4 ,b if1 9 su* a case1 !re is reason to ?9k t s5sibles :i* ,i %\ld see1 if ! position ( my body 7 alt]$1 exi/ 9 spite ( ! fact t ,i d n exp]i5ce !m1 !re is1 ,i ?9k1 an equal reason to suppose x 9 o!r cases4 ,we mu/1 = in/ance1 suppose t ! s5sibles :i* ,i %\ld see n[1 if ,i 7 at ! o!r end ( ! room1 or if ,i 7 look+ "u ! table1 exi/ at ?is mom5t1 ?\gh !y are n be+ exp]i5c$4 ,& simil>ly we mu/ suppose t ! s5sibles :i* y w\ld see1 if y 7 9 ! position 9 :i* ,i am n[1 exi/ at ?is mom5t1 9 spite ( ! fact t !y may be m or less diff]5t f ^? :i* ,i see1 ow+ to ! diff]5t con/itution ( our bodies4 ,all ?is implies ( c\rse1 t a va/ numb] ( s5sibles exi/ at any mom5t1 :i* are n be+ exp]i5c$ at all4 ,b /ill x implies ?is only ) reg>d to s5sibles ( a /rictly limit$ class1 namely s5sibles :i* w\ld be exp]i5c$ 9 a s5sation prop]1 if a body1 hav+ a c]ta9 con/itution1 7 9 a position 9 :i* x is n1 "u ! giv5 physical conditions4 ,x does n1 = in/ance1 imply t any images1 ( :i* x may be true t ,i %\ld h !m1 "u pres5t physical conditions1 if ! position ( my body 7 alt]$1 exi/ n[2 nor does x imply t s5sibles :i* w\ld be exp]i5c$ by me n[ 9 a s5sation prop]1 if ! physical conditions ext]nal to my body 7 diff]5t f :at !y are1 exi/ n[4 ,i feel1 ( c\rse1 t ,i h only succe$$ 9 def9+ mis]ably vaguely ! k9d ( s5sibles ,i mean2 & ,i d n "k :e!r ! fact t ,i h a /rong prop5sity to believe t s5sibles ( a k9d to be def9$ 9 "s su* way1 d exi/ unexp]i5c$1 is any good reason = suppos+ t !y actually d4 ,! belief may1 ( c\rse1 be a m]e prejudice4 ,b ,i d n "k ( any c]ta9 te/ by :i* prejudices c be di/+ui%$ f reasonable beliefs4 ,& ,i _c help ?9k+ t !re may be a class ( s5sibles1 capable ( def9ition 9 "s su* way1 :i* !re really is reason to ?9k exi/ unexp]i5c$4 ,b1 if ,i am n mi/ak51 !re is an empirical argum5t :i*1 ?\gh1 ev5 if x 7 s\nd1 x w\ld h no t5d5cy :atev] to %[ t no s5sibles exi/ unexp]i5c$1 w\ld1 if x 7 s\nd1 %[ t ?is v class ( s5sibles1 to :i* alone my argum5t = unexp]i5c$ exi/5ce applies1 c]ta9ly d n s exi/4 ,?is1 x seems to me1 is ! mo/ weighty argum5t :i* c be us$ ^u ! subject2 & ,i want1 !re=e1 to give my reasons = ?9k+ t x is fallaci\s4 ,! argum5t is "o :i* ass]ts t !re is abundant empirical evid5ce 9 fav\r ( ! view t ! exi/5ce ( ! s5sibles :i* we exp]i5ce at any "t1 always dep5ds ^u ! condition ( our n]v\s sy/em3 s t1 ev5 :]e x also dep5ds ^u ext]nal physical conditions1 we c safely say t s5sibles1 :i* we %\ld h exp]i5c$1 if only our n]v\s sy/em _h be5 9 a diff]5t condition1 c]ta9ly d n exi/1 :5 x is n 9 t condition4 ,& ! fallacy ( ?is argum5t seems to me to lie 9 ! fact t x does n di/+ui% betwe5 ! exi/5ce ( ! s5sibles :i* we exp]i5ce & ! fact t we exp]i5ce !m4 ,:at !re is evid5ce = is t our exp]i5ce ( s5sibles always dep5ds ^u ! condition ( our n]v\s sy/em2 t1 accord+ z ! condition ( ! n]v\s sy/em *anges1 diff]5t s5sibles are exp]i5c$1 ev5 :]e o!r conditions are ! same4 ,b obvi\sly ! fact t our exp]i5ce ( a giv5 s5sible dep5ds ^u ! condition ( our n]v\s sy/em does n directly %[ t ! exi/5ce ( ! s5sible exp]i5c$ always also s dep5ds4 ,! fact t ,i am n[ exp]i5c+ ?is black m>k is c]ta9ly a diff]5t fact f ! fact t ?is black m>k n[ exi/s4 ,& h5ce ! evid5ce :i* does t5d to %[ t ! =m] fact w\ld n h exi/$ if my n]v\s sy/em _h be5 9 a diff]5t condition1 has no t5d5cy to %[ t ! latt] w\ld n h done s ei!r4 ,i am sure t ?is di/9ction ought to be made2 & h5ce1 ?\gh ,i ?9k !re may be o!r reasons = ?9k+ t ! v exi/5ce ( ! s5sibles1 :i* we exp]i5ce1 & n m]ely ! fact t we exp]i5ce !m does always dep5d ^u ! condition ( our n]v\s sy/ems1 x seems to me c]ta9 t ?is p>ticul> argum5t con/itutes no su* reason4 ,& ,i ?9k t ^? :o suppose t x does are apt to be influ5c$ by an assumption1 = :i* also1 s f> z ,i c see1 !re is no reason4 ,i h admitt$ t ! only reason ,i c see = suppos+ t s5sibles :i* we exp]i5ce ev] exi/ unexp]i5c$1 seems to lead to ! conclusion t ! s5sibles :i* w\ld be se5 by a col\r-bl9d man1 if he occupi$ exactly ! position :i* ,i1 :o am n col\r-bl9d1 n[ occupy1 exi/ n[1 j z mu* z ^? :i* ,i n[ see4 ,& x may be ?\ght t ?is implies t ! s5sibles1 :i* he w\ld see1 & :i* w\ld c]ta9ly be v diff]5t f ^? :i* ,i see1 are nev]!less at ?is mom5t 9 exactly ! same place z ^? :i* ,i see4 ,n[1 = my "p1 ,i am n prep>$ to admit t x is impossible !y %\ld be 9 ! same place4 ,b ! assumption aga9/ :i* ,i wi% to prote/1 is ! assumption t1 if !y exi/ at all1 !y mu/ be 9 ! same place4 ,i c see no reason :atev] = ?is assumption4 ,& h5ce any difficulties !re may be 9 ! way ( suppos+ t !y c\ld be 9 ! same place at ! same "t z ! s5sibles :i* ,i see1 d n at all apply to my hypo!sis1 :i* is only t !y exi/ n[1 n t !y exi/ 9 ! same place 9 :i* m9e d4 ,on ?is "q1 !re=e1 z to :e!r s5sibles ev] exi/ at times :5 !y are n exp]i5c$1 ,i h only to say 7#a7 t ,i ?9k !re is c]ta9ly no good reason :atev] = ass]t+ t no s5sibles d2 & 7#b7 t ,i ?9k p]haps a c]ta9 am\nt ( weight ought to be atta*$ to our in/9ctive belief t c]ta9 k9ds ( s5sibles d2 & t "h aga9 any special argum5ts :i* may be br\ght =w>d to %[ t1 :e!r "s s5sibles exi/ unexp]i5c$ or n1 ?is k9d c]ta9ly d n1 are1 s f> z ,i c see1 :olly inconclusive4 7,,ii7 ,i n[ pass to ! "q h[ s5sibles are relat$ to physical objects4 ,& "h ,i want to say1 to beg9 )1 t ,i feel extremely puzzl$ ab\t ! :ole subject4 ,i f9d x extremely difficult to di/+ui% cle>ly f "o ano!r ! diff]5t consid]ations :i* ought to be di/+ui%$2 & all ,i c d is to raise1 m or less vaguely1 c]ta9 que/ions z to h[ c]ta9 p>ticul> s5sibles are relat$ to c]ta9 p>ticul> physical objects1 & to give ! reasons :i* seem to me to h mo/ weight = answ]+ ^! que/ions 9 "o way r ?an ano!r4 ,i feel t all t ,i c say is v t5tative4 ,to beg9 )1 ,i d n "k h[ physical object is to be def9$1 & ,i %all n try to def9e x4 ,i %all1 in/ead1 consid] c]ta9 propositions1 :i* ev]ybody w admit to be propositions ab\t physical objects1 & :i* ,i %all assume t ,i "k to be true4 ,& ! "q ,i %all raise is z to h[ ^! propositions are to be int]pret$--9 :at s5se !y are true2 9 consid]+ :i*1 we %all at ! same "t consid] h[ !y are relat$ to c]ta9 s5sibles4 ,i am look+ at two co9s1 "o ( :i* is a half-cr[n1 ! o!r a flor94 ,bo? are ly+ on ! gr\nd2 & !y are situat$ obliquely to my l9e ( sight1 s t ! visual s5sibles :i* ,i directly appreh5d 9 look+ at !m are visibly elliptical1 & n ev5 approximately circul>4 ,moreov]1 ! half-cr[n is s mu* f>!r f me ?an ! flor9 t its visual s5sible is visibly small] ?an t ( ! flor94 ,9 ^! circum/ances ,i am go+ to assume t ,i "k ! foll[+ propositions to be true2 & no "o1 ,i ?9k1 w d5y t we c "k su* propositions to be true1 ?\gh1 z we %all see1 extremely diff]5t views may be tak5 z to :at !y mean4 ,i "k 7a7 t1 9 ! ord9>y s5se ( ! ^w see ,i am really see+ two co9s2 an ass]tion :i* includes1 if x is n id5tical )1 ! ass]tion t ! visual exp]i5ces1 :i* consi/ 9 my direct appreh5sion ( ^? two elliptical pat*es ( col\r1 are s5sations prop]1 & are n ei!r halluc9ations nor m]e exp]i5ces ( images2 7b7 t ! upp] sides ( ! co9s are really approximately circul>1 & n m]ely elliptical l ! visual s5sibles2 7c7 t ! co9s h ano!r side1 & an inside1 ?\gh ,i don't see x2 7d7 t ! upp] side ( ! half-cr[n is really l>g] ?an t ( ! flor91 ?\gh its visual s5sible is small] ?an ! visual s5sible ( ! upp] side ( ! flor93 7e7 t bo? co9s cont9ue to exi/1 ev5 :5 ,i turn away my head or %ut my eyes2 b 9 say+ ?is1 ,i d n1 ( c\rse1 mean to say t !re is absolutely no *ange 9 !m2 ,i d>esay !re mu/ be "s *ange1 & ,i d n "k h[ to def9e exactly :at ,i d mean4 ,b we c1 ,i ?9k1 say at lea/ ?is3 viz41 t propositions 7h71 7c71 & 7d7 w /ill be true1 al?\gh proposition 7a7 has ceas$ to be true4 ,n[ all ^! propositions are1 ,i ?9k1 typical propositions ( ! sort :i* we call propositions ab\t physical objects2 & ! two co9s !mselves are physical objects1 if any?+ is4 ,my "q is3 ,9 :at s5se are ^! propositions true8 ,& 9 consid]+ ?is "q1 !re are1 ,i ?9k1 two pr9ciples :i* we c lay d[n z c]ta9 to beg9 )2 ?\gh !y d n c>ry u v f>4 ,! "o is 7a7 t ! upp] side ( ! co91 :i* ,i am said to see1 is n simply id5tical ) ! visual s5sible :i* ,i directly appreh5d 9 see+ x4 ,t ?is is s might be ?\ght to foll[ absolutely f ea* ( ! two facts :i* ,i h call$ 7b7 & 7d72 b ,i am n q sure t x does foll[ f ei!r ( ^! or f bo? toge!r3 = x seems to me j possible t ! two s5sibles 9 "q1 ?\gh n circul> 9 my private space1 may yet be circul> 9 physical space2 & simil>ly t ?\gh ! s5sible ( ! half-cr[n is small] ?an t ( ! flor9 9 my private space1 x may be l>g] 9 physical space4 ,b :at ,i ?9k x does foll[ f is ! fact t ano!r p]son may be see+ ! upp] side ( ! co9 9 exactly ! same s5se 9 :i* ,i am see+ x1 & yet 8 s5sible be c]ta9ly diff]5t f m9e4 ,f ?is x foll[s absolutely t ! upp] side ( ! co9 _c be id5tical ) bo? s5sibles1 s9ce !y are n id5tical ) "o ano!r4 ,& ?\gh x does n foll[ absolutely t x may n be id5tical ) "o ( ! two1 yet x does foll[ t we c get a case 9 :i* x is n id5tical ) m9e & ,i ne$ only assume t ! case ,i am tak+ is su* a case4 ,f ?is x foll[s t we mu/ di/+ui% t s5se ( ! ^w see 9 :i* we c be said to see a physical object1 f t s5se ( ! ^w 9 :i* see means m]ely to directly appreh5d a visual s5sible4 ,9 a proposition ( ! =m ,i see ,a1 :]e ,a is a "n or description ( "s physical object1 ?\gh1 if ?is proposition is to be true1 !re mu/ be "s visual s5sible1 ,b1 :i* ,i am directly appreh5d+1 yet ! proposition ,i see ,a is c]ta9ly n always1 & probably nev]1 id5tical 9 mean+ ) ! proposition ,i directly appreh5d ,b4 ,9 ass]t+ ,i see ,a we are ass]t+ n only t we directly appreh5d "s s5sible b also some?+ else ab\t ?is s5sible--x may be only "s proposition ( ! =m1 & ?is s5sible has c]ta9 o!r prop]ties1 or x may be "s proposition ( ! =m & ,i "k ?is s5sible to h c]ta9 o!r prop]ties4 ,inde$ we h n only to di/+ui% t s5se ( ! ^w p]ceive 9 :i* x is equival5t to directly appreh5d1 f "o s5se 9 :i* we c be said to p]ceive a physical object2 we h also to di/+ui% at lea/ two diff]5t s5ses 9 :i* we c be said to p]ceive physical objects1 diff]5t bo? f "o ano!r & f directly appreh5d4 ,= x is obvi\s t ?\gh ,i %\ld be said to be n[ see+ ! half-cr[n1 !re is a n>r[]1 & m prop]1 s5se1 9 :i* ,i c only be said to see "o side ( x--n its l[] side or its inside1 & n !re=e ! :ole half-cr[n4 ,! o!r pr9ciple1 :i* we c lay d[n to />t ) is 77 t my k ( all ! five propositions 7a7 to 7e71 is bas$1 9 ! la/ resort1 on exp]i5ces ( m9e consi/+ 9 ! direct appreh5sion ( s5sibles & 9 ! p]ception ( relations betwe5 directly appreh5d$ s5sibles4 ,x is bas$ on ^!1 9 at lea/ ?is s5se1 t ,i %\ld nev] h kn[n any ( ^! propositions if ,i _h nev] directly appreh5d$ any s5sibles nor p]ceiv$ any relations betwe5 !m4 ,:at1 9 view ( ^! two pr9ciples1 c be ! s5se 9 :i* my five propositions are true8 7#a7 ,x seems to me possible t ! only true int]pretation :i* c be giv5 to any ( !m is an int]pretation ( a k9d :i* ,i c only indicate r vaguely z foll[s3 ,namely1 t all ( !m express only a k9d ( fact :i* we %\ld naturally express by say+ t1 if c]ta9 conditions 7 fulfill$1 ,i or "s o!r p]son1 %\ld directly appreh5d c]ta9 o!r s5sibles4 ,= in/ance ! only true ?+ t c be meant by say+ t ,i really see co9s may be "s su* ?+ z t1 if ,i 7 to move my body 9 c]ta9 ways1 ,i %\ld directly appreh5d o!r s5sibles1 e4g4 tactual ones1 :i* ,i %\ld n directly appreh5d z a consequ5ce ( ^! movem5ts1 if ^! pres5t visual exp]i5ces ( m9e 7 m]e halluc9ations or exp]i5ces ( images4 ,aga91 ! only true ?+ t c be meant by say+ t ! upp] sides ( ! co9s are really approximately circul> may be "s su* ?+ z t1 if ,i 7 look+ /raight at !m1 ,i %\ld directly appreh5d circul> s5sibles4 ,& simil>ly1 ! only true int]pretation ( 7c7 may be "s su* fact z t1 if ,i 7 to turn ! co9s ov]1 or break !m up1 ,i %\ld h c]ta9 s5sations1 ( a sort ,i c imag9e v well2 ( 7d7 t if ,i 7 at an equal di/ance f ! half-cr[n & ! flor91 ! s5sible1 ,i %\ld !n see correspond+ to ! half-cr[n w\ld be bigg] ?an t correspond+ to ! flor91 :]eas x is n[ small]2 ( 7e7 t1 if1 :5 my eyes 7 clos$1 !y _h be5 op5 in/ead1 ,i %\ld h se5 c]ta9 s5sibles4 ,x is obvi\s1 inde$1 t if any int]pretation on ^! l9es is ! only true int]pretation ( our five propositions1 none ( ^? :i* ,i h vaguely sugge/$ comes any:]e ne> to express+ x 9 its ultimate =m4 ,!y _c d s = ! simple reason t1 9 !m1 ! conditions "u :i* ,i %\ld exp]i5ce c]ta9 o!r s5sibles are !mselves express$ 9 t]ms ( physical objects1 & n 9 t]ms ( s5sibles & our exp]i5ce ( !m4 ,! conditions are express$ 9 su* t]ms z if ,i 7 to move my body1 if ,i 7 to look /raight at ! co9s1 if ,i 7 to turn ! co9s ov]1 etc42 & all ^! are obvi\sly propositions1 :i* mu/ !mselves aga9 be int]pret$ 9 t]ms ( s5sibles1 if our orig9al five propositions ne$ to be s4 ,x is obvi\s1 !re=e1 t any ultimate int]pretation ( our five propositions1 on ^! l9es1 w\ld be imm5sely complicat$2 & ,i _c come any:]e ne> to /at+ exactly :at x w\ld be4 ,b x seems to me possible t "s su* int]pretation c\ld be f\nd1 & t x is ! only true "o4 ,! great recomm5dation ( ?is view seems to me to be t x enables u to see1 m cle>ly ?an any o!r view c1 h[ our k ( physical propositions c be bas$ on our exp]i5ce ( s5sibles1 9 ! way 9 :i* pr9ciple 77 ass]ts x to be4 ,if1 :5 ,i "k t ! co9s are r\nd1 all t ,i "k is "s su* ?+ z t if1 aft] exp]i5c+ ! s5sibles ,i d n[ exp]i5ce1 ,i 7 to exp]i5ce /ill o!rs1 ,i %\ld f9ally exp]i5ce a ?ird set1 we c und]/&1 z cle>ly z we c und]/& h[ any k c be obta9$ by induction at all1 h[ su* a k c\ld be bas$ on our previ\s exp]i5ce ( s5sibles1 & h[ x c\ld be v]ifi$ by our subsequ5t exp]i5ce4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ap>t f ! difficulty ( actually giv+ any int]pretation on ^! l9es1 :i* w meet ! requirem5ts1 ! great objection to x seems to me to be ?is4 ,x is obvi\s t1 on ?is view1 ?\gh we %all /ill be all[$ to say t ! co9s exi/$ be=e ,i saw !m1 are circul> etc41 all ^! expressions1 if !y are to be true1 w h to be und]/ood 9 a ,pickwickian s5se4 ,:5 ,i "k t ! co9s exi/$ be=e ,i saw !m1 :at ,i "k w n be t any?+ :atev] exi/$ at t "t1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ^? elliptical pat*es ( col\r exi/ n[4 ,all t ,i "k w be simply t1 s9ce ! elliptical pat*es exi/ n[1 x is true1 t1 if c]ta9 unrealis$ conditions _h be5 realis$1 ,i %\ld h _h c]ta9 s5sations t ,i h n _h2 or1 if c]ta9 conditions1 :i* may or may n be realis$ 9 ! future1 7 to be s1 ,i %\ld h c]ta9 exp]i5ces4 ,some?+ l ?is w actually be ! only true ?+ t c be meant by say+ t ! co9s exi/$ be=e ,i saw !m4 ,9 o!r words1 to say ( a physical object t x exi/$ at a giv5 "t w always consi/ m]ely 9 say+ ( "s s5sible1 n t x exi/$ at ! "t 9 "q1 b some?+ q diff]5t & imm5sely complicat$4 ,& ?us1 ?\gh1 :5 ,i "k t ! co9s exi/1 :at ,i "k w be m]ely "s proposition ab\t ^! s5sibles :i* ,i am directly appreh5d+1 yet ?is view w n contradict pr9ciple 7a7 by id5tify+ ! co9s ) ! s5sibles4 ,= x w say t to ass]t a giv5 ?+ ( ! co9s is n equival5t to ass]t+ ! same ?+ ( ! s5sibles1 b only to ass]t+ ( !m some?+ q diff]5t4 ,! fact t ^! ass]tions t ! co9s exi/1 are r\nd1 etc41 w1 on ?is view1 only be true 9 ?is outrage\sly ,pickwickian s5se1 seems to me to con/itute ! great objection to x4 ,b x seems to me to be an objection only1 s f> z ,i c see1 because ,i h a /rong prop5sity to believe t1 :5 ,i "k t ! co9s exi/$ be=e ,i saw !m1 :at ,i "k is t some?+ exi/$ at t "t1 9 ! v same s5se 9 :i* ^? elliptical pat*es n[ exi/4 ,&1 ( c\rse1 ?is belief may be a m]e prejudice4 ,x may be t :5 ,i believe t ,i n[ h1 9 my body1 blood & n]ves & bra91 :at ,i believe is only true1 if x does n ass]t1 9 ! prop] s5se ( ! ^w exi/5ce1 ! pres5t exi/5ce ( any?+ :atev]1 o!r ?an s5sibles :i* ,i directly appreh5d1 b only makes ass]tions z to ! k9d ( exp]i5ces a doctor w\ld h1 if he dissect$ me4 ,b ,i _c feel at all sure t my belief1 t1 :5 ,i "k ( ! pres5t ,exi/5ce ( ^! ?+s 7z ,i ?9k ,i d71 ,i am kn[+ ( ! pres5t exi/5ce 79 ! prop] s5se7 ( ?+s o!r ?an any s5sibles :i* ,i or any "o else am n[ directly appreh5d+1 is a m]e prejudice4 ,& !re=e ,i ?9k x is wor? :ile to consid] :at1 if x is n1 ^! ?+s1 ( ^: exi/5ce ,i "k1 c be4 7#b7 ,x is c]ta9 t if1 :5 ,i "k t t half-cr[n exi/$ be=e ,i saw x1 ,i am kn[+ t some?+ exi/$ at t "t 9 o!r ?an a ,pickwickian s5se1 ,i only "k ?is some?+ by description2 & x seems pretty cle> t ! description by :i* ,i "k x is z ! ?+ :i* has a c]ta9 connection ) ?is s5sible :i* ,i am n[ directly appreh5d+4 ,b :at connection8 ,we _c simply say1 z _m p h said1 t by t half-cr[n ,i mean ! ?+ :i* caus$ my exp]i5ce ( ?is s5sible2 because ev5ts :i* happ5 betwe5 ! half-cr[n & my eyes1 & ev5ts 9 my eyes1 & optic n]ves1 & bra9s are j z mu* causes ( my exp]i5ces z ! half-cr[n itself4 ,b x may p]haps be ! case t ! half-cr[n has "s p>ticul> k9d ( causal relation to my exp]i5ce1 :i* ^! o!r ev5ts h n got--a k9d :i* may be express$1 p]haps1 by say+ t x is its s\rce4 ,& h5ce1 :5 ,i "k t t half-cr[n is circul>1 ,i may p]haps be kn[+ t ! s\rce ( ?is exp]i5ce is circul>4 ,b :at sort ( a ?+ c ?is s\rce be8 ,"o k9d ( view1 :i* ,i ?9k is v commonly held1 is t x is some?+ spiritual 9 its nature1 or some?+ ^: nature is utt]ly unkn[n to u4 ,& ^? :o hold ?is view are apt to add1 t x is n really circul>1 9 any s5se at all2 nor is ! s\rce ( my half-cr[n exp]i5ce1 9 any s5se at all1 bigg] ?an t ( my flor9 exp]i5ce4 ,b if ?is addition 7 s]i\sly meant1 x w\ld1 ( c\rse1 am\nt to say+ t propositions 7b7 & 7d7 are n true1 9 any s5se at all2 & ,i d n ?9k t ^? :o make x1 really mean to say ?is4 ,i ?9k t :at !y mean is only t ! only s5se 9 :i* ^? s\rces are circul>1 & "o bigg] ?an ! o!r1 is "o 9 :i* to say ?is m]ely am\nts to say+ t ! s5sibles1 :i* !y w\ld cause u to exp]i5ce1 "u c]ta9 conditions1 w\ld be circul>1 & "o bigg] ?an ! o!r4 ,9 o!r words1 9 ord] to give a true int]pretation to ! propositions t ! co9s are circul> & "o bigg] ?an ! o!r1 !y say t we mu/ int]pret !m 9 ! same k9d ( way 9 :i* view 7#a7 int]pret$ !m2 & ! only diff]5ce betwe5 _! view & view 7#a71 is t1 :]eas t said t y mu/ give a ,pickwickian int]pretation bo? to ! ass]tion t ! co9s exi/1 & to ! ass]tion t !y are circul>1 !y say t y mu/ n give x to ! =m] ass]tion1 & mu/ to ! latt]4 ,to ?is view my objection is only t any reason !re may be = say+ t ! s\rces exi/ 9 o!r ?an a ,pickwickian s5se1 seems to me to be also a reason = say+ t !y are circul> 9 a s5se t is n ,pickwickian4 ,i h j z /rong a prop5sity to believe t !y are really circul>1 9 a simple & natural s5se1 z t !y exi/ 9 su* a s5se3 & ,i "k ( no bett] reason = believ+ ei!r4 7#c7 ,x may be sugge/$1 next1 t ^! s\rces1 in/ead ( be+ some?+ spiritual 9 _! nature or some?+ ( a nature utt]ly unkn[n1 consi/ simply ( s5sibles1 ( a k9d :i* ,i h previ\sly tri$ to def9e2 namely ( all ^? s5sibles1 :i* anybody w\ld1 "u ! actual physical conditions1 exp]i5ce 9 s5sations prop] ( :i* ! half-cr[n & ! flor9 7 ! s\rce1 if _! bodies 7 9 any ( ! positions relatively to ^? co9s1 9 :i* !y w\ld get s5sations f !m at all4 ,we saw be=e t x seems possible t all ^! s5sibles d really exi/ at times :5 !y are n exp]i5c$1 & t "s p1 at all ev5ts1 seem to h a /rong prop5sity to believe t !y d4 ,& 9 fav\r ( ! view t "s su* huge collection ( s5sibles is ! upp] side ( ! half-cr[n1 is ! fact t we d seem to h a /rong prop5sity to believe t any p>ticul> s5sible1 :i* we directly appreh5d 9 look+ at ! upp] side ( ! half-cr[n1 & ( our direct appreh5sion ( :i* ! upp] side is ! s\rce1 is 9 ! place 9 :i* ! upp] side is4 ,& t "s s5se might be giv5 to ! expression 9 ! same place z1 9 :i* x c\ld be true t s5sibles ( all sorts ( diff]5t %apes & sizes1 & ( all sorts ( diff]5t col\rs1 7 9 ! same place at ! same "t1 seems to me to be possible4 ,b ! objection to ?is view seems to me to be ! same z to ! la/2 namely t if ! upp] side ( ! half-cr[n 7 id5tical ) su* a collection ( s5sibles1 !n ! only s5se 9 :i* x c\ld be said to be circul>1 or bigg] ?an t ( ! flor91 w\ld c]ta9ly be v ,pickwickian1 ?\gh n ! same z on t view4 7#d7 ,if1 = ! reasons giv51 we reject bo? 7#a71 7#b71 & 7#c7 z int]pretations ( our five propositions1 ! only alt]native ,i c ?9k ( t rema9s1 is "o :i* is r\ghly id5tical1 s f> z ,i c see1 ) ,locke's view4 ,x is a view :i* ass]ts t ! half-cr[n & ! flor9 really did exi/ 79 ! natural s5se7 be=e ,i saw !m2 t !y really are approximately circul> 7aga9 9 ! natural s5se72 t1 !re=e1 !y are n compos$ ( s5sibles :i* ,i or o!rs %\ld directly appreh5d "u o!r conditions2 & t !re=e also nei!r ^! s5sibles 7ev5 if su* d n[ exi/7 nor ^? :i* ,i am n[ directly appreh5d+ are 9 ! place 9 :i* ! co9s are4 ,x holds1 !re=e1 t ! co9s d really resemble "s s5sibles1 9 respect ( ! prim>y qualities :i* ^! h2 t !y really are r\nd1 & "o l>g] ?an ! o!r1 9 mu* ! same s5se 9 :i* "s s5sibles are r\nd & "s l>g] ?an o!rs4 ,b x holds also t no s5sibles :i* we ev] d directly appreh5d1 or %\ld directly appreh5d1 if at a giv5 "t we 7 9 o!r positions1 are p>ts ( ^? co9s2 & t1 !re=e1 !re is no reason to suppose t any p>ts ( ! co9s h any ( ! second>y qualities--col\r1 etc4--:i* any ( ^! s5sibles h4 ,on ?is view1 x is pla91 !re is no?+ to prev5t u f hold+ t1 z sugge/$ 9 ,i 7#c71 all sorts ( unexp]i5c$ s5sibles d exi/4 ,we are only prev5t$ f hold+ t1 if !y d1 ^? :i* h ! same s\rce all exi/ 9 ! same place z _! s\rce4 ,& ! natural view to take z to ! /atus ( s5sibles g5]ally1 relatively to physical objects1 w\ld be t none ( !m1 :e!r exp]i5c$ or n1 7 ev] 9 ! same place z any physical object4 ,t none1 !re=e1 exi/ any:]e 9 physical space2 :ile1 at ! same "t1 we c also say1 z argu$ 9 ,i 7#b71 t none exi/ 9 ! m9d1 except 9 ! s5se t "s are directly appreh5d$ by "s m9ds4 ,& ! only ?+ t w\ld ne$ to be add$1 is t "s1 & "s only1 resemble ! physical objects :i* are _! s\rce1 9 respect ( _! %ape4 ,to ?is view ,i c see no objection except ! s]i\s "o t x is difficult to answ] ! que/ions3 ,h[ c ,i ev] come to "k t ^! s5sibles h a s\rce at all8 ,& h[ d ,i "k t ^! s\rces are circul>8 ,x w\ld seem t1 if ,i d "k ^! ?+s at all1 ,i mu/ "k imm$iately1 9 ! case ( "s s5sibles1 bo? t !y h a s\rce & :at ! %ape ( ?is s\rce is4 ,& to ?is x may be object$ t ?is is a k9d ( ?+ :i* ,i c]ta9ly _c "k imm$iately4 ,! argum5t 9 fav\r ( an int]pretation ( type 7i7 seems to me to re/ :olly on ! assumption t !re are only c]ta9 k9ds ( facts :i* ,i c "k imm$iately2 & h5ce t if ,i believe ,i "k a fact1 :i* is n ( ?is k9d1 & :i* also ,i _c h le>nt imm$iately1 my belief mu/ be a m]e prejudice4 ,b ,i d n "k h[ x c be %[n t an ass]tion ( ! =m3 ,facts ( c]ta9 k9ds are ! only ones y c "k imm$iately2 is itself n a prejudice4 ,i d n ?9k1 !re=e1 t ! fact t1 if ?is la/ view 7 true1 we %\ld h to admit t we "k imm$iately facts ( a k9d :i* _m p ?9k we _c "k imm$iately1 is a conclusive objection to x4 ,,! ,,conception ,,( ,,reality ,! f\r? *apt] ( ,mr4 ,bradley's ,appe>ance & ,reality is a *apt] head$ ,space & ,"t1 & he beg9s ! *apt] z foll[s3-- ,! object ( ?is *apt] is f> f be+ an attempt to discuss fully ! nature ( space or ( "t4 ,x w cont5t itself ) /at+ our ma9 ju/ification = reg>d+ !m z appe>ances4 ,x w expla9 :y we d5y t1 9 ! "* :i* !y exhibit1 !y ei!r h or belong to reality4#a ,"h1 x w be se51 ,mr4 ,bradley /ates t1 9 8 op9ion1 ,"t1 9 a c]ta9 "*1 nei!r has nor belongs to reality2 ?is is ! conclusion he wi%es to ma9ta94 ,& to say t ,"t has n reality w\ld seem to be pla9ly equival5t to say+ t ,"t is n real4 ,h[ev]1 if anybody %\ld d\bt :e!r ! two phrases are meant to be equival5t1 ! d\bt may be easily set at re/ by a ref]5ce to ! conclud+ words ( ! same *apt]1 :]e ,mr4 ,bradley uses ! foll[+ v emphatic expression3 ,"t1 he says1 l space1 has mo/ evid5tly prov$ n to be real1 b to be a contradictory appe>ance 7p4 #dc74 ,mr4 ,bradley does1 !n1 say "h1 9 s _m words1 t ,"t is n real4 ,b !re is "o o!r diff]5ce betwe5 ?is /atem5t at ! end ( ! *apt]1 & ! /atem5t at ! beg9n+ ( x1 :i* we mu/ n =get to notice4 ,9 ! /atem5t at ! beg9n+ he c>efully qualifies ! ass]tion ,"t nei!r has nor belongs to reality by say+ ,"t1 9 ! "* :i* x exhibits1 nei!r has nor belongs to reality1 :]eas 9 ! f9al /atem5t ?is qualification is n ins]t$2 "h he says simply ,"t is n real4 ,?is qualification1 :i* is ins]t$ 9 ! "o place & omitt$ 9 ! o!r1 might1 ( c\rse1 be meant to imply t1 9 "s o!r "*--"s "* :i* x does n exhibit--,"t has reality & does belong to x4 ,& ,i %all pres5tly h some?+ to say ab\t ?is di/9ction betwe5 ,"t 9 "o "* & ,"t 9 ano!r1 because x might be ?\ght t ?is di/9ction is ! explanation ( ! difficulty z to ,mr4 ,bradley's mean+1 :i* ,i am go+ to po9t out4 ,h[ev]1 s f> x is cle> t ,mr4 ,bradley holds t 9 "s s5se1 at all ev5ts1 ! :ole proposition ,"t is n real c be truly ass]t$4 ,&1 n[1 ,i want to quote a passage 9 :i* he says ?+s :i*1 at fir/ sight1 seem difficult to reconcile ) ?is view4 ,?is new passage is a passage 9 :i* he is n talk+ ( ,"t 9 p>ticul>1 b ( appe>ances 9 g5]al4 ,b1 z we h se51 he does reg>d ,"t z "o among appe>ances1 & ,i ?9k !re is no d\bt t :at he "h decl>es to be true ( all appe>ances is meant to be true ( ,"t1 among ! re/4 ,?is new passage is z foll[s3-- ,= ! pres5t1 he says1#b we may keep a fa/ hold ^u ?is1 t appe>ances exi/4 ,t is absolutely c]ta91 & to d5y x is nons5se4 ,& :atev] exi/s mu/ belong to reality4 ,?is is also q c]ta91 & its d5ial once m is self-contradictory4 ,our appe>ances1 no d\bt1 may be a begg>ly %[1 & _! nature to an unkn[n ext5t may be some?+ :i*1 z x is1 is n true ( reality4 ,t is "o ?+1 & x is q ano!r ?+ to speak z if ^! facts _h no actual exi/5ce1 or z if !re c\ld be any?+ b reality to :i* !y might belong4 ,& ,i mu/ v5ture to repeat t su* an idea w\ld be %e] nons5se4 ,:at appe>s1 = t sole reason1 mo/ indubitably is2 & !re is no possibility ( conjur+ its be+ away f x4 ,t is ! passage :i* seems to me to raise a difficulty z to 8 mean+ :5 contra/$ ) ! =m] passage4 ,& ! reason :y x seems to me to raise "o is ?is4 ,9 ! =m] passage ,mr4 ,bradley decl>$ mo/ emphatically t ,"t is n real2 he said3 ,"t has mo/ evid5tly prov$ n to be real4 ,:]eas 9 ?is "o he seems to decl>e equally emphatically t ,"t does exi/1 & is4 ,& 8 language "h aga9 is z /rong z possible4 ,he says x is %e] nons5se to suppose t ,"t does n exi/1 is n a fact1 does n belong to reality4 ,x looks1 !re=e1 z if he meant to make a di/9ction betwe5 be+ real on ! "o h&1 & exi/+1 be+ a fact1 & be+ on ! o!r h&--z if he meant to say t a ?+ may exi/1 & be1 & be a fact1 & yet n be real4 ,& ,i ?9k !re is1 at all ev5ts1 "s sup]ficial difficulty 9 und]/&+ ?is di/9ction4 ,we might naturally ?9k t to say ,"t exi/s1 is a fact1 & is1 is equival5t to say+ t x is real4 ,:at m1 we might ask1 c a man :o says t ,"t is real mean to ma9ta9 ab\t x ?an t x exi/s1 is a fact1 & is8 ,all t mo/ p w\ld mean by say+ t "t is real c\ld1 x w\ld seem1 be express$ by say+ ,!re is su* a ?+ z ,"t4 ,& x might1 !re=e1 appe> f ?is new passage z if ,mr4 ,bradley fully agre$ ) ! view t mo/ p w\ld express by say+ ,"t is real--z if he did n at all mean to contradict any?+ t mo/ p believe ab\t ,"t4 ,b1 if s1 !n :at are we to make ( 8 =m] ass]tion t1 nev]!less1 ,"t is n real8 ,he evid5tly ?9ks t1 9 ass]t+ ?is1 he is ass]t+ some?+ :i* is n m]e nons5se2 & he c]ta9ly w\ld n h *os5 ?is way ( express+ :at he means1 unless he _h suppos$ t :at he is "h ass]t+ ab\t ,"t is incompatible ) :at p (t5 mean :5 !y say ,"t is real4 ,yet1 we h se5 t he ?9ks t :at he is ass]t+ is n incompatible ) ! ass]tions t ,"t is1 & is a fact1 & exi/s4 ,he mu/1 !re=e1 ?9k t :5 p say ,"t is real !y (t51 at lea/1 mean some?+ m ?an m]ely t !re is su* a ?+ z ,"t1 some?+ !re=e1 :i* may be d5i$1 )\t d5y+ ?is4 ,all ! same1 !re is1 ,i ?9k1 a real difficulty 9 see+ t !y ev] d mean any?+ m1 &1 if !y d1 :at m x is t !y c mean4 ,! two expressions ,!re is su* a ?+ z s & s & ,s & s is real are c]ta9ly sometimes & q naturally us$ z equival5ts1 ev5 if !y are n always s us$4 ,& ,mr4 ,bradley's own language implies t ?is is s4 ,=1 z we h se51 9 ! fir/ passage1 he seems to id5tify belong+ to reality ) be+ real4 ,! conclusion :i* he expresses 9 "o place by say+ t ,"t does n belong to reality he expresses 9 ano!r by say+ t x is n real2 :]eas 9 ! second passage he seems to id5tify ! mean+ ( ! same phrase belong+ to reality ) exi/+2 he says t :atev] exi/s mu/ belong to reality1 & t x is self-contradictory to d5y ?is4 ,b if bo? be+ real & exi/+ are id5tical ) belong+ to reality1 x w\ld seem !y mu/ be id5tical ) "o ano!r4 ,&1 inde$1 9 ano!r passage 9 ! ,app5dix to ! #bnd ,edition 7p4 #eee7 we f9d ,mr4 ,bradley actually us+ ! foll[+ words3 ,any?+1 he says1 t 9 any s5se is1 qualifies ! absolute reality & s is real4 ,moreov]1 z we h se51 he decl>es x to be nons5se to d5y t ,"t is2 he mu/1 !re=e1 all[ t1 9 a s5se1 at all ev5ts1 x is nons5se to d5y t ,"t is real4 ,& yet ?is d5ial is ! v "o he has made4 ,mr4 ,bradley1 !re=e1 does seem himself to all[ t ! ^w real may1 sometimes at all ev5ts1 be prop]ly us$ z equival5t to ! words exi/s1 is a fact1 is4 ,& yet 8 two ass]tions _c bo? be true1 unless !re is "s s5se 9 :i* ! :ole proposition ,"t is real is n equival5t to & _c be inf]r$ f ,"t is1 or ,"t exi/s1 or ,"t is a fact4 ,x seems1 !n1 pretty cle> t ,mr4 ,bradley mu/ be hold+ t ! /atem5t ,"t is real is 9 "o s5se1 n equival5t to ,"t exi/s2 ?\gh he admits t1 9 ano!r s5se1 x is4 ,& ,i w only quote "o o!r passage :i* seems to make ?is pla94 ,if1 he says lat] on 7p4 #bjf7 ,"t is n unreal1 ,i admit t our ,absolute is a delusion2 b1 on ! o!r side1 x w be urg$ t "t _c be m]e appe>ance4 ,! *ange 9 ! f9ite subject1 we are told1 is a matt] ( direct exp]i5ce2 x is a fact1 & h5ce x _c be expla9$ away4 ,& s mu* ( c\rse is indubitable4 ,*ange is a fact &1 fur!r1 ?is fact1 z su*1 is n reconcilable ) ! ,absolute4 ,&1 if we c\ld n 9 any way p]ceive h[ ! fact c be unreal1 we %\ld be plac$1 ,i admit1 9 a hopeless dilemma4444 ,b our real position is v diff]5t f ?is4 ,= "t has be5 %[n to contradict itself1 & s to be appe>ance4 ,) ?is1 its discord1 we see at once1 may pass z an elem5t into a wid] h>mony4 ,& ) ?is1 ! appeal to fact at once becomes wor?less4 ,x is m]e sup]/ition to suppose t an appeal to exp]i5ce c prove reality4 ,t ,i f9d some?+ 9 exi/5ce 9 ! _w or 9 my self1 %[s t ?is some?+ exi/s1 & x _c %[ m4 ,any deliv]ance ( consci\sness--:e!r orig9al or acquir$--is b a deliv]ance ( consci\sness4 ,x is 9 no case an oracle & a revelation :i* we h to accept z x is a fact1 l o!r facts1 to be dealt )2 & !re is no presumption any:]e t any fact is bett] ?an appe>ance4 ,"h ,mr4 ,bradley seems pla9ly to imply t to be real is some?+ m & o!r ?an to be a fact or to exi/4 ,?is is ! di/9ction :i* ,i ?9k he means to make1 & :i*1 ,i ?9k1 is ! real explanation ( 8 puzzl+ language1 & ?is is ! di/9ction :i* ,i am go+ pres5tly to discuss4 ,b ,i want fir/ to say some?+ z to t o!r di/9ction1 :i* ,i said might be suppos$ to be ! explanation ( ! :ole difficulty--! di/9ction impli$ by ! qualification ,"t1 9 ! "* :i* x exhibits2 ! sugge/ion t1 :5 we talk ( ,"t1 we may sometimes mean ,"t 9 "o "*1 sometimes 9 ano!r1 & t :at is true ( x 9 ! "o "* may n be true ( x 9 ! o!r4 ,x might1 ,i ?9k1 be sugge/$ t ?is is ! explanation ( ! :ole difficulty4 ,& ,i want briefly to po9t out :y ,i ?9k x _c be ! only explanation4 ,/at$ v badly & crudely1 ! difficulty :i* requires explanation is ?is3 ,mr4 ,bradley says1 ,x is %e] nons5se to say ,"t is n real4 ,b ?is ?+ :i* he says x is %e] nons5se to say is ! v ?+ :i* he himself _h =m]ly said4 ,he _h said1 ,"t has mo/ evid5tly prov$ n to be real4 ,n[1 ,mr4 ,bradley c]ta9ly does n mean to say t ?is proposition ( 8 own is %e] nons5se2 & yet he says1 9 words1 t x is %e] nons5se4 ,?is is ! difficulty4 ,:at is ! explanation8 ,q obvi\sly1 ! explanation c only take "o possible =m4 ,mr4 ,bradley mu/ be hold+ t ! words ,"t is real may h two diff]5t s5ses4 ,9 "o s5se1 ! d5ial ( !m is %e] nons5se2 9 ! o!r s5se1 s f> f be+ %e] nons5se1 d5ial ( !m is1 accord+ to him1 evid5tly true4 ,n[1 :at are ^! two diff]5t s5ses1 betwe5 :i* ! diff]5ce is s enorm\s8 ,x is "h t ! two diff]5t explanations come 94 ,! fir/ &1 z ,i ?9k1 ! wrong explanation 7?\gh ,i ?9k ,mr4 ,bradley's words d give "s col\r to x7 is ?is4 ,x might be said3 ,! :ole bus9ess is p]fectly easy to expla94 ,:5 ,mr4 ,bradley says t ,"t is n real1 :at he means is t ,"t1 9 ! "* :i* x exhibits1 is n real4 ,:]eas1 :5 he says1 ,"t does exi/1 is a fact1 & is1 & t x is nons5se to d5y ?is1 :at he means is t ,"t does exi/1 9 "s o!r "*--"s "* o!r ?an t :i* x exhibits4 ,he does n mean to make any di/9ction1 su* z y suppose1 betwe5 two mean+s ( ! ^w ,i real '--! "o ( !m m]ely equival5t to 'exi/s1' 'is1' 'is a fact1' & ! o!r mean+ some?+ v diff]5t f ?is4 ,! only di/9ction he means to make is a di/9ction betwe5 two mean+s ( ',"t' or ( ! :ole s5t5ce ',"t is real4' ,he di/+ui%es betwe5 ! mean+ ( ?is s5t5ce1 :5 x means1 ',"t 9 ! "* :i* x exhibits1 is real1' :i* mean+1 he says1 is evid5tly false2 & its mean+ :5 x means1 ',"t 9 "s o!r "*1 is real1' & ?is mean+1 he says1 is evid5tly true4 ,?is is ! complete explanation ( y\r suppos$ puzzle1 :i* is1 9 fact1 !re=e1 v easy to solve4 ,?is1 ,i ?9k1 might be (f]$ z an explanation ( ,mr4 ,bradley's mean+4 ,& x mu/ be admitt$ t x w\ld furni% a complete explanation ( ! p>ticul> puzzle ,i h j /at$1 x w\ld completely absolve ,mr4 ,bradley f ! *>ge ( inconsi/5cy2 & w\ld %[ t :]e he appe>s to contradict himself ab\t ! reality ( ,"t1 ! contradiction is v]bal only & n real4 ,we might1 inde$1 object to ?is di/9ction betwe5 ,"t 9 "o "* & ,"t 9 ano!r2 on ! gr\nd t any?+ :i* has n got ! "* :i* ,"t exhibits1 b only "s o!r "*1 ought n to be call$ ,"t at all4 ,we are1 inde$1 p]fectly famili> ) ! conception t "o & ! same ?+ may at "o "t possess a "* :i* x does n possess at ano!r1 s t :at is true ( x at "o "t may n be true ( x at ano!r4 ,we are1 t is1 famili> ) ! idea ( a ?+ *ang+ its "*4 ,b ,"t itself z a :ole obvi\sly _c *ange its "* 9 ?is s5se4 ,mr4 ,bradley _c mean to say t x possesses ! "* :i* x exhibits & 9 :i* x is unreal at "o "t1 & possesses "s o!r "*1 9 :i* x is real1 at "s o!r "t4 ,& h5ce we might say x is c]ta9ly wrong to speak z if ,"t itself c\ld h two incompatible *>act]s2 s9ce no?+ c h two incompatible *>act]s1 unless x has !m at diff]5t times4 ,& ?is is an objection :i* does seem to apply to ,mr4 ,bradley's doctr9e 9 any case1 s9ce he does 9 any case seem to imply ?is di/9ction betwe5 ,"t 9 "o "* & ,"t 9 ano!r1 :e!r ?is di/9ction is ! complete explanation ( our p>ticul> puzzle or n4 ,yet ?is objection w\ld n necess>ily be m ?an an objection to ,mr4 ,bradley's words2 x w\ld n necess>ily be an objection to 8 mean+4 ,:]e he seems to imply t ,"t1 9 "s "* o!r ?an t :i* x exhibits1 may be fully real1 he may only mean t some?+ completely diff]5t f ,"t1 b :i* does 9 "s s5se correspond to x1 is fully real2 & if he does mean ?is1 our objection w\ld only am\nt to an objection to 8 giv+ ! "n ( ,"t to ?is suppos$ c\nt]p>t ( ,"t2 we might say1 & ,i ?9k ju/ly1 t x is mislead+ to speak ( ?is c\nt]p>t ( ,"t z if x 7 ,"t itself 9 "s o!r "*2 b ?is w\ld g no way at all to %[ t !re may n really be su* a c\nt]p>t ( ,"t1 :i* is real1 :ile ,"t itself is unreal4 ,we might ask1 too1 :at ?is suppos$ c\nt]p>t ( ,"t is l1 or 7to put x 9 ,mr4 ,bradley's way7 :at ! precise "* is1 9 :i* ,"t ,areal8 ,& ,i ?9k ,mr4 ,bradley w\ld admit t he _c tell u4 ,b ?is1 y see1 w\ld also be no objection to 8 actual doctr9e4 ,he might q well "k1 & be "r 9 say+1 t !re is & mu/ be a real c\nt]p>t ( ,"t1 completely diff]5t 9 "* f ,"t1 z we "k x1 ev5 ?\gh he has n ! lea/ idea :at ?is c\nt]p>t is l4 ,we mu/1 !re=e1 admit t ?is propos$ explanation ( our puzzle w\ld be a complete explanation ( x4 ,x w\ld completely v9dicate ,mr4 ,bradley f ! *>ge ( inconsi/5cy1 & w\ld give u1 z 8 doctr9e1 a doctr9e to :i* we h hi!rto f\nd no objection except v]bal ones4 ,b1 nev]!less1 ,i ?9k x is a wrong explanation1 & ,i want to expla9 :y4 ,if we 7 to suppose t ?is di/9ction betwe5 ,"t 9 "o "* & ,"t 9 ano!r 7 ! only "o on :i* ,mr4 ,bradley meant to rely1 we %\ld h z 8 doctr9e ?is3 ,we %\ld h to suppose him to affirm mo/ emphatically t ,"t1 9 ! "* :i* x exhibits1 nei!r is real1 nor exi/s1 nor is a fact1 nor is4 ,we %\ld h to suppose him to be us+ all ^! f\r expressions always z /rict equival5ts1 & to mean t x is only 9 its o!r "* t ,"t ei!r exi/s1 or is a fact1 or is4 ,& if he did mean ?is1 !re w\ld1 ( c\rse1 be no d\bt :atev] t he does mean to contradict ! common view ) reg>d to ,"t2 s9ce1 ( c\rse1 :at mo/ p mean by ,"t is :at he *ooses to call ,"t 9 ! "* :i* x exhibits4 ,yet1 8 language1 ev5 9 ! passages t ,i quot$1 seems to me to indicate t he does n mean ?is4 ,i ?9k1 on ! contr>y1 he means to affirm emphatically t ,"t ev5 9 ! "* :i* x exhibits1 does exi/1 is a fact1 & indubitably is1 ?\gh x is n real 9 t "*4 ,9 ! second passage1 = in/ance1 :]e he insi/s s emphatically t appe>ances d exi/1 are facts1 & indubitably are1 he is1 ,i ?9k1 pla9ly talk+ ( appe>ances1 9 ! "* :i* !y exhibit--or1 z he !re puts x1 _! nature1 z x is--he does1 ,i ?9k1 mean t appe>ances1 ev5 9 ?is "*1 are facts1 exi/1 & are1 ?\gh1 9 ?is "*1 !y are n true ( reality4 ,&1 s aga9 9 ! ?ird passage1 :]e he says1 ,*ange is a fact1 & ?is fact1 z su*1 is n reconcilable ) ! ,absolute2 ?is language is surely q inexcusable1 unless he means t ,*ange1 z su*--*ange1 9 ! "* :i* x exhibits--*ange1 z x is1 is a fact3 ?\gh1 ( c\rse1 he holds t 9 ?is "* x c]ta9ly is n real4 ,i ?9k1 !re=e1 we h to assume t ,mr4 ,bradley means to make a di/9ction n m]ely betwe5 ,"t1 9 "o "*1 & ,"t 9 ano!r1 b also betwe5 real1 9 "o s5se1 & real 9 ano!r4 ,8 mean+ is n s simple z x w\ld be1 if he 7 m]ely mak+ a di/9ction betwe5 ,"t 9 "o "* & ,"t 9 ano!r1 & x is n1 aft] all1 at all pla9 :e!r he means to contradict :at ord9>y p hold ab\t ,"t or n4 ,he does n mean to ass]t t ,"t1 z su*1 nei!r is real1 nor exi/s1 nor is a fact1 nor is2 b1 on ! contr>y1 t ,"t1 ev5 z su*1 does exi/1 is a fact1 & is2 b1 nev]!less1 is n real4 ,?is1 at lea/1 is :at ,i am go+ to assume him to mean4 ,& on ?is assumption1 we are br\ght face to face ) ! "q z to ! mean+ ( ! ^w real1 & also z to ! mean+ ( ^! o!r words exi/s1 is a fact1 & is4 ,mr4 ,bradley seems to admit1 we h se51 t real may sometimes be prop]ly us$ z m]ely equival5t to ^! o!r phrases4 ,we are1 h[ev]1 n[ suppos+ t he also holds t 9 ano!r s5se !y are n equival5t1 b t real means some?+ m ?an ! o!rs1 s t x is q consi/5t to ma9ta9 t ,"t is n real1 & yet does exi/1 is a fact1 & is4 ,9 hold+ ?is ,i ?9k he is mi/ak52 & :at ,i want to d is to expla91 z cle>ly z ,i c1 :at sort ( a mi/ake ,i take him to be mak+1 & :at seems to me to be ! s\rce ( ?is mi/ake4 ,i may1 p]haps1 be q wrong 9 ?9k+ t ,mr ,bradley has made ?is mi/ake1 & t x is 9 any degree ! s\rce ( ! di/9ction he seems to draw betwe5 reality & exi/5ce4 ,to ma9ta9 t x is s is no "p ( my ma9 object4 ,my ma9 object is simply to make cle> ! nature ( ?is p>ticul> mi/ake1 :e!r committ$ by ,mr4 ,bradley or n1 & t x is a mi/ake2 because x seems to me t x is a mi/ake :i* x is v easy to make1 & v important to avoid4 ,i am1 ( c\rse1 n conc]n$ at all to discuss ! "q :e!r ,"t is real or n1 b only to discuss ! "q :at sort ( ?+s w\ld h to be true1 if x 7 unreal1 & :e!r if ^? ?+s 7 true x c\ld /ill be true t ,"t ei!r exi/s1 or is1 or is a fact4 ,n[1 to beg9 )1 ,i ?9k ,i "k pretty well1 9 "p at lea/1 :at ,mr4 ,bradley means :5 he says t x is unreal4 ,i ?9k t "p at lea/ ( :at he means is j :at he ought to mean--j :at anyone else w\ld mean if he said t ,"t 0 unreal1 & :at any ord9>y p]son w\ld und]/& to be meant1 if he he>d ^? words4 ,b ,i c conceive t1 :5 ,i h expla9$ z well z ,i c :at ?is is t he ought to mean1 "s p may be incl9$ to dispute :e!r he means any su* ?+ at all4 ,!y may say t he is us+ ! ^w real exclusively 9 "s highly unusual & special s5se1 s t 9 ass]t+ t ,"t is unreal he is by no means d5y+ any "p ( :at ord9>y p w\ld mean by say+ t ,"t is real4 ,& t "s special s5se may come 9 to 8 mean+ ,i am prep>$ to admit4 ,i d ?9k x is possible t "p ( :at ,mr4 ,bradley is ass]t+ may be some?+ :i* no unsophi/icat$ p]son w\ld ?9k ( express+ 9 ! same way1 & ,i w admit1 !re=e1 t he does n1 v likely1 mean by ,"t is unreal m]ely :at o!r p w\ld mean by ?is phrase1 b some?+ else z well4 ,:at1 h[ev]1 ,i _c help ?9k+ is t1 ev5 if he means some?+ m1 he does mean :at ord9>y p w\ld mean z well3 t :at !y w\ld mean is at lea/ a "p ( 8 mean+4 ,& if ev5 ?is is disput$1 if x is ma9ta9$ t he is us+ ! words exclusively 9 "s special s5se1 ,i own ,i d n "k h[ to argue ! "q4 ,if anybody really does take ! view t1 :5 he says ,"t is unreal1 absolutely all t he means is some?+ :i* is 9 no way incompatible ) :at mo/ p w\ld mean by say+ ,"t is real1 ,i d n "k h[ to %[ t ?is view is wrong4 ,i c only say t if ?is _h be5 all t he meant1 ,i _c believe t he w\ld h express$ 8 view 9 ! =m ,"t is unreal4 ,! only fur!r argum5t ,i %all br+ 9 fav\r ( my view t he does mean :at he ought to mean w take ! =m ( an answ] to "o possible argum5t :i* might be br\ght aga9/ x4 ,:5 ,i nave expla9$ :at he ought to mean by say+ t ,"t is unreal1 x w be q cle> t ?is is some?+ :i* is 9 fact incompatible ) ! tru? ( ! propositions t ,"t is1 or exi/s1 or is a fact4 ,& x might be urg$ t ! fact t x is ?us incompatible is a /rong argum5t aga9/ ! view t ,mr4 ,bradley does mean :at he ought to mean1 s9ce1 if he _h meant x1 he c\ld h>dly h fail$ to p]ceive t :at he meant 0 inconsi/5t ) ^! propositions1 :]eas1 z we h se51 he c]ta9ly does n p]ceive ?is4 ,i h an answ] to t argum5t1 :i* consi/s 9 giv+ an explanation1 :i* ,i ?9k a plausible "o1 z to h[ he c\ld come to ?9k t ! propositions are n inconsi/5t1 :5 9 fact !y are4 ,:at1 !n1 ought ,mr4 ,bradley to mean by ,"t is unreal8 ,:at w\ld mo/ p mean by ?is proposition8 ,i d n ?9k !re is mu* difficulty 9 discov]+ :at sort ( ?+ !y w\ld mean by x4 ,( c\rse1 ,"t1 ) a big ,t1 seems to be a highly ab/ract k9d ( entity1 & to def9e exactly :at c be meant by say+ ( an entity ( t sort t x is unreal does seem to (f] difficulties4 ,b if y try to translate ! proposition into ! concrete1 & to ask :at x implies1 !re is1 ,i ?9k1 v little d\bt z to ! sort ( ?+ x implies4 ,! mom5t y try to d ?is1 & ?9k :at x really comes to1 y at once beg9 ?9k+ ( a numb] ( diff]5t k9ds ( propositions1 all ( :i* pla9ly mu/ be untrue1 if ,"t is unreal4 ,if ,"t is unreal1 !n pla9ly no?+ ev] happ5s be=e or aft] any?+ else2 no?+ is ev] simultane\s ) any?+ else2 x is nev] true t any?+ is pa/2 nev] true t any?+ w happ5 9 ! future2 nev] true t any?+ is happ5+ n[2 & s on4 ,y c at once ?9k ( a consid]able numb] ( k9ds ( propositions 7& y c\ld easily add to ! li/71 ! falsehood ( all ( :i* is pla9ly impli$ by say+ t ,"t is unreal4 ,& x is cle>1 also1 t to say t ! falsehood ( all propositions ( ^! k9ds is impli$ is equival5t to say+ t !re are no facts ( c]ta9 correspond+ k9ds--no facts :i* consi/ 9 "o ev5t happ5+ be=e ano!r2 none :i* consi/ 9 an ev5t be+ pa/ or future1 & s on4 ,t is to say1 :at ,"t is unreal implies is t1 9 ! case ( a l>ge numb] ( diff]5t prop]ties :i* are su* t1 if !y did belong to any?+1 :at !y belong$ to w\ld be facts hav+ "s common *>act]i/ic1 :i* we might express by call+ !m temporal facts1 ! prop]ties 9 "q d1 9 fact1 belong to no?+4 ,x implies t ! prop]ty ( be+ a fact :i* consi/s 9 "o ev5t foll[+ ano!r belongs to no?+2 t t ( be+ a pa/ ev5t belongs to no?+1 & s on4 ,& :y x implies t all ^? diff]5t special prop]ties belong to no?+ is1 ,i ?9k we may say1 because :at x means is t ! g5]al prop]ty :i* ,i h call$ t ( be+ a temporal fact belongs to no?+4 ,to say t ! prop]ty ( be+ a temporal fact belongs to no?+ does imply t su* special prop]ties z t ( be+ a fact :i* consi/s 9 "o ev5t foll[+ ano!r1 or t ( be+ a fact :i* consi/s 9 some?+ be+ pa/1 also belong to no?+2 9 exactly ! same way z to say t ! prop]ty ( be+ col\r$ belongs to no?+ implies ) reg>d to ! special prop]ties be+ r$1 be+ blue1 etc41 t !y also belong to no?+4 ,we may1 !n1 ,i ?9k1 say t :at ,"t is unreal means is simply ,! prop]ty ( be+ a temporal fact belongs to no?+1 or1 to express ?is 9 ! way 9 :i* x w\ld be express$ 9 ord9>y life1 ,!re are no temporal facts4 ,& ?is be+ s1 we h expla9$ ! usage ( unreal1 :]e x is pr$icat$ ( ,"t ) a capital ,t1 by ref]5ce to a mu* m common & p]fectly famili> usage ( ! t]m4 ,! use ( is unreal 9 ! phrase ,"t is unreal has be5 def9$ by ref]5ce to its use 9 ! phrase ,temporal facts are unreal4 ,& its use 9 ?is phrase is1 s f> z ,i c see1 exactly ! same z 9 ho/s ( phrases ) :i* we are p]fectly famili>2 x is1 ,i ?9k1 ! commone/ & by f> ! mo/ important use ( ! t]m unreal4 ,! use is t 9 :i* we use x :5 we say1 ,unicorns are unreal1 ,griff9s are unreal1 ,*imras are unreal1 & s on4 ,x is ! usage 9 :i* unreal is equival5t to imag9>y2 & 9 :i* to say ,unicorns are unreal means ! same z ,!re are no unicorns or ,unicorns d n exi/4 ,9 j ! same way ! proposition ,temporal facts are unreal1 into :i* we h translat$ ,"t is unreal1 means ! same z ,!re are no temporal facts1 or ,temporal facts d n exi/1 or ,temporal facts are imag9>y4 ,i ?9k1 !n1 t :at ,mr4 ,bradley ought to mean by ,"t is unreal c be def9$ by ref]5ce to "o p>ticul> usage ( ! ^w real --or1 if y l to put x t way1 to "o p>ticul> "o among ! conceptions = :i* ! t]m reality may /&4 ,& ?is p>ticul> conception seems to me to be by f> ! commone/ & mo/ important ( ^? = :i* ! t]m does /&4 ,i want1 !re=e1 be=e go+ on1 to dwell a little ^u its nature2 al?\gh ,i d>esay t all t ,i h to say is p]fectly famili> & p]fectly well und]/ood by e "o "h4 ,( c\rse1 x has (t5 be5 said be=e1 b ,i ?9k x is /ill v f> f be+ g5]ally und]/ood4 ,i ?9k1 p]haps1 ! po9t ,i want to insi/ on c be br\ght out 9 ?is way4 ,i h j said t we h po9t$ out "o p>ticul> "o1 & t ! mo/ important1 among ! conceptions = :i* ! t]m reality may /&2 & t is an excusable way ( say+ :at we h done4 ,b x w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 be m correct to say t we h po9t$ out "o p>ticul>1 & t ! mo/ important1 usage ( ! t]ms real & unreal1 & t "o ( ! peculi>ities ( ?is usage is t x is su* t ! t]ms real & unreal _c1 :5 us$ 9 ?is way1 be prop]ly said to /& = any conception :atev]4 ,i w try to expla9 :at ,i mean4 ,we h said t :at ,lions are real means is t "s p>ticul> prop]ty or o!r--,i w say1 = ! sake ( brevity1 ! prop]ty ( be+ a lion1 ?\gh t is n /rictly accurate1 does ,9 fact belong to "s-?+--t !re are ?+s :i* h x1 or1 to put x 9 ano!r way1 t ! conception ( be+ a lion is a conception :i* does apply to "s ?+s--t !re are ?+s :i* fall "u x4 ,& simil>ly :at ,unicorns are unreal means is t ! prop]ty ( be+ a unicorn belongs to no?+4 ,n[1 if ?is is s1 !n x seems to me1 9 a v important s5se1 real & unreal d n 9 ?is usage /& = any conceptions at all4 ,! only conceptions :i* occur 9 ! proposition ,lions are real are1 on ?is int]pretation1 pla9ly1 7#a7 ! conception ( be+ a lion1 & 7#b7 ! conception ( belong+ to some?+1 & p]fectly obvi\sly real does n /& = ei!r ( ^!4 ,9 ! case ( ! fir/ t is obvi\s2 b x is wor? :ile po9t+ out t x is also true ( ! second4 ,= if is real did /& = belongs to some?+1 !n ! proposition ,lions are real w\ld /&1 n = ! ass]tion t ! prop]ty ( be+ a lion belongs to some?+1 b = ! ass]tion t lions !mselves are prop]ties :i* belong to some?+2 & x is q obvi\s t :at we mean to ass]t is n any su* nons5se z ?is4 ,real1 !re=e1 does n1 9 ?is proposition1 /& = ! conception ( belong+ to some?+ nor yet1 q pla9ly1 does x /& = ! conception ( be+ a lion4 ,& h5ce1 s9ce ^! are ! only two conceptions :i* d occur 9 ! proposition1 we may1 ,i ?9k1 say t real1 9 ?is usage1 does n /& = any conception at all4 ,to say t x did w\ld be to imply t x /ood = "s prop]ty ( :i* we are ass]t+ t ev]y?+ :i* has ! prop]ty ( be+ a lion also has ?is o!r prop]ty4 ,b we are n1 9 fact1 ass]t+ any su* ?+4 ,we are n ass]t+ ( any prop]ty call$ reality t x belongs to lions1 z 9 ! proposition ,lions are mammalian we are ass]t+ ( ! prop]ty ( be+ a mammal t x belongs to lions4 ,! two propositions ,lions are real & ,lions are mammalian1 ?\gh grammatically simil>1 are 9 reality ( :olly diff]5t =ms2 & "o diff]5ce betwe5 !m may be express$ by say+ t :]eas mammalian does /& = a prop]ty or conception1 ! v po9t ( ?is usage ( real is t x does n4 ,to return to ,mr4 ,bradley4 ,"t is unreal ought to mean1 accord+ to me1 ,temporal facts are unreal1 9 ! s5se ,i h tri$ to expla94 ,& ,i _c help ?9k+ t ?is :i* he ought to mean is1 9 "p at lea/1 :at ,mr4 ,bradley does mean :5 he says ,"t is unreal1 ?\gh possibly be also means some?+ else z well4 ,b if s1 x is q cle>1 ,i ?9k1 t :at he means is inconsi/5t ) its be+ true t ,"t exi/s or t !re is su* a ?+ z ,"t4 ,to say t ,"t exi/s or t !re is su* a ?+1 is to ass]t at lea/1 t !re are "s temporal facts3 x may ass]t m ?an ?is1 b x does ass]t ?is1 at lea/4 ,& ?is1 we h se51 is exactly :at is d5i$ :5 x is said t ,"t is unreal4 ,"t is unreal j means ,temporal facts are unreal1 or !re are no temporal facts1 or ,temporal facts d n exi/4 ,& j ?is is also :at is meant by ,"t does n exi/ or ,!re is no su* ?+ z ,"t4 ,!re is1 9 fact1 no?+1 else = ^! expressions to mean4 ,:at1 !re=e1 ,mr4 ,bradley ought to mean & 7accord+ to me7 does mean by ,"t is unreal is1 9 fact1 inconsi/5t ) :at he ought to mean by ,"t exi/s or by ,"t is4 ,& yet pla9ly he does n ?9k t x is s4 ,is x possible to expla9 :y he %\ld h fail$ to p]ceive ! inconsi/5cy8 ,i ?9k 8 failure c be expla9$ z foll[s4 ,x may h be5 notic$ t1 9 ! passages ,i quot$ f him1 he insi/s 9 "o place1 t to d5y t appe>ances exi/ is n m]ely false b self-contradictory1 & 9 ano!r appeals to ! pr9ciple t any deliv]ance ( consci\sness is b a deliv]ance ( consci\sness 9 support ( 8 cont5tion t :at is a fact ne$1 nev]!less1 n be real4 ,& ! fact t he does ^! two ?+s does1 ,i ?9k1 give col\r to ! sugge/ion t ! reason :y he ?9ks t :at is unreal may yet exi/1 & be a fact1 & be1 is ! foll[+4 ,x is und\bt$ly ! case t1 ev5 if temporal facts are unreal1 i4e41 !re are no su* ?+s1 we c & d ?9k ( !m1 j z x is und\bt$ly ! case t1 ?\gh unicorns are unreal1 we c & d imag9e !m4 ,9 o!r words1 temporal facts & unicorns are bo? q c]ta9ly deliv]ances ( consci\sness1 at lea/ 9 ! s5se t !y are objects ( ?\ght2 be+ objects ( ?\ght !y are1 9 a wide s5se1 appe>ances also1 & ,i _c help ?9k+ t ,mr4 ,bradley supposes t1 m]ely because !y are s1 !y mu/ at lea/ ,,be4 ,h[ 7,i imag9e he w\ld ask7 c a ?+ 'appe>' or ev5 'be ?\ght (' unless x is !re to appe> & to be ?\ght (8 ,to say t x appe>s or is ?\ght (1 & t yet !re is no su* ?+1 is pla9ly self-contradictory4 ,a ?+ _c h a prop]ty1 unless x is !re to h x1 &1 s9ce unicorns & temporal facts d h ! prop]ty ( be+ ?\ght (1 !re c]ta9ly mu/ be su* ?+s4 ,:5 ,i ?9k ( a unicorn1 :at ,i am ?9k+ ( is c]ta9ly n no?+2 if x 7 no?+1 !n1 :5 ,i ?9k ( a griff91 ,i %\ld also be ?9k+ ( no?+1 & !re w\ld be no diff]5ce betwe5 ?9k+ ( a griff9 & ?9k+ ( a unicorn4 ,b !re c]ta9ly is a diff]5ce2 & :at c ! diff]5ce be except t 9 ! "o case :at ,i am ?9k+ ( is a unicorn1 & 9 ! o!r a griff98 ,& if ! unicorn is :at ,i am ?9k+ (1 !n !re c]ta9ly mu/ be a unicorn1 9 spite ( ! fact t unicorns are unreal4 ,9 o!r words1 ?\gh 9 "o s5se ( ! words !re c]ta9ly are no unicorns--t s5se1 namely1 9 :i* to ass]t t !re are w\ld be equival5t to ass]t+ t unicorns are real--yet !re mu/ be "s o!r s5se 9 :i* !re are su* ?+s2 s9ce1 if !re 7 n1 we c\ld n ?9k ( !m4 ,p]haps1 x may be ?\ght t ! fallacy involv$ 9 ?is argum5t is too gross = x to be possible t ,mr4 ,bradley %\ld h be5 guilty ( x4 ,b !re are o!r passages 9 ,appe>ance & ,reality--p>ticul>ly :at he says ab\t ,error --:i* look to me z if he c]ta9ly 0 guilty ( x4 ,i suppose x w be q obvi\s to ev]yone "h t x is a fallacy2 t ! fact t we c ?9k ( unicorns is n suffici5t to prove t1 9 any s5se at all1 !re are any unicorns4 ,yet1 ,i am n sure t ,i "k myself :at is ! mi/ake involv$ 9 ?9k+ t x is suffici5t1 & ,i am go+1 !re=e1 to try to put z cle>ly z ,i c1 :at ,i ?9k x is1 9 ! hope t somebody may be able1 if ,i am wrong1 to correct me4 ,! ma9 mi/ake1 ,i suppose1 is ! mi/ake ( ?9k+ t ! proposition ,unicorns are ?\ght ( is a proposition ( ! same =m z ,lions are hunt$2 or ! proposition ,i am ?9k+ ( a unicorn ( ! same =m z ,i am hunt+ a lion2 or ! proposition ,unicorns are objects ( ?\ght ( ! same =m z ,lions are objects ( ! *ase4 ,( ! second proposition 9 ea* ( ^! ?ree pairs1 x is 9 fact ! case t x c\ld n be true unless !re 7 lions--at lea/ "o4 ,ea* ( !m does1 9 fact1 ass]t bo? ) reg>d to a c]ta9 prop]ty--:i* we w call t ( be+ a lion--t !re are ?+s :i* possess x1 & also ) reg>d to ano!r--t ( be+ hunt$--t "s ( ! ?+s :i* possess ! =m] possess ?is prop]ty too4 ,b x is obvi\s en\gh to common s5se t ! same is by no means true ( ! fir/ proposition 9 ea* pair1 9 spite ( ! fact t _! grammatical expression %[s no trace ( ! diff]5ce4 ,x is p]fectly obvi\s t if ,i say ,i am ?9k+ ( a unicorn1 ,i am n say+ bo? t !re is a unicorn & t ,i am ?9k+ ( x1 al?\gh1 if ,i say ,i am hunt+ a lion1 ,i am say+ bo? t !re is a lion1 & t ,i am hunt+ x4 ,9 ! =m] case1 ,i am n ass]t+ t ! two prop]ties ( be+ a unicorn & ( be+ ?\ght ( by me bo? belong to "o & ! same ?+2 :]eas1 9 ! latt] case1 ,i am ass]t+ t ! two prop]ties ( be+ a lion & ( be+ hunt$ by me d belong to "o & ! same ?+4 ,x is q cle> t !re is 9 fact1 ?is diff]5ce betwe5 ! two propositions2 al?\gh no trace ( x appe>s 9 _! v]bal expression4 ,& :y we %\ld use ! same =m ( v]bal expression to convey su* diff]5t mean+s is m ?an ,i c say4 ,x seems to me v curi\s t language1 9 ?is1 z 9 ! o!r in/ance :i* we h j consid]$ ( ,lions are real & ,lions are mammalian1 %\ld h gr[n up j z if x 7 expressly design$ to mislead philosoph]s2 & ,i d n "k :y x %\ld h4 ,yet1 x seems to me !re is no d\bt t 9 ev] s _m in/ances x has4 ,moreov]1 exactly :at is meant by say+ ,i am ?9k+ ( a unicorn is n by any means cle> to me4 ,i ?9k we c ass]t at lea/ ?is3 ,9 ord] t ?is proposition %\ld be true1 x is necess>y 7#a7 t ,i %\ld be conceiv+1 ) reg>d to a c]ta9 prop]ty1 ! hypo!sis t !re ,is some?+ :i* possesses x1 & 7#b7 t ! prop]ty 9 "q %\ld be su* t1 if any?+ did possess x !re w\ld be a unicorn4 ,al?\gh ?is is pla9ly true1 x does n give u completely :at is meant by ! /atem5t1 ,i am ?9k+ ( a unicorn2 & ,i d n "k :at ! complete mean+ is4 ,x is c]ta9ly n t ,i am conceiv+ ) reg>d to ! prop]ty ( be+ a unicorn1 t !re is some?+ :i* possesses x2 s9ce ,i may be ?9k+ ( a unicorn1 )\t ev] hav+ conceiv$ ! prop]ty ( be+ a unicorn at all4 ,:atev] x does mean1 ! po9t :i* conc]ns u is t x is c]ta9ly n necess>y = its tru?1 t ! prop]ty ( be+ a unicorn %\ld1 9 fact1 belong to any?+ :atev]1 or1 !re=e1 t !re %\ld 9 any s5se :atev] be a unicorn4 ,& ! fallacy ,i am attribut+ to ,mr4 ,bradley is t ( suppos+ t1 9 "s s5se1 x mu/ imply ?is latt]4 ,?is1 !n1 is :at ,i imag9e to be at lea/ "o ( ! reasons :i* h l$ ,mr4 ,bradley to suppose t ! proposition ,"t is unreal1 mu/ be consi/5t ) ! proposition ,!re is su* a ?+ z ,"t4 ,put %ortly1 x is t he sees 7:at is p]fectly true7 t ,"t is unreal mu/ be consi/5t ) ,we d ?9k ( ,"t2 he ?9ks 7falsely7 t ,we d ?9k ( ,"t mu/ imply1 9 "s s5se1 ,!re is su* a ?+ z ,"t2 & f9ally1 inf]s 7correctly7 f ?is true & ?is false premiss1 t !re mu/ be "s s5se ( ! proposition ,!re is su* a ?+ z ,"t :i* is consi/5t ) ,"t is unreal4 ,x foll[s1 !n1 t if ,mr4 ,bradley means :at he ought mean bo? by ,"t is unreal & by ,"t exi/s1 he is contradict+ himself :5 he comb9es ^! two propositions4 ,& ,i h said ,i feel conv9c$ t he does mean :at he ought to mean by ! =m]4 ,b ,i feel a good deal ( d\bt z to :e!r1 all ! same1 he is contradict+ himself1 because x does seem to me d\btful :e!r he means :at he ought to mean by ! latt]4 ,! k9d ( ?+ :i* ,i imag9e may be happ5+ to him :5 he insi/s s /rongly t ,"t does exi/1 is a fact1 & is1 is t1 prop]ly speak+1 he is n atta*+ to ^! phrases any mean+ :atev]--n1 !re=e1 t :i* !y prop]ly be>4 ,x seems to me v possible t he has s /rongly conv9c$ himself ( ! false proposition t !re mu/ be "s s5se 9 :i*1 if ,i ?9k ( a unicorn1 !re mu/ be a unicorn1 t :]ev] he kn[s ! =m] proposition holds1 he all[s himself to use ! latt] =m ( words1 )\t atta*+ any mean+ to !m4 ,:at he is really ass]t+ s emphatically may1 ,i ?9k1 be n any?+ :i* 8 words /& =1 b simply ?is v]bal proposition t !re mu/ be "s s5se 9 :i* !y are true4 #a ,appe>ance & ,reality 7#bnd edn471 p4 #ce4 ,! ,italics are m9e4 #b ,op4 cit4 pp4 #aca-b4 ,,"s ,,judgm5ts ,,( ,,p]ception ,i want to raise "s *ildi%ly simple que/ions z to :at we are do+ :5 we make judgm5ts ( a c]ta9 k9d1 :i* we all d 9 fact exce$+ly commonly make4 ,! k9d ( judgm5ts ,i mean are ^? :i* we make :51 ) reg>d to some?+ :i* we are see+1 we judge su* ?+s z ',t is an ink/&1 ,t is a tableclo?1 ,t is a door1 etc41 etc42 or :51 ) reg>d to some?+ :i* we are feel+ ) our h&s1 we judge su* ?+s z ,?is is clo?1 ,?is is a f+]1 ,?is is a co91 etc41 etc4 ,x is sc>cely possible1 ,i ?9k1 to exagg]ate ! frequ5cy ) :i* we make su* judgm5ts z ^!1 nor yet ! c]ta9ty ) :i* we are able to make va/ numb]s ( !m4 ,any man1 :o is n bl9d1 c1 at almo/ any mom5t ( 8 wak+ life1 except :5 he is 9 ! d>k1 make a l>ge numb] ( judgm5ts ( ! fir/ k9d1 ) ! greate/ c]ta9ty4 ,he has only to look ab\t him1 if he is indoors1 to judge ) reg>d to v>i\s ?+s :i* he is see+1 su* ?+s z ,t is a w9d[1 ,t is a *air1 ,?is is a book2 or1 if he is out-(-doors1 su* ?+s z ,t is a h\se1 ,t is a motor-c>1 ,t is a man1 or ,t is a /one1 ,t is a tree1 ,t is a cl\d4 ,& all ( u1 :o are n bl9d1 d 9 fact con/antly make su* judgm5ts1 ev5 if1 z a rule1 we only make !m z p>ts ( m complicat$ judgm5ts4 ,:at ,i mean is t1 :5 we make su* judgm5ts z ,hullo6 t clock has /opp$1 or ,?is *air is m com=table ?an t "o1 or ,t man looks l a =eign]1 judgm5ts ( ! simpl] k9d ) :i* ,i am conc]n$ are1 s f> z ,i c see1 actually a "p ( :at we are judg+4 ,9 judg+ ,t clock has /opp$1 "p ( :at ,i am actually judg+ is1 s f> z ,i c see1 ,t is a clock2 & simil>ly if ,i judge ,t tree is tall] ?an ?is "o1 my judgm5t actually conta9s ! two simpl] judgm5ts ,t is a tree1 & ,?is is a tree4 ,p]haps mo/ judgm5ts :i* we make1 ( ! k9d ,i mean1 are1 9 ?is way1 only p>ts ( m complicat$ judgm5ts3 ,i d n "k :e!r ?is is s or n4 ,b 9 any case !re c be no d\bt t we make !m exce$+ly commonly4 ,& ev5 a bl9d man1 or a man 9 ! d>k1 c & does1 v frequ5tly1 make judgm5ts ( ! second k9d--judgm5ts ab\t ?+s :i* he is feel+ ) 8 h&s4 ,all ( u1 = in/ance1 at almo/ any mom5t ( our wak+ life1 :e!r we are 9 ! d>k or n1 h only to feel c]ta9 p>ts ( our own bodies or ( our clo!s1 9 ord] to make1 ) great c]ta9ty1 su* judgm5ts z ,?is is a f+]1 ,?is is a nose1 ,?is is clo?4 ,& simil>ly ,i h only to feel 9 my pockets to judge1 ) reg>d to objects :i* ,i meet ) !re1 su* ?+s z ,?is is a co91 ,?is is a p5cil1 ,?is is a pipe4 ,judgm5ts ( ?is k9d w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 commonly1 & rightly1 be tak5 to be judgm5ts1 ! tru? ( :i* involves ! exi/5ce ( mat]ial ?+s or physical objects4 ,if ,i am "r 9 judg+ t ?is is an ink/&1 x foll[s t !re is at lea/ "o ink/& 9 ! ,univ]se2 & if !re is an ink/& 9 ! ,univ]se1 x foll[s t !re is 9 x at lea/ "o mat]ial ?+ or physical object4 ,?is may1 ( c\rse1 be disput$4 ,b]keley1 if ,i und]/& him rightly1 0 cle>ly ( op9ion t !re 0 no inconsi/5cy 9 ma9ta9+ t !re 7 9 ! ,univ]se ?\s&s ( ink/&s & trees & /ones & />s1 & t yet !re 0 9 x no su* ?+ z matt]4 ,& p]haps ! def9ition ( matt]1 :i* he adopt$1 0 su* t !re really 0 no inconsi/5cy 9 ma9ta9+ ?is4 ,p]haps1 simil>ly1 o!r philosoph]s h sometimes adopt$ def9itions ( ! expressions mat]ial ?+s & physical objects1 :i* 7 su* t all ! judgm5ts ( ?is k9d t we make might q well be true1 )\t its be+ true t !re are 9 ! ,univ]se any mat]ial ?+s :atev]4 ,p]haps1 ev51 !re may be "s ju/ification = adopt+ def9itions ( ^? t]ms :i* w\ld yield ! surpris+ result t we may1 ) p]fect consi/5cy1 ma9ta9 t ! _w is full ( m9]als & vegetables & animals1 ( all sorts ( diff]5t k9ds1 & t yet !re is n to be f\nd 9 x a s+le mat]ial ?+4 ,i d n "k :e!r !re is or is n any utility 9 us+ ! t]ms mat]ial ?+ or physical object 9 su* a s5se z ?is4 ,b1 :e!r !re is or n1 ,i _c help ?9k+ t !re is ample ju/ification = us+ !m 9 ano!r s5se--a s5se 9 :i* f ! proposition t !re are 9 ! ,univ]se su* ?+s z ink/&s or f+]s or cl\ds1 x /rictly foll[s t !re are 9 x at lea/ z _m mat]ial ?+s1 & 9 :i*1 !re=e1 we c n consi/5tly ma9ta9 ! exi/5ce ( ink/&s1 f+]s1 & cl\ds1 :ile d5y+ t ( mat]ial ?+s4 ,! k9ds ( judgm5t :i* ,i h m5tion$1 & ?\s&s ( o!rs :i* might easily be m5tion$1 are obvi\sly all ( ! same sort 9 "o v important respect--a respect 9 :i*1 = in/ance1 su* judgm5ts z ,?is is an emotion1 ,?is is a judgm5t1 ,?is is a col\r1 are n ( ! same sort z !y are4 ,& x seems to me t we are c]ta9ly us+ ! t]m mat]ial ?+ 9 a correct & useful way1 if we express ?is important common prop]ty :i* !y h1 by say+ t ( ea* ( !m ! same c truly be said z 0 said ( ! judgm5t ,t is an ink/&3 t1 j z f ! proposition ,!re is an ink/& x foll[s t !re is at lea/ "o mat]ial ?+1 s f ! proposition ,!re is a tableclo?1 x foll[s t !re is at lea/ "o mat]ial ?+2 & simil>ly 9 all ! o!r cases4 ,we c c]ta9ly use ! expression ,?+s su* z ink/&s1 tableclo?s1 f+]s1 cl\ds1 />s1 etc41 to mean ?+s su* z ^! 9 a c]ta9 v important respect1 :i* we all und]/&1 ?\gh we may n be able to def9e x4 ,& ! t]m mat]ial ?+ c]ta9ly is & c be correctly us$ to mean simply ?+s su* z ^! 9 t respect--:atev] x may be4 ,"s t]m is c]ta9ly requir$ to mean m]ely ?+s su* z ^! 9 t important respect2 &1 s f> z ,i c see1 !re is no t]m :i* c be naturally us$ 9 ?is s5se except ! t]m mat]ial ?+s & its equival5ts4 ,?us und]/ood1 ! t]m mat]ial ?+ c]ta9ly does /& = an important notion1 :i* requires a "n4 ,&1 if we agree to use ! t]m 9 ?is s5se1 !n x is obvi\s t no m c be necess>y = ! tru? ( ! ass]tion t !re are mat]ial ?+s1 ?an is necess>y = ! tru? ( judgm5ts ( ! k9d ) :i* ,i propose to deal4 ,b no m c be necess>y = ! tru? ( ^! judgm5ts ?an is actually ass]t$ 9 or logically impli$ by !m4 ,& if we approa* ! "q :at is necess>y = ! tru? ( ! ass]tion t !re are mat]ial ?+s1 by ask+ :at x is t we actually ass]t :5 we make su* judgm5ts z ^!1 c]ta9 reasons = d\bt+ h[ mu* is necess>y are1 ,i ?9k1 br\ght out mu* m cle>ly1 ?an if we approa* ! "q 9 any o!r way4 ,_m philosoph]s h told u a v great deal z to :at !y suppose to be involv$ 9 ! exi/5ce ( mat]ial ?+s2 & "s1 at lea/1 among !m seem to h meant by mat]ial ?+s su* ?+s z ink/&s1 f+]s & cl\ds4 ,b ,i c ?9k ( only "o type ( view z to ! con/itution ( mat]ial ?+s1 :i* is su* t x is tol]ably cle> :at answ] ^? :o hold x w\ld give to ! simple "q2 ,:at is x t ,i am judg+1 :5 ,i judge1 z ,i n[ d1 t t is an ink/&8 ,! type ( view ,i mean is t to :i* ! view t ,mill sugge/s1 :5 he expla9s :at he means by say+ t ,matt] is a ,p]man5t ,possibility ( ,s5sation1 & also ! view or views :i* ,mr4 ,russell seems to sugge/ 9 8 ,our ,k ( ! ,ext]nal ,_w1 seem to belong4 ,9 ! case ( views ( ?is k9d1 x is1 ,i ?9k1 tol]ably cle> :at answ] ^? :o hold !m w\ld give to all ! que/ions ,i want to raise ab\t judgm5ts ( ! k9d ,i h describ$4 ,b x does n seem to me at all c]ta9 t any view ( ?is type is true2 & c]ta9ly _m philosoph]s h held & d hold t all views ( ?is type are false4 ,b 9 ! case ( ^? :o d hold !m to be false1 ,i d n "k1 9 any s+le case1 :at answ] w\ld be giv5 to all ! que/ions :i* ,i want to raise4 ,9 ! case ( philosoph]s1 :o d n accept any view ( ! ,mill-,russell type1 none1 s f> z ,i "k1 has made x cle> :at answ] he w\ld give to all my que/ions3 "s h made x cle> :at answ] !y w\ld give to "s ( !m2 b _m1 ,i ?9k1 h n ev5 made x cle> :at answ] !y w\ld give to any4 ,p]haps !re is "s simple & satisfactory answ]1 :i* has escap$ me1 t su* philosoph]s c\ld give to all my que/ions2 b ,i _c help ?9k+ t assumptions z to ! nature ( mat]ial ?+s h too (t5 be5 made1 )\t its ev5 occurr+ to ^? :o made !m to ask1 :at1 if !y 7 true1 we c\ld be judg+ :5 we make su* judgm5ts z ^!2 & t1 if ?is "q _h be5 ask$1 x w\ld h become evid5t t ^? assumptions 7 f> less c]ta9 ?an !y appe>$ to be4 ,i d n "k t !re is any excuse :atev] = call+ all judgm5ts ( ! k9d ,i mean judgm5ts ( p]ception4 ,all ( !m are1 ( c\rse1 judgm5ts ab\t ?+s :i* we are at ! mom5t p]ceiv+1 s9ce1 by def9ition1 !y are judgm5ts ab\t ?+s :i* we are see+ or feel+ ) our h&s2 & all ( !m are1 no d\bt1 also bas$ ^u some?+ :i* we p]ceive ab\t ! ?+ 9 "q4 ,b ! m]e fact t a judgm5t is bo? ab\t a ?+ :i* ,i am p]ceiv+1 & also bas$ ^u some?+ :i* ,i p]ceive ab\t t ?+1 does n seem to be a suffici5t reason = call+ x a judgm5t ( p]ception2 & ,i d n "k t !re is any o!r reason ?an ?is = call+ all judgm5ts ( ! k9d ,i mean judgm5ts ( p]ception4 ,i d n want !re=e1 to ass]t t all ( !m are s4 ,b x seems to me q pla9 t enorm\s numb]s ( !m are s1 9 a p]fectly legitimate s5se4 ,?is judgm5t1 :i* ,i n[ make1 to ! effect t t is a door1 seems to me q pla9ly to be a judgm5t ( p]ception1 9 ! simple s5se t ,i make x because ,i d1 9 fact1 see t t is a door1 & ass]t 9 x no m ?an :at ,i see2 & :at ,i see ,i1 ( c\rse1 p]ceive4 ,9 e case 9 :i* ,i judge1 ) reg>d to some?+ :i* ,i am see+ or feel+ ) my h&s1 t x is a s-&-s1 simply because ,i d p]ceive1 by sight or t\*1 t x is 9 fact a ?+ ( t k9d1 we c1 ,i ?9k1 fairly say t ! judgm5t 9 "q is a judgm5t ( p]ception4 ,& enorm\s numb]s ( judgm5ts ( ! k9d ,i mean are1 q pla9ly1 judgm5ts ( p]ception 9 ?is s5se4 ,!y are n all1 = ! simple reason t "s ( !m are mi/ak54 ,i may1 = in/ance1 judge1 ) reg>d to an animal :i* ,i see at a di/ance1 t x is a %eep1 :5 9 fact x is a pig4 ,& "h my judgm5t is c]ta9ly n due to ! fact t ,i see x to be a %eep2 s9ce ,i _c possibly see a ?+ to be a %eep1 unless x is "o4 ,x1 !re=e1 is n a judgm5t ( p]ception 9 ?is s5se4 ,& moreov]1 ev5 :]e su* a judgm5t is true1 x may n always be a judgm5t ( p]ception1 = ! reason t1 :]eas ,i only see ! ?+ 9 "q1 ! k9d ( ?+ :i* ,i judge x to be is ( su* a nature1 t x is impossible = any "o1 by sight alone1 to p]ceive any?+ to be ( t k9d4 ,h[ to draw ! l9e betwe5 judgm5ts ( ?is k9d1 :i* are judgm5ts ( p]ception1 & ^? :i* are n1 ,i d n "k4 ,t is to say1 ,i d n "k :at conditions mu/ be fulfill$ 9 ord] t ,i may be truly said to be p]ceiv+1 by sight or t\*1 su* ?+s z t t is a door1 ?is is a f+]1 & n m]ely inf]r+ !m4 ,"s p may no d\bt ?9k t x is v unphilosophical 9 me to say t we ev] c p]ceive su* ?+s z ^!4 ,b x seems to me t we d1 9 ord9>y life1 con/antly talk ( see+ su* ?+s1 & t1 :5 we d s1 we are nei!r us+ language incorrectly1 nor mak+ any mi/ake ab\t ! facts--suppos+ some?+ to occur :i* nev] does 9 fact occur4 ,! tru? seems to me to be t we are us+ ! t]m p]ceive 9 a way :i* is bo? p]fectly correct & expresses a k9d ( ?+ :i* con/antly does occur1 only t "s philosoph]s h n recognis$ t ?is is a correct usage ( ! t]m & h n be5 able to def9e x4 ,i am n1 !re=e1 afraid to say t ,i d n[ p]ceive t t is a door1 & t t is a f+]4 ,only1 ( c\rse1 :5 ,i say t ,i d1 ,i d n mean to ass]t t "p ( :at ,i p]ceive1 :5 ,i p]ceive ^! ?+s1 may n be some?+ :i*1 9 an important s5se1 is kn[n to me only by inf]5ce4 ,x w\ld be v ra% to ass]t t p]ception1 9 ?is s5se ( ! ^w1 entirely excludes inf]5ce4 ,all t seems to me c]ta9 is t !re is an important & useful s5se ( ! ^w p]ception1 :i* is su* t ! am\nt & k9d ( inf]5ce1 if inf]5ce !re be1 :i* is involv$ 9 my pres5t p]ception t t is a door1 is no b> to ! tru? ( ! ass]tion t ,i d p]ceive t x is "o4 ,va/ numb]s1 !n1 ( ! k9d ( judgm5ts ) :i* ,i propose to deal seem to me to be1 9 an important & legitimate s5se1 judgm5ts ( p]ception2 al?\gh ,i am n prep>$ to def9e1 any fur!r ?an ,i h done1 :at t s5se is4 ,& ?\gh x is true t ! que/ions :i* ,i %all raise apply j z mu* to ^? ( !m :i* are n judgm5ts ( p]ception z to ^? :i* are1 x is1 ( c\rse1 also true t !y apply j z mu* to ^? :i* are z to ^? :i* are n2 s t ,i %all be really deal+ ) a l>ge & important class among judgm5ts ( p]ception4 ,x is true t1 if c]ta9 views :i*1 if ,i und]/& !m rightly1 "s ,philosoph]s h s]i\sly ent]ta9$1 7 true ones1 x w\ld be q impossible t any ( !m %\ld be judgm5ts ( p]ception4 ,= "s philosoph]s seem to me to h d5i$ t we ev] d 9 fact "k su* ?+s z ^!1 & o!rs n only t we ev] "k !m b also t !y are ev] true4 ,&1 if1 9 fact1 ,i nev] d "k su* a ?+1 or if x is nev] true1 x w ( c\rse1 foll[ t ,i nev] p]ceive su* a ?+2 s9ce ,i c]ta9ly _c1 9 ?is s5se1 p]ceive any?+ :atev]1 unless ,i bo? "k x & x is true4 ,b x seems to me a suffici5t refutation ( su* views z ^!1 simply to po9t to cases 9 :i* we d "k su* ?+s4 ,?is1 aft] all1 y "k1 really is a f+]3 !re is no d\bt ab\t x3 ,i "k x1 & y all "k x4 ,& ,i ?9k we may safely *all5ge any philosoph] to br+ =w>d any argum5t 9 fav\r ei!r ( ! proposition t we d n "k x1 or ( ! proposition t x is n true1 :i* does n at "s po9t1 re/ ^u "s premiss :i* is1 beyond comp>ison1 less c]ta9 ?an is ! proposition :i* x is design$ to attack4 ,! que/ions :e!r we d ev] "k su* ?+s z ^!1 & :e!r !re are any mat]ial ?+s1 seem to me1 !re=e1 to be que/ions :i* !re is no ne$ to take s]i\sly3 !y are que/ions :i* x is q easy to answ]1 ) c]ta9ty1 9 ! affirmative4 ,:at does1 ,i ?9k1 ne$ to be tak5 s]i\sly1 & :at is really dubi\s1 is n ! "q1 :e!r ?is is a f+]1 or :e!r ,i "k t x is1 b ! "q :at1 9 c]ta9 respects1 ,i am kn[+1 :5 ,i "k t x is4 ,& ?is is ! "q to :i* ,i w n[ address myself4 ,to beg9 ) !re is "o ?+ :i* seems to me to be v c]ta9 inde$ ab\t su* judgm5ts4 ,x is un=tunately a ?+ :i* ,i d n "k h[ prop]ly to express4 ,!re seem to me to be objections to e way ( express+ x :i* ,i c ?9k (4 ,b ,i hope ,i may be able to make my mean+ cle>1 9 spite ( ! inadequacy ( my expression4 ,! ?+ ,i mean is a ?+ :i* may to "s p seem s obvi\s z to be sc>cely wor? say+4 ,b ,i _c help ?9k+ t x is n always cle>ly recognis$1 & ev5 t "s philosoph]s1 to judge f :at !y say1 might p]haps dispute x4 ,x seems to me to be an assumption :i* is sil5tly made 9 _m treatm5ts ( ! subject1 &1 z ,i say1 x seems to me to be v c]ta9 inde$4 ,b ,i ?9k x is at all ev5ts wor? :ile to try to make ! assumption explicit1 9 case x %\ld be disput$4 ,if x really is n true1 !n ! o!r que/ions to :i* ,i %all g on1 & :i* seem to me really dubi\s & difficult1 d n1 ,i ?9k1 arise at all4 ,i w try to express ?is fundam5tal assumption1 :i* seems to me s v c]ta91 by say+ x is ! assumption t1 9 all cases 9 :i* ,i make a judgm5t ( ?is sort1 ,i h no difficulty :atev] 9 pick+ out a ?+1 :i* is1 q pla9ly1 9 a s5se 9 :i* no?+ else is1 ! ?+ ab\t :i* ,i am mak+ my judgm5t2 & t yet1 ?\gh ?is ?+ is ! ?+ ab\t :i* ,i am judg+1 ,i am1 q c]ta9ly1 n1 9 g5]al1 judg+ ) reg>d to x1 t x is a ?+ ( t k9d = :i* ! t]m1 :i* seems to express ! pr$icate ( my judgm5t1 is a "n4 ,?us1 :5 ,i judge1 z n[1 t ,t is an ink/&1 ,i h no difficulty :atev] 9 pick+ out1 f :at1 if y l1 y c call my total field ( pres5tation at ! mom5t1 an object1 :i* is und\bt$ly1 9 a s5se 9 :i* no?+ else is1 ! object ab\t :i* ,i am mak+ ?is judgm5t2 & yet x seems to me q c]ta9 t ( ?is object ,i am n judg+ t x is a :ole ink/&4 ,& simil>ly :5 ,i judge1 ) reg>d to some?+ :i* ,i am feel+ 9 my pocket1 ,?is is a co91 ,i h no difficulty 9 pick+ out1 f my field ( pres5tation1 an object1 :i* is und\bt$ly ! object ) :i* my judgm5t is conc]n$2 & yet ,i am c]ta9ly n judg+ ) reg>d to ?is object t x is a :ole co94 ,i say t alwayst :5 ,i make su* a judgm5t1 ,i c pick out ! "o1 among ! objects pres5t$ to me at ! "t1 ab\t :i* ,i am mak+ x2 b ,i h only said t 9 g5]al ,i am n judg+ ) reg>d to ?is object t x is a ?+ ( ! k9d1 = :i* ! t]m1 :i* seems to express ! pr$icate ( my judgm5t1 is a "n4 ,& ,i h limit$ my second proposition 9 ?is way1 because !re are cases1 9 :i* x does n1 at fir/ sight1 seem q s c]ta9 t ,i am n do+ ?is1 z 9 ! two in/ances ,i h j giv54 ,:51 = in/ance1 ,i judge ) reg>d to some?+1 :i* ,i am see+1 ,?is is a soap-bubble1 or ,?is is a drop ( wat]1 or ev5 :5 ,i judge ,?is is a spot ( ink1 x may n seem q s pla91 t ,i may n be judg+1 ) reg>d to ! v object pres5t$ to me1 t x is1 itself1 a :ole soap-bubble1 a :ole drop ( wat]1 or a :ole spot ( ink1 z x always is1 9 ! case ( an ink/&1 or a co91 t ,i nev] take ! pres5t$ object1 ab\t :i* ,i am judg+1 to be a :ole ink/&1 or a :ole co94 ,! sort ( reason :y ,i say ?is w1 ( c\rse1 be obvi\s to any "o1 & x is obvi\sly ( a *ildi% ord]4 ,b ,i _c say t x seems to me q obvi\s t 9 su* a case ,i am n judg+ ( ! pres5t$ object t x is a :ole drop ( wat]1 9 ! way 9 :i* x does seem to be obvi\s t ,i am n judg+ ( ?is pres5t$ object t x is an ink/&4 ,t is :y ,i limit myself to say+ t1 9 g5]al1 :5 ,i judge ,t is a s-&-s ,i am n judg+ ) reg>d to ! pres5t$ object1 ab\t :i* my judgm5t is t x is a ?+ ( ! k9d 9 "q4 ,z mu* z ?is seems to me to be a ?+ :i* any *ild c see4 ,nobody w suppose1 = a mom5t1 t :5 he judges su* ?+s z ,?is is a s(a1 or ,?is is a tree1 he is judg+1 ) reg>d to ! pres5t$ object ab\t :i* 8 judgm5t pla9ly is1 t x is a :ole s(a or a :ole tree3 he c1 at mo/1 suppose t he is judg+ x to be a "p ( ! surface ( a s(a or a "p ( ! surface ( a tree4 ,& c]ta9ly 9 ! case ( mo/ judgm5ts ( ?is k9d :i* we make1 :e!r 9 ! case ( all or n1 ?is is pla9ly ! case3 we are n judg+1 ) reg>d to ! pres5t$ object ab\t :i* our judgm5t pla9ly is1 t x is a ?+ ( ! k9d1 = :i* ! t]m :i* appe>s to express ! pr$icate ( our judgm5t1 is a "n4 ,& t ?is %\ld be true ( mo/ judgm5ts ( ?is k9d1 :e!r ( all or n1 is q suffici5t = my purpose4 ,?is mu*1 !n1 seems to me to be v c]ta9 inde$4 ,b ,i w try to make cle>] exactly :at ,i mean by x1 by m5tion+ a gr\nd on :i* ,i imag9e x might p]haps be disput$4 ,! object ( :i* ,i h spok5 z ! object1 ab\t :i*1 9 ea* p>ticul> case1 su* a judgm5t z ?is always is a judgm5t1 is1 ( c\rse1 always an object ( ! k9d :i* "s philosoph]s w\ld call a s5sation1 & o!rs w\ld call a s5se-datum4 ,:e!r all philosoph]s1 :5 !y talk ( s5sations1 mean to include among !m su* objects z ^!1 ,i d n "k4 ,"s1 :o h giv5 a great deal ( att5tion to ! subject1 & = :om ,i h a great respect1 talk ( s5sations 9 su* a way1 t ,i _c be sure :at !y are talk+ ab\t at all or :e!r !re are su* ?+s4 ,b _m1 ,i ?9k1 und\bt$ly d mean to include su* subjects z ^!4 ,no d\bt1 9 g5]al1 :5 !y call !m s5sations1 !y mean to attribute to !m prop]ties1 :i* x seems to me extremely d\btful :e!r !y possess4 ,& p]haps ev5 ^? :o call !m s5se-data1 may1 9 "p1 be attribut+ to !m prop]ties :i* x may be d\btful :e!r !y possess4 ,if we want to def9e a s5sation or a s5se-datum1 9 a mann] :i* w leave x n op5 to d\bt :at sort ( ?+s we are talk+ (1 & t !re are su* ?+s1 ,i d n "k t we c d x bett] ?an by say+ t s5se-data are ! sort ( ?+s1 ab\t :i* su* judgm5ts z ^! always seem to be made--! sort ( ?+s :i* seem to be ! real or ultimate subjects ( all su* judgm5ts4 ,su* a way ( def9+ h[ ! t]m s5se-datum is us$1 may n seem v satisfactory2 b ,i am incl9$ to ?9k x may be z satisfactory z any :i* c be f\nd4 ,& x is c]ta9ly calculat$ to obviate "s misund]/&+s :i* may arise2 s9ce ev]ybody c see1 ,i ?9k1 :at ! ?+ is :i* ,i am describ+ z ! ?+ ab\t :i* he is mak+ 8 judgm5t1 :5 he judges ,t is an ink/&1 & t !re is su* a ?+1 ev5 if he does n agree t ?is description applies to x4 ,i c1 9 fact1 imag9e t "s ( ^? :o w\ld call ?is ?+ a s5sation w\ld d5y t my judgm5t is ab\t x at all4 ,x w\ld sometimes be spok5 ( z ! s5sation :i* m$iates my p]ception ( ?is ink/& 9 ?is in/ance4 ,& ,i c imag9e t "s ( ^? :o w\ld s speak ( x might be incl9$ to say t :5 ,i judge ,?is is an ink/&1 my judgm5t is ab\t ?is ink/& :i* ,i p]ceive1 & n1 9 any s5se at all1 ab\t ! s5sation :i* m$iates my p]ception ( x4 ,!y may p]haps imag9e t ! s5sation m$iates my p]ception ( ! ink/& only 9 ! s5se t x br+s ! ink/& be=e my m9d 9 su* a way t1 once x is be=e my m9d1 ,i c make a judgm5t ab\t x1 :i* is n a judgm5t ab\t ! m$iat+ s5sation at all2 & t su* a judgm5t is ! "o ,i am actually express+ :5 ,i say ,?is is an ink/&4 ,su* a view1 if x is held1 seems to me to be q c]ta9ly false1 & is :at ,i h int5d$ to d5y4 ,& p]haps ,i c put mo/ cle>ly ! reason :y x seems to me false1 by say+ t1 if 7:i* may be d\bt$7 !re is any?+ :i* is ?is ink/&1 t ?+ is c]ta9ly n giv5 to me indep5d5tly ( ?is s5se-datum1 9 su* a s5se t ,i c possibly make a judgm5t ab\t x :i* is n a judgm5t ab\t ?is s5se-datum4 ,i am n1 ( c\rse1 d5y+ t ,i d p]ceive ?is ink/&1 & t my judgm5t is1 9 a s5se1 a judgm5t ab\t x4 ,bo? ^! ?+s seem to me to be q obvi\sly true4 ,i am only ma9ta9+ t my judgm5t is also1 9 ano!r s5se1 a judgm5t ab\t ?is s5se-datum :i* m$iates my p]ception ( ! ink/&4 ,^? :o say t ?is s5se-datum does m$iate my p]ception ( ! ink/&1 w\ld1 ( c\rse1 admit t my p]ception ( ! ink/& is1 9 a s5se1 dep5d5t ^u ! s5se-datum2 t x is dep5d5t is impli$ 9 ! m]e /atem5t t x is m$iat$ by x4 ,b x might be ma9ta9$ t x is dep5d5t on x only 9 ! s5se 9 :i*1 :5 ! idea ( "o object is call$ up 9 my m9d1 ?r\gh association1 by ! idea ( ano!r1 ! idea :i* is call$ up is dep5d5t on ! idea :i* calls x up4 ,:at ,i wi% to ma9ta91 & :at seems to me to be q c]ta9ly true1 is t my p]ception ( ?is ink/& is dep5d5t on ?is s5se-datum1 9 a q diff]5t & f> m intimate s5se ?an ?is4 ,x is dep5d5t on x 9 ! s5se t1 if !re is any?+ :i* is ?is ink/&1 !n1 9 p]ceiv+ t ?+1 ,i am kn[+ x only z ! ?+ :i* /&s 9 a c]ta9 relation to ?is s5se-datum4 ,:5 ! idea ( "o object is call$ up 9 my m9d by ! idea ( ano!r1 ,i d n "k ! second object only z ! ?+ :i* has a c]ta9 relation to ! fir/3 on ! contr>y1 ,i c make a judgm5t ab\t ! second object1 :i* is n a judgm5t ab\t ! fir/4 ,& simil>ly 9 ! case ( two s5se-data :i* are pres5t$ to me simultane\sly1 ,i d n "k ! "o only z a ?+ :i* has a c]ta9 relation to ! o!r4 ,b 9 ! case ( ?is s5se-datum & ?is ink/& ! case seems to me to be pla9ly q diff]5t4 ,if !re be a ?+ :i* is ?is ink/& at all1 x is c]ta9ly only kn[n to me z ! ?+ :i* /&s 9 a c]ta9 relation to ?is s5se-datum4 ,x is n giv5 to me1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ?is s5se-datum is giv54 ,if !re be su* a ?+ at all1 x is q c]ta9ly only kn[n to me by description1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ,mr4 ,russell uses t phrase2 & ! description by :i* x is kn[n is t ( be+ ! ?+ :i* /&s to ?is s5se-datum 9 a c]ta9 relation4 ,t is to say1 :5 ,i make su* a judgm5t z ,?is ink/& is a good big "o2 :at ,i am really judg+ is3 ,!re is a ?+ :i* /&s to ?is 9 a c]ta9 relation1 & :i* is an ink/&1 & t ?+ is a good big "o--:]e ?is /&s = ?is pres5t$ object4 ,i am ref]r+ to or id5tify+ ! ?+ :i* is ?is ink/&1 if !re be su* a ?+ at all1 only z ! ?+ :i* /&s to ?is s5se-datum 9 a c]ta9 relation2 & h5ce my judgm5t1 ?\gh 9 "o s5se x may be said to be a judgm5t ab\t ! ink/&1 is q c]ta9ly also1 9 ano!r s5se1 a judgm5t ab\t ?is s5se-datum4 ,?is seems to me s cle>1 t ,i wond] h[ anyone c d5y x2 & p]haps nobody w\ld4 ,b ,i _c help ?9k+ t x is n cle> to ev]ybody2 p>tly because1 s f> z ,i c make out1 nobody be=e ,mr4 ,russell _h po9t$ out ! extreme diff]5ce !re is betwe5 a judgm5t ab\t a ?+ kn[n only by description to ! individual :o makes ! judgm5t1 & a judgm5t ab\t a ?+ n kn[n to him only 9 ?is way2 & p>tly because s _m p seem /ill utt]ly to h fail$ to und]/& :at ! di/9ction is :i* he expresses 9 ?is way4 ,i w try to make ! po9t cle>1 9 a slightly diff]5t way4 ,suppose ,i am see+ two co9s1 ly+ side by side1 & am n p]ceiv+ !m 9 any o!r way except by sight4 ,x w be pla9 to ev]ybody1 ,i ?9k1 t1 :5 ,i id5tify ! "o z ,?is "o & ! o!r z ,t "o1 ,i id5tify !m only by ref]5ce to ! two visual pres5t$ objects1 :i* correspond respectively to ! "o & to ! o!r4 ,b :at may n1 ,i ?9k1 be realis$1 is t ! s5se 9 :i* ,i id5tify !m by ref]5ce to ! correspond+ s5se-data1 is "o :i* involves t e judgm5t :i* ,i make ab\t ! "o is a judgm5t ab\t ! s5se-datum :i* corresponds to x1 & e judgm5t ,i make ab\t ! o!r1 a judgm5t ab\t ! s5se-datum :i* corresponds to x3 ,i simply _c make a judgm5t ab\t ei!r1 :i* is n a judgm5t ab\t ! correspond+ s5se-datum4 ,b if ! two co9s 7 giv5 to me1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ! two s5se-data are1 ?is w\ld c]ta9ly n be ! case4 ,i c id5tify & di/+ui% ! two s5se-data directly1 ?is z ?is "o1 & t z t "o3 ,i d n ne$ to id5tify ei!r z ! ?+ :i* has ?is relation to ?is o!r ?+4 ,b ,i c]ta9ly _c ?us directly id5tify ! two co9s4 ,i h n f\r ?+s pres5t$ to me 7#a7 ?is s5se-datum1 7#b7 t s5se-datum1 7#c7 ?is co91 & 7#d7 t co91 b two only--?is s5se-datum & t s5se-datum4 ,:51 !re=e1 ,i judge ,?is is a co91 my judgm5t is c]ta9ly a judgm5t ab\t ! "o s5se-datum1 & :5 ,i judge ,& t is also a co91 x is c]ta9ly a judgm5t ab\t ! o!r4 ,only1 9 spite ( :at my language might seem to imply1 ,i am c]ta9ly n judg+ ei!r ( ! "o s5se-datum t x is a :ole co91 nor yet ( ! o!r t x is "o4 ,?is1 !n1 seems to me fundam5tally c]ta9 ab\t judgm5ts ( ?is k9d4 ,:5ev] we make su* a judgm5t we c easily pick out an object 7:e!r we call x a s5sation or a s5se-datum1 or n71 :i* is1 9 an easily intelligible s5se1 ! object :i* is ! real or ultimate subject ( our judgm5t2 & yet1 9 _m cases at all ev5ts1 :at we are judg+ ) reg>d to ?is object is c]ta9ly n t x is an object ( ! k9d1 = :i* ! t]m :i* appe>s to express ! pr$icate ( our judgm5t is a "n4 ,b if ?is be s1 :at is x t ,i am judg+1 9 all su* cases1 ab\t ! pres5t$ object1 :i* is ! real or ultimate subject ( my judgm5t8 ,x is at ?is po9t t we come to que/ions :i* seem to me to be really unc]ta9 & difficult to answ]4 ,to beg9 )1 !re is "o answ] :i* is naturally sugge/$ by ! reason ,i h giv5 = say+ t1 9 ?is case1 x is q obvi\s t ,i am n judg+1 ) reg>d to ?is pres5t$ object1 t x is an ink/&1 :]eas x is n 9 ! same way1 q obvi\s t1 9 mak+ su* a judgm5t z ,?is is a soap-bubble or ,?is is a drop ( wat]1 ,i may n be judg+1 ( ! object ab\t :i* my judgm5t is1 t t v object really is a soap-bubble or a drop ( wat]4 ,! reason ,i gave is t x is q obvi\s t ,i d n take ?is pres5t$ object to be a :ole ink/&3 t1 at mo/1 ,i only take x to be "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&4 ,& ?is reason naturally sugge/s t ! true answ] to our "q may be t :at ,i am judg+ ( ! pres5t$ object is j t x is a "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&4 ,?is answ] seems to me to be obvi\sly on q a diff]5t level f ! sugge/ion t ,i am judg+ x really to be an ink/&4 ,x is n *ildi%ly obvi\s t ,i am n judg+ x to be "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&1 z x is t ,i am n judg+ x to be an ink/&--a :ole "o4 ,on ?is view1 :5 ,i say su* ?+s z ,t is an ink/&1 ,t is a door1 ,?is is a co91 ^! expressions w\ld really only be a loose way ( say+ ,t is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&1 ,t is "p ( ! surface ( a door1 ,?is is "p ( ! surface ( a co94 ,& !re w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 pla9ly be no?+ surpris+ 9 ! fact t we %\ld use language ?us loosely4 ,:at1 at fir/ sight1 appe>s to be a p>adox1 namely t1 :]eas ,i appe> to be ass]t+ ( a giv5 ?+ t x is ( a c]ta9 k9d1 ,i am n really ass]t+ ( ! ?+ 9 "q t x is ( t k9d at all1 w\ld be susceptible ( an easy explanation4 ,& moreov]1 if ?is view 7 true1 x w\ld (f] an excell5t illu/ration ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 a ?+ kn[n only by description & a ?+ n s kn[n1 & w\ld %[ h[ entirely free f my/]y t di/9ction is4 ,on ?is view1 :5 ,i judge ,t ink/& is a good big "o ,i %all 9 effect be judg+3 ,!re is "o & only "o ink/& ( :i* ?is is "p ( ! surface1 & ! ink/& ( :i* ?is is true is a good big "o4 ,x w\ld be q cle> t ! "p ( ! surface ( ! ink/& 0 giv5 to me 9 a s5se 9 :i* ! :ole 0 n1 j z x is 9 fact cle> t ,i d n[ see ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&1 9 a s5se 9 :i* ,i d n see ! :ole2 & t my judgm5t1 :ile x is1 9 fact1 ab\t bo? ! :ole ink/&1 & also ab\t "o p>ticul> "p ( its surface1 is ab\t !m 9 two entirely diff]5t s5ses4 ,?is view is "o1 :i* x is at fir/ sight1 ,i ?9k1 v natural to suppose to be true4 ,b be=e giv+ ! reasons1 :y1 nev]!less1 x seems to me extremely d\btful1 ,i ?9k x is desirable to try to expla9 m precisely :at ,i mean by x4 ,! ^w "p is "o :i* is (t5 us$ extremely vaguely 9 philosophy2 & ,i c imag9e t "s p w\ld be will+ to ass5t to ! proposition t ?is s5se-datum really is1 9 "s s5se or o!r1 a "p ( ?is ink/&1 & t :at ,i am judg+ ) reg>d to x1 :5 ,i judge ,?is is an ink/&1 is1 9 effect1 ,!re is an ink/&1 ( :i* ?is is a "p1 :o w\ld be f> f all[+ t ?is c possibly be :at ,i am judg+1 :5 once !y und]/& :at ! s5se is 9 :i* ,i am "h us+ ! ^w "p4 ,:at ?is s5se is1 ,i am q unable to def9e2 b ,i hope ,i may be able to make my mean+ suffici5tly cle>1 by giv+ in/ances ( ?+s :i* are und\bt$ly p>ts ( o!r ?+s 9 ! s5se 9 "q4 ,!re is1 x seems to me1 a s5se ( ! ^w "p1 9 :i* we all con/antly use ! ^w ) p]fect precision1 &1 :i*1 !re=e1 we all und]/& v well1 h[ev] little we may be able to def9e x4 ,x is ! s5se 9 :i* ! trunk ( any tree is und\bt$ly a "p ( t tree2 9 :i* ?is f+] ( m9e is und\bt$ly a "p ( my h&1 & my h& a "p ( my body4 ,?is is a s5se 9 :i* e "p ( a mat]ial ?+ or physical object is itself a mat]ial ?+ or physical object2 & x is1 s f> z ,i c see1 ! only prop] s5se 9 :i* a mat]ial ?+ c be said to h p>ts4 ,! view :i* ,i wi% to discuss is ! view t ,i am judg+ ?is pres5t$ object to be a "p ( an ink/&1 9 ?is s5se4 ,& ! nature ( ! view c p]haps be br\ght out m cle>ly1 by m5tion+ "o important coroll>y :i* w\ld foll[ f x4 ,i am1 ( c\rse1 at ?is mom5t1 see+ _m p>ts ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&4 ,b all ^! p>ts1 except "o1 are1 9 fact1 !mselves p>ts ( t "o4 ,t "o is ! "o ( :i* we %\ld naturally speak z ! "p ( ! surface t ,i am n[ see+ or z ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&4 ,!re is only "o "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&1 :i* does ?us conta91 z p>ts1 all ! o!r p>ts t ,i am n[ see+4 ,&1 if x 7 true t ,i am judg+ ?is pres5t$ object to be a "p ( ! surface ( an ink/& at all1 9 ! s5se ,i mean1 x w\ld foll[ t ?is pres5t$ object mu/1 if my judgm5t ,?is is an ink/& be true 7z x c]ta9ly is71 be id5tical ) ?is "p1 :i* conta9s all ! o!r p>ts :i* ,i am see+2 s9ce !re is pla9ly no o!r "p ) :i* x c\ld possibly be id5tifi$4 ,t is to say1 if ,i am really judg+ ( ?is pres5t$ object t x is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&1 9 ! s5se ,i mean1 x mu/ be ! case t ev]y?+ :i* is true ( :at ,i %\ld call ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/& is1 9 fact1 true ( ?is pres5t$ object4 ,?is view1 !re=e1 t :at we are judg+ ( ! ultimate subject ( our judgm5t1 :5 we judge ,?is is a s-&-s1 is1 9 g5]al1 m]ely t ! subject 9 "q is a "p ( a ?+ ( ! k9d 9 "q1 c1 ,i ?9k1 be mo/ cle>ly discuss$1 by ask+ :e!r1 9 ?is case1 ?is pres5t$ object c really be id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&4 ,if x c't1 !n mo/ c]ta9ly ,i am n judg+ ( x t x is a "p ( ! surface ( an ink/& at all4 ,= my judgm5t1 :atev] x is1 is true4 ,& yet1 if ?is pres5t$ object is n id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&1 x c]ta9ly is n a "p ( an ink/& at all2 s9ce !re is no o!r "p1 ei!r ( ?is ink/& or ( any o!r1 ) :i* x c\ld possibly be suppos$ to be id5tical4 ,c we1 !n1 hold t ?is s5se-datum really is id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&8 ,t ev]y?+ :i* is true ( ! "o is true ( ! o!r8 ,an enorm\s numb] ( v famili> argum5ts h be5 us$ by v>i\s philosoph]s1 :i*1 if !y 7 s\nd1 w\ld %[ t we c n4 ,"s ( ^! argum5ts seem to me to be q cle>ly n s\nd--all1 = in/ance1 :i* re/ ei!r on ! assumption t ?is s5se-datum c only exi/ s long z x is p]ceiv$1 or on ! assumption t x c only exi/ s long z x is p]ceiv$ by me4 ,( o!rs ,i suspect t !y may h "s =ce1 ?\gh ,i am q unable to see t !y h any4 ,su*1 = in/ance1 are all ^? :i* assume ei!r t ?is s5se-datum is a s5sation or feel+ ( m9e1 9 a s5se :i* includes ! ass]tion t x is dep5d5t on my m9d 9 ! v same s5se 9 :i* my p]ception ( x obvi\sly is s2 or t x is causally dep5d5t on my body 9 ! s5se 9 :i* my p]ception ( x admitt$ly is s4 ,b o!rs d seem to me to h great =ce4 ,i w1 h[ev]1 conf9e myself to try+ to /ate "o1 :i* seems to me to h z mu* z any4 ,x w be f\nd t ?is "o involves an assumption1 :i* does seem to me to h great =ce1 b :i* yet seems to me to be d\btful4 ,s f> z ,i "k1 all good argum5ts aga9/ ! view t ?is s5se-datum really is id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ! ink/&1 d involve ?is same assumption1 & h no m =ce ?an x has4 ,b 9 ?is1 ( c\rse1 ,i may be wrong4 ,p]haps "s "o w be able to po9t out an argum5t1 :i* is obvi\sly q indep5d5t ( x1 & :i* yet has =ce4 ,! argum5t ,i mean involves consid]ations :i* are exce$+ly famili>1 s famili> t ,i am afraid e "o may be sick ( he>+ !m allud$ to4 ,b1 9 spite ( ?is fact1 x seems to me n q easy to put x q precisely1 9 a way :i* w di/+ui% x cle>ly f o!r argum5ts involv+ ! same famili> consid]ations1 b :i* d n seem to me to be equally cog5t4 ,i want1 !re=e1 to try to put x ) a degree ( precision1 :i* w prev5t irrelevant objections f be+ made to x--objections :i* w\ld1 ,i ?9k1 be relevant aga9/ "s ( ^! o!r argum5ts1 b are n1 ,i ?9k1 relevant aga9/ x4 ,! fact is t we all1 exce$+ly commonly1 :51 at ea* ( two times1 sep>at$ by a long] or %ort] int]val1 we see a "p ( ! surface ( a mat]ial ?+1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ,i am n[ see+ ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&1 or :5 at "o "t we see su* a surface & at ano!r p]ceive "o by t\*1 make1 on ! second occasion1 ! judgm5t ,?is "p ( a surface is ! same "p ( ! surface ( ! same ?+1 z t :i* ,i 0 see+ 7or p]ceiv+ by t\*7 j n[4 ,h[ commonly we all d ?is c sc>cely be exagg]at$4 ,i look at ?is ink/&1 & !n ,i look aga91 & on ! second occasion ,i judge ,?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/& is ! same z1 or at lea/ conta9s a "p :i* is ! same z a "p (1 ! "p ( its surface :i* ,i 0 see+ j n[4 ,or ,i look at ?is f+] & !n ,i t\* x1 & ,i judge1 on ! second occasion1 ,?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is f+] is ! same z "o ( ^? ,i 0 see+ j n[4 ,we all ?us con/antly id5tify a "p ( a surface ( a mat]ial ?+ :i* we are p]ceiv+ at "o "t ) a "p :i* we 7 p]ceiv+ at ano!r4 ,n[1 :5 we d ?is--:5 we judge ,?is is ! same "p ( ! same ?+ z ,i 0 see+ or t\*+ j n[1 we1 ( c\rse1 d n mean to exclude ! possibility t ! "p 9 "q may h *ang$ dur+ ! int]val2 t x is really diff]5t1 on ! second occasion1 ei!r 9 %ape or size or quality1 or 9 all ?ree1 f :at x 0 on ! fir/4 ,t is to say1 ! s5se ( sam5ess :i* we are "h conc]n$ ) is "o :i* cle>ly does n exclude *ange4 ,we may ev5 be prep>$ to ass]t1 on g5]al gr\nds1 9 all su* cases1 t ! surface 9 "q c]ta9ly mu/ h *ang$4 ,b nev]!less !re is a great diff]5ce 9 "o respect1 betwe5 two k9ds ( su* cases1 bo? ( :i* occur exce$+ly commonly4 ,if ,i wat* somebody bl[+ air into a *ild's balloon1 x con/antly happ5s1 at c]ta9 /ages 9 ! process1 t ,i judge ) reg>d to ! "p ( ! surface :i* ,i am see+ at t /age1 n only t x is l>g] ?an x 0 at an e>li] /age1 b t x is p]ceptibly l>g]4 ,or1 if ,i pull ! face ( an india-rubb] doll1 ,i may judge at a c]ta9 /age 9 ! process t ! pat* ( r$ col\r on its *eek n only is diff]5t 9 %ape f :at x 0 at ! beg9n+1 b is p]ceptibly s2 x may1 = in/ance1 be a p]ceptibly flatt] ellipse ?an x 0 to />t )4 ,or1 if ,i wat* a p]son blu%+1 ,i may judge at a c]ta9 /age t a c]ta9 "p ( ! surface ( 8 face n only is diff]5t 9 col\r f :at x 01 :5 ,i saw x be=e he began to blu%1 b is p]ceptibly s--p]ceptibly r$d]4 ,9 enorm\s numb]s ( cases we d ?us judge ( a surface se5 at a giv5 "t t x is ?us p]ceptibly diff]5t 9 size1 or 9 %ape1 or 9 col\r1 f :at x 0 :5 we saw x be=e4 ,b cases are at lea/ equally num]\s 9 :i*1 ?\gh we might1 on g5]al gr\nds be prep>$ to ass]t t x mu/ h *ang$ 9 "s respect1 we %\ld n be prep>$ to ass]t t x _h1 9 any respect :atev]1 *ang$ p]ceptibly4 ,( ?is "p ( ?is surface ( ?is ink/&1 = in/ance1 ,i am c]ta9ly n prep>$ to ass]t t x is n[ p]ceptibly diff]5t 9 any respect f :at x 0 :5 ,i saw x j n[4 ,& simil> cases are s num]\s t ,i ne$ n give fur!r in/ances4 ,we c1 !re=e1 divide cases1 9 :i* we judge1 ( a "p ( a surface :i* we are see+1 ,?is is ! same "p ( ! surface ( ! same mat]ial ?+ z ! "o ,i saw j n[1 into cases :]e we %\ld also judge ,b x is p]ceptibly diff]5t f :at x 0 !n1 & cases 9 :i*1 ev5 ?\gh we might ass]t ,x mu/ be diff]5t1 we are c]ta9ly n prep>$ to ass]t t x is p]ceptibly s4 ,b n[ let u consid] ! cases 9 :i* we are n prep>$ to ass]t t ! surface 9 "q has *ang$ p]ceptibly4 ,! /range fact1 f :i* ! argum5t ,i mean is drawn1 is t1 9 a v l>ge numb] ( su* cases1 x seems z if x 7 unmi/akably true t ! pres5t$ object1 ab\t :i* we are mak+ our judgm5t :5 we talk ( ,?is surface at ! lat] "t1 is p]ceptibly diff]5t1 f t ab\t :i* we are mak+ x :5 we talk ( ! surface ,i saw j n[4 ,if1 at ! lat] "t1 ,i am at a suffici5tly great] di/ance f ! surface1 ! pres5t$ object :i* corresponds to x at ! "t seems to be p]ceptibly small]1 ?an ! "o :i* correspond$ to x be=e4 ,if ,i am look+ at x f a suffici5tly oblique angle1 ! lat] pres5t$ object (t5 seems to be p]ceptibly diff]5t 9 %ape--a p]ceptibly flatt] ellipse1 = in/ance4 ,if ,i am look+ at x1 ) blue spectacles on1 :5 =m]ly ,i _h none1 ! lat] pres5t$ object seems to be p]ceptibly diff]5t 9 col\r f ! e>li] "o4 ,if ,i am p]ceiv+ x by t\* alone1 :]eas =m]ly ,i 0 p]ceiv+ x by sight alone1 ! lat] pres5t$ object seems to be p]ceptibly diff]5t f ! e>li]1 9 respect ( ! fact t x is n col\r$ at all1 :]eas ! e>li] 01 & t1 on ! o!r h&1 x has c]ta9 tactual qualities1 :i* ! e>li] _h n got4 ,all ?is seems to be z pla9 z x c be1 & yet x makes absolutely no diff]5ce to ! fact t ( ! surface 9 "q we are n prep>$ to judge t x is p]ceptibly diff]5t f :at x 04 ,sometimes1 ( c\rse1 :]e !re seems to be no d\bt t ! lat] pres5t$ object is p]ceptibly diff]5t f ! e>li]1 we may n notice t x is s4 ,b ev5 :]e we d notice ! app>5t diff]5ce1 we d /ill cont9ue to judge ( ! surface 9 "q3 ,?is surface is n1 s f> z ,i c tell ) c]ta9ty by p]ception1 9 any way diff]5t f :at x 0 :5 ,i saw x or t\*$ x j n[2 ,i am n prep>$ to ass]t t x has *ang$ p]ceptibly4 ,x seems1 !re=e1 to be absolutely impossible t ! surface se5 at ! lat] "t %\ld be id5tical ) ! object pres5t$ !n1 & ! surface se5 at ! e>li] id5tical ) ! object pres5t$ !n1 = ! simple reason t1 :]eas ) reg>d to ! lat] se5 surface ,i am n prep>$ to judge t x is 9 any way p]ceptibly diff]5t f t se5 e>li]1 x seems t ) reg>d to ! lat] s5se-datum ,i _c fail to judge t x is p]ceptibly diff]5t f ! e>li] "o3 ! fact t !y are p]ceptibly diff]5t simply />es me 9 ! face4 ,x seems1 9 %ort1 t :51 9 su* a case1 ,i judge3 ,?is surface is n1 s f> z ,i c tell1 p]ceptibly diff]5t f ! "o ,i saw j n[1 ,i _c possibly be judg+ ( ! pres5t$ object ,?is is n1 s f> z ,i c tell1 p]ceptibly diff]5t f t object :i* 0 pres5t$ to me j n[1 = ! simple reason t ,i c tell1 z c]ta9ly1 almo/1 z ,i c tell any?+1 t x is p]ceptibly diff]5t4 ,t is ! argum5t1 z well z ,i c put x1 = say+ t ?is pres5t$ object1 is n id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&2 & t1 !re=e1 :5 ,i judge ,?is is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&1 ,i am n judg+ ( ?is pres5t$ object1 :i* nev]!less is ! ultimate subject ( my judgm5t1 t x is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&4 ,& ?is argum5t does seem to me to be a v p[]ful "o4 ,b nev]!less x does n seem to me to be q conclusive1 because x re/s on an assumption1 :i*1 ?\gh x seems to me to h great =ce1 does n seem to me q c]ta94 ,! assumption ,i mean is ! assumption t1 9 su* cases z ^? ,i h spok5 (1 ! lat] pres5t$ object really is p]ceptibly diff]5t f ! e>li]4 ,?is assumption has1 if ,i am n mi/ak51 seem$ to _m philosoph]s to be q unque/ionable2 !y h nev] ev5 ?\ght ( que/ion+ x2 & ,i own t x us$ to be s ) me4 ,& ,i am /ill n sure t ,i may n be talk+ %e] nons5se 9 sugge/+ t x c be que/ion$4 ,b1 if ,i am1 ,i am no long] able to see t ,i am4 ,:at n[ seems to me to be possible is t ! s5se-datum :i* corresponds to a tree1 :i* ,i am see+1 :5 ,i am a mile (f1 may n really be p]ceiv$ to be small] ?an ! "o1 :i* corresponds to ! same tree1 :5 ,i see x f a di/ance ( only a hundr$ y>ds1 b t x is only p]ceiv$ to seem small]2 t ! s5se-datum :i* corresponds to a p5ny1 :i* ,i am see+ obliquely1 is n really p]ceiv$ to be diff]5t 9 %ape f t :i* correspond$ to ! p5ny1 :5 ,i 0 /raight 9 front ( x1 b is only p]ceiv$ to seem diff]5t--t all t is p]ceiv$ is t ! "o seems elliptical & ! o!r circul>2 t ! s5se-datum pres5t$ to me :5 ,i h ! blue spectacles on is n p]ceiv$ to be diff]5t 9 col\r f ! "o pres5t$ to me :5 ,i h n1 b only to seem s2 & f9ally t ! s5se-datum pres5t$ :5 ,i t\* ?is f+] is n p]ceiv$ to be diff]5t 9 any way f t pres5t$ to me :5 ,i see x1 b only to seem s t ,i d n p]ceive ! "o to be col\r$ & ! o!r n to be s1 b only t ! "o seems col\r$ & ! o!r n4 ,if su* a view is to be possible1 we %all h1 ( c\rse1 to ma9ta9 t ! k9d ( exp]i5ce :i* ,i h express$ by say+ "o seems diff]5t f ! o!r--seems circul>1 seems blue1 seems col\r$1 & s on--involves an ultimate1 n fur!r analysable1 k9d ( psy*ological relation1 n to be id5tifi$ ei!r ) t involv$ 9 be+ p]ceiv$ to be s & s1 or ) t involv$ 9 be+ judg$ to be s & s2 s9ce a pres5t$ object might1 9 ?is s5se1 seem to be elliptical1 seem to be blue1 etc41 :5 x is nei!r p]ceiv$ to be s1 nor judg$ to be s4 ,b !re seems to me to be no reason :y !re %\ld n be su* an ultimate relation4 ,! great objection to su* a view seems to me to be ! difficulty ( believ+ t ,i don't actually p]ceive ?is s5se-datum to be r$1 = in/ance1 & t o!r to be elliptical2 t ,i only p]ceive1 9 _m cases1 t x seems s4 ,i _c1 h[ev]1 n[ p]suade myself t x is q cle> t ,i d p]ceive x to be s4 ,&1 if ,i don't1 !n x seems really possible t ?is pres5t$ object really is id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&2 s9ce1 :5 ,i judge1 z 9 ! cases suppos$1 t ! surface 9 "q is n1 s f> z ,i c tell1 p]ceptibly diff]5t f :at x 01 ,i might really be judg+ ( ! two s5se-data t !y also 7 n1 s f> z ,i c tell1 p]ceptibly diff]5t1 ! only diff]5ce betwe5 ! two t is p]ceptible1 be+ t ! "o seems to be ( a c]ta9 size1 %ape or col\r1 & ! o!r to be ( a diff]5t & incompatible size1 %ape or col\r4 ,( c\rse1 9 ^? cases1 z 9 t ( ! balloon be+ bl[n up1 :]e ,i p]ceive t ! surface has *ang$1 e4g4 9 size1 x w\ld h to be admitt$ t ,i d p]ceive ( ! two s5se-data n m]ely t !y seem diff]5t 9 size1 b t !y are s4 ,b ,i ?9k x w\ld be possible to ma9ta9 t ! s5se 9 :i*1 9 ^! cases1 ,i p]ceive !m to be diff]5t1 is a diff]5t "o f t 9 :i*1 bo? 9 ^! & 9 ! o!rs1 ,i p]ceive !m to seem s4 ,possibly 9 mak+ ?is sugge/ion t s5se-data1 9 cases :]e mo/ philosoph]s h assum$ unhesitat+ly t !y are p]ceiv$ to be diff]5t1 are only really p]ceiv$ to seem diff]5t1 ,i am1 z ,i said1 talk+ %e] nons5se1 ?\gh ,i _c1 at ! mom5t1 see t ,i am4 ,& possibly1 ev5 if ?is sugge/ion itself is n nons5se1 ev5 if x is true1 !re may be o!r fatal objections to ! view t ?is pres5t$ object really is id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&4 ,b :at seems to me c]ta9 is t1 unless ?is sugge/ion is true1 !n ?is pres5t$ object is c]ta9ly n id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&4 ,& s9ce x is d\btful :e!r x is n nons5se1 & /ill m d\btful :e!r x is true1 x mu/1 ,i ?9k1 be admitt$ to be highly d\btful :e!r ! two are id5tical4 ,b1 if !y are n id5tical1 !n :at ,i am judg+ ) reg>d to ?is pres5t$ object1 :5 ,i judge ,?is is an ink/&1 is c]ta9ly n t x is itself "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&2 & h5ce1 x is wor? :ile to inquire fur!r1 :at1 if ,i am n judg+ ?is1 ,i c be judg+ ) reg>d to x4 ,& "h1 ,i ?9k1 ! fir/ natural sugge/ion to make is t j z1 :5 ,i talk ( ?is ink/&1 :at ,i seem really to mean is ! ink/& ( :i* ?is is "p ( ! surface1 s t ! ink/& is only kn[n to me by description z ! ink/& ( :i* ?is mat]ial surface is "p ( ! surface1 s aga9 :5 ,i talk ( ?is mat]ial surface1 :at ,i really mean is ! mat]ial surface to :i* ?is 7pres5t$ object7 has a c]ta9 relation1 s t ?is surface is1 9 its turn1 only kn[n to me by description z ! surface :i* has a c]ta9 relation to ?is pres5t$ object4 ,if t 7 s1 !n :at ,i %\ld be judg+ ( ?is pres5t$ object1 :5 ,i judge ,?is is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&1 w\ld be n t x is itself su* a "p1 b t ! ?+ :i* /&s to x 9 a c]ta9 relation is su* a "p3 9 %ort1 :at ,i %\ld be judg+ ) reg>d to x1 w\ld be ,!re's "o ?+ & "o only :i* /&s to ?is 9 ?is relation1 & ! ?+ :i* does s is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&4 ,b if we are to adopt ! view t some?+ ( ?is sort is :at we are judg+1 !re occurs at once ! press+ "q3 ,:at on e>? c ! relation be ) reg>d to :i* we are judg+1 t "o & only "o ?+ /&s 9 x to ?is pres5t$ object8 ,& ?is is a "q to :i*1 s f> z ,i "k1 none ( ^? philosoph]s1 :o bo? hold 7z _m d7 t ?is pres5t$ object is n id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&1 & also t !re really is some?+ ( :i* x c\ld be truly pr$icat$ t x is ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/& 7t is to say1 :o reject all views ( ! ,mill-,russell type71 h giv5 any?+ l a cle> answ]4 ,x does n seem to h occurr$ to !m t x requires an answ]1 *iefly1 ,i ?9k1 because x has n occurr$ to !m to ask :at we c be judg+ :5 we make judgm5ts ( ?is sort4 ,!re are only two answ]s1 t ,i c ?9k (1 :i* might be sugge/$ ) any plausibility4 ,_m philosoph]s1 :o take ! view t ! pres5t$ objects ab\t :i* we make ^! judgm5ts are s5sations ( ours1 & "s ev5 :o d n1 are 9 ! habit ( talk+ ( ! causes ( ^! objects z if we knew1 9 ! case ( ea*1 t x _h "o & only "o cause2 & _m ( !m seem to ?9k t ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/& c\ld be correctly describ$ z ! cause ( ?is pres5t$ object4 ,!y sugge/1 !re=e1 ! view t :at ,i am judg+ 9 ?is case might be3 ,?is pres5t$ object has "o & only "o cause1 & t cause is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&4 ,x seems to me q obvi\s t ?is view1 at all ev5ts1 is utt]ly unt5able4 ,i d n believe = a mom5t1 nor does any "o1 & c]ta9ly !re=e d n judge1 t ?is pres5t$ object has only "o cause3 ,i believe t x has a :ole s]ies ( diff]5t causes4 ,i d1 9 fact1 believe t ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/& is "o among ! causes ( my p]ception ( ?is pres5t$ object3 t seems to me to be a v well e/abli%$ sci5tific proposition4 ,& ,i am prep>$ to admit t !re may be good reasons = ?9k+ t x is "o among ! causes ( ?is pres5t$ object itself1 ?\gh ,i _c myself see t !re are any4 ,b t x is ! only cause ( ?is pres5t$ object ,i c]ta9ly d n believe1 nor1 ,i ?9k1 does anybody1 & h5ce my judgm5t c]ta9ly _c be ,! cause ( ?is is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&4 ,x might no d\bt1 be possible to def9e "s k9d ( causal relation1 su* t x might be plausibly held t x & x alone causes ?is pres5t$ object 9 t p>ticul> way4 ,b any su* def9ition w\ld1 s f> z ,i c see1 be necess>ily v complicat$4 ,&1 ev5 :5 we h got x1 x seems to me x w\ld be highly improbable we c\ld truly say t :at we are judg+ 9 ^! cases is3 ,?is pres5t$ object has "o & only "o cause1 ( ?is special k9d4 ,/ill1 ,i d n wi% to d5y t "s su* view may possibly be true4 ,! only o!r sugge/ion ,i c make is t !re may be "s ultimate1 n fur!r def9able relation1 :i* we might = in/ance1 call ! relation ( be+ a manife/ation (1 su* t we might conceivably be judg+3 ,!re is "o & only "o ?+ ( :i* ?is pres5t$ object is a manife/ation1 & t ?+ is "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&4 ,& "h aga91 x seems to me j possible t ?is may be a true acc\nt ( :at we are judg+2 only ,i _c f9d ! slighte/ sign t ,i am 9 fact aw>e ( any su* relation4 ,possibly o!r sugge/ions c\ld be made z to :at ! relation is1 ) reg>d to :i* x c\ld be plausibly suppos$ t 9 all cases1 :]e we make ^! judgm5ts we are 9 fact judg+ ( ! pres5t$ object ,!re is "o & only "o ?+ :i* /&s to ?is object 9 ?is relation4 ,b x seems to me at lea/ v d\btful :e!r !re is any su* relation at all2 :e!r1 !re=e1 our judgm5t really is ( ?is =m1 & :e!r !re=e1 ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/& really is kn[n to me by description z ! ?+ :i* /&s 9 a c]ta9 relation to ?is pres5t$ object4 ,b if x isn't1 & if1 also1 we _c take ! view t :at ,i am judg+ is t ?is pres5t$ object itself is a "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&1 !re w\ld seem to be no possible alt]native b t we mu/ take "s view ( :at ,i h call$ ! ,mill-,russell type4 ,views ( ?is type1 if ,i und]/& !m rightly1 are di/+ui%$ f ^? :i* ,i h hi!rto consid]$1 by ! fact t1 accord+ to !m1 !re is no?+ :atev] 9 ! ,univ]se ( :i* x c\ld truly be pr$icat$ t x is ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&1 or inde$ t x is a "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&1 or an ink/&1 at all4 ,!y hold1 9 %ort1 t ?\gh !re are pl5ty ( mat]ial ?+s 9 ! ,univ]se1 !re is no?+ 9 x ( :i* x c\ld truly be ass]t$ t x is a mat]ial ?+3 t1 ?\gh1 :5 ,i ass]t ,?is is an ink/&1 my ass]tion is true1 & is su* t x foll[s f x t !re is 9 ! ,univ]se at lea/ "o ink/&1 &1 !re=e1 at lea/ "o mat]ial ?+1 yet x does n foll[ f x t !re is any?+ :i* is a mat]ial ?+4 ,:5 ,i judge ,?is is an ink/&1 ,i am judg+ ?is pres5t$ object to possess a c]ta9 prop]ty1 :i* is su* t1 if !re are ?+s1 :i* possess t prop]ty1 !re are ink/&s & mat]ial ?+s1 b :i* is su* t no?+ :i* possesses x is itself a mat]ial ?+2 s t 9 judg+ t !re are mat]ial ?+s1 we are really always judg+ ( "s o!r prop]ty1 :i* is n t ( be+ a mat]ial ?+1 t !re are ?+s :i* possess x4 ,x seems to me q possible1 ( c\rse1 t "s view ( ?is type is ! true "o4 ,inde$1 ?is pap] may be reg>d$1 if y l1 z an argum5t 9 fav\r ( ! proposition t "s su* view mu/ be true4 ,c]ta9ly "o ( my ma9 objects 9 writ+ x 0 to put z pla9ly z ,i c "s grave difficulties :i* seem to me to /& 9 ! way ( any o!r view2 9 ! hope t "s ( ^?1 :o reject all views ( ! ,mill-,russell type1 may expla9 cle>ly :i* ( ! alt]natives ,i h sugge/$ !y w\ld adopt1 or :e!r1 p]haps1 "s o!r :i* has n occurr$ to me4 ,x does n seem to me to be always suffici5tly realis$ h[ difficult x is to f9d any answ] to my "q ,:at are we judg+ 9 ^! cases8 to :i* !re are n v grave objections1 unless we adopt an answ] ( ! ,mill-,russell type4 ,t an answ] ( ?is type is ! true "o1 ,i am n myself1 9 spite ( ^! objections1 by any means conv9c$4 ,! tru? is ,i am completely puzzl$ z to :at ! true answ] c be4 ,at ! pres5t mom5t1 ,i am r incl9$ to fav\r ! view t :at ,i am judg+ ( ?is pres5t$ object is t x is itself a "p ( ! surface ( an ink/&--t1 !re=e1 x really is id5tical ) ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&1 9 spite ( ! fact t ?is involves ! view t1 :]e1 hi!rto1 ,i h always suppos$ myself to be p]ceiv+ ( two pres5t$ objects t !y really 7 diff]5t1 ,i 01 9 fact1 only p]ceiv+ t !y seem$ to be diff]5t4 ,b1 z ,i h said1 x seems to me q possible t ?is view is1 z ,i h hi!rto suppos$1 %e] nons5se2 &1 9 any case1 !re are1 no d\bt1 o!r s]i\s objections to ! view t ?is pres5t$ object is ?is "p ( ! surface ( ?is ink/&4 ,,! ,,conception ,,( ,,intr9sic ,,value ,my ma9 object 9 ?is pap] is to try to def9e m precisely ! mo/ important "q1 :i*1 s f> z ,i c see1 is really at issue :5 x is disput$ ) reg>d to any pr$icate ( value1 :e!r x is or is n a subjective pr$icate4 ,!re are ?ree *ief cases 9 :i* ?is controv]sy is apt to arise4 ,x arises1 fir/1 ) reg>d to ! conceptions ( "r & wrong1 & ! closely alli$ conception ( duty or :at ought to be done4 ,x arises1 secondly1 ) reg>d to good & evil1 9 "s s5se ( ^? words 9 :i* ! conceptions = :i* !y /& are c]ta9ly q di/9ct f ! conceptions ( "r & wrong1 b 9 :i* nev]!less x is und5iable t e?ics has to deal ) !m4 ,& x arises1 la/ly1 ) reg>d to c]ta9 ae/hetic conceptions1 su* z beautiful & ugly2 or good & bad1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ^! words are appli$ to works ( art1 & 9 :i*1 !re=e1 ! "q :at is good & bad is a "q n = e?ics b = ae/hetics4 ,9 all ?ree cases !re are p :o ma9ta9 t ! pr$icates 9 "q are purely subjective1 9 a s5se :i* c1 ,i ?9k1 be fairly easily def9$4 ,i am n "h go+ to attempt a p]fectly accurate def9ition ( ! s5se 9 "q2 b1 z ! t]m subjective is s desp]ately ambigu\s1 ,i _h bett] try to indicate r\ghly ! s5se ,i am ?9k+ (4 ,take ! ^w beautiful = example4 ,!re is a s5se ( ! t]m subjective1 su* t to say t beautiful /&s = a subjective pr$icate1 means1 r\ghly1 t any /atem5t ( ! =m ,?is is beautiful m]ely expresses a psy*ological ass]tion to ! effect t "s p>ticul> individual or class ( individuals ei!r actually has1 or w\ld1 "u c]ta9 circum/ances1 h1 a c]ta9 k9d ( m5tal attitude t[>ds ! ?+ 9 "q4 ,& :at ,i mean by hav+ a m5tal attitude t[>ds a ?+1 c be be/ expla9$ by say+ t to desire a ?+ is to h "o k9d ( m5tal attitude t[>ds x1 to be pleas$ ) x is to h ano!r1 to w x is to h ano!r2 & 9 %ort t to h any k9d ( feel+ or emotion t[>ds x is to h a c]ta9 m5tal attitude t[>ds x--a diff]5t "o 9 ea* case4 ,?us anyone :o holds t :5 we say t a ?+ is beautiful1 :at we mean is m]ely t we ourselves or "s p>ticul> class ( p actually d1 or w\ld "u c]ta9 circum/ances1 h1 or p]man5tly h1 a c]ta9 feel+ t[>ds ! ?+ 9 "q1 is tak+ a subjective view ( beauty4 ,b 9 all ?ree cases !re are also a good _m p :o hold t ! pr$icates 9 "q are n1 9 ?is s5se subjective2 & ,i ?9k t ^? :o hold ?is are apt to speak z if ! view :i* !y wi% to ma9ta9 9 opposition to x consi/$ simply & solely 9 hold+ its contradictory--9 hold+1 t is1 t ! pr$icates 9 "q are objective1 :]e objective simply means ! same z n subjective4 ,b 9 fact ,i ?9k ?is is h>dly ev] really ! case4 ,9 ! case ( goodness & beauty1 :at su* p are really anxi\s to ma9ta9 is by no means m]ely t ^! conceptions are objective1 b t1 besides be+ objective1 !y are also1 9 a s5se :i* ,i %all try to expla91 intr9sic k9ds ( value4 ,x is ?is conviction--! conviction t goodness & beauty are intr9sic k9ds ( value1 :i* is1 ,i ?9k1 ! /ronge/ gr\nd ( _! objection to any subjective view4 ,& inde$1 :5 !y speak ( ! objectivity ( ^! conceptions1 :at !y h 9 m9d is1 ,i believe1 always a conception :i* has no prop] "r to be call$ objectivity1 s9ce x includes z an ess5tial "p ?is o!r *>act]i/ic :i* ,i propose to call t ( be+ an intr9sic k9d ( value4 ,! tru? is1 ,i believe1 t ?\gh1 f ! proposition t a p>ticul> k9d ( value is intr9sic x does foll[ t x mu/ be objective1 ! conv]se implication by no means holds1 b on ! contr>y x is p]fectly easy to conceive !ories ( e4g4 goodness1 accord+ to :i* goodness w\ld1 9 ! /ricte/ s5se1 be objective1 & yet w\ld n be intr9sic4 ,!re is1 !re=e1 a v important diff]5ce betwe5 ! conception ( objectivity1 & t :i* ,i w call int]nality b yet1 if ,i am n mi/ak51 :5 p talk ab\t ! objectivity ( any k9d ( value1 !y almo/ always confuse ! two1 ow+ to ! fact t mo/ ( ^? :o d5y ! int]nality ( a giv5 k9d ( value1 also ass]t its subjectivity4 ,h[ great ! diff]5ce is1 & t x is a fact t ^? :o ma9ta9 ! objectivity ( goodness d1 z a rule1 mean by ?is n m]e objectivity1 b int]nality1 z well1 c1 ,i ?9k1 be be/ br\ght out by consid]+ an in/ance ( a !ory1 accord+ to :i* goodness w\ld be objective b w\ld n be intr9sic4 ,let u suppose x to be held1 = in/ance1 t :at is meant by say+ t "o type ( human be+ ,a is bett] ?an ano!r type ,b1 is m]ely t ! c\rse ( evolution t5ds to increase ! numb]s ( type ,a & to decrease ^? ( type ,b4 ,su* a view has1 9 fact1 be5 (t5 sugge/$1 ev5 if x has n be5 held 9 ?is exact =m2 x am\nts m]ely to ! famili> sugge/ion t bett] means bett] fitt$ to survive4 ,obvi\sly bett]1 on ?is int]pretation ( its mean+1 is 9 no s5se a subjective conception3 ! conception ( belong+ to a type :i* t5ds to be fav\r$ by ! /ruggle = exi/5ce m ?an ano!r is z objective z any conception c be4 ,b yet1 if ,i am n mi/ak51 all ^? :o object to a subjective view ( goodness1 & insi/ ^u its objectivity1 w\ld object j z /rongly to ?is int]pretation ( its mean+ z to any subjective int]pretation4 ,obvi\sly1 !re=e1 :at !y are really anxi\s to cont5d = is n m]ely t goodness is objective1 s9ce !y are "h object+ to a !ory :i* is objective2 b some?+ else4 ,& ?is some?+ else is1 ,i ?9k1 c]ta9ly j t x is intr9sic--a "* :i* is j z incompatible ) ?is objective evolution>y int]pretation z ) any & e subjective int]pretation4 ,= if y say t to call type ,a bett] ?an type ,b means m]ely t x is m fav\r$ 9 ! /ruggle = exi/5ce1 x foll[s t ! be+ bett] is a pr$icate :i* does n dep5d m]ely on ! intr9sic nature ( ,a & ,b respectively4 ,on ! contr>y1 al?\gh "h & n[ ,a may be m fav\r$ ?an ,b1 x is obvi\s t "u o!r circum/ances or ) diff]5t natural laws ! v same type ,b might be m fav\r$ ?an ,a1 s t ! v same type :i*1 "u "o set ( circum/ances1 is bett] ?an ,b1 w\ld1 "u ano!r set1 be worse4 ,"h1 !n1 we h a case :]e an int]pretation ( goodness1 :i* does make x objective1 is incompatible ) its be+ intr9sic4 ,& x is j ?is same fact--! fact t1 on any subjective int]pretation1 ! v same k9d ( ?+ :i*1 "u "s circum/ances1 is bett] ?an ano!r1 w\ld1 "u o!rs1 be worse--:i* con/itutes1 s f> z ,i c see1 ! fundam5tal objection to all subjective int]pretations4 ,obvi\sly1 !re=e1 to express ?is objection by say+ t goodness is objective is v incorrect2 s9ce goodness might q well be objective & yet n possess ! v *>act]i/ic :i* x is ma9ly wi%$ to ass]t t x has4 ,9 ! case1 !re=e1 ( e?ical & ae/hetic goodness1 ,i ?9k t :at ^? :o cont5d = ! objectivity ( ^! conceptions really wi% to cont5d = is n m]e objectivity at all1 b pr9cipally & ess5tially t !y are intr9sic k9ds ( value4 ,b 9 ! case ( "r & wrong & duty1 ! same _c be said1 because _m ( ^? :o object to ! view t ^! conceptions are subjective1 nev]!less d n hold t !y are intr9sic4 ,we _c1 !re=e1 say t :at ^? :o cont5d = ! objectivity ( "r & wrong really mean is always *iefly t ^? conceptions are intr9sic1 b we c1 ,i ?9k1 say t :at !y d mean is c]ta9ly n objectivity 9 ?is case any m ?an ! o!r2 s9ce "h1 j z !re1 x w\ld be possible to f9d c]ta9 views1 :i* are 9 e s5se objective1 to :i* !y w\ld object j z /rongly z to any subjective view4 ,& ?\gh :at is meant by objectivity 9 ?is case1 is n t "r & wrong are !mselves intr9sic1 :at is1 ,i ?9k1 meant "h too is t !y h a fix$ relation to a k9d ( value :i* is intr9sic4 ,x is ?is fix$ relation to an intr9sic k9d ( value1 s f> z ,i c see1 :i* gives to "r & wrong t k9d & degree ( fixity & imp>tiality :i* !y actually are felt to possess1 & :i* is :at p are ?9k+ ( :5 !y talk ( _! objectivity4 ,"h1 too1 !re=e1 to talk ( ! *>act]i/ic meant z objectivity is j z great a misnom] z 9 ! o!r cases2 s9ce ?\gh x is a *>act]i/ic :i* is incompatible ) any k9d ( subjectivity1 x is also incompatible1 = ! same reason1 ) _m k9ds ( objectivity4 ,= ^! reasons ,i ?9k t :at ^? :o cont5d = ! objectivity ( c]ta9 k9ds ( value1 or = ! objectivity ( judgm5ts ( value1 commonly h 9 m9d is n really objectivity at all1 b ei!r t ! k9ds ( value 9 "q are !mselves intr9sic1 or else t !y h a fix$ relation to "s k9d t is s4 ,! conception ^u :i* !y really wi% to lay /ress is n t ( objective value1 b t ( intr9sic value1 ?\gh !y confuse ! two4 ,& ,i ?9k ?is is ! case to a consid]able ext5t n only ) ! def5d]s ( s-call$ objectivity1 b also ) its oppon5ts4 ,_m ( ^? :o hold /rongly 7z _m d7 t all k9ds ( value are subjective c]ta9ly object to ! s-call$ objective view1 n s mu* because x is objective1 z because x is n naturali/ic ox positivi/ic--a *>act]i/ic :i* does naturally foll[ f ! cont5tion t value is intr9sic1 b does n foll[ f ! m]e cont5tion t x is objective4 ,to a view :i* is at ! same "t bo? naturali/ic or positivi/ic & also objective1 su* z ! ,evolution>y view :i* ,i sket*$ j n[1 !y d n feel at all ! same k9d or degree ( objection z to any s-call$ objective view4 ,) reg>d to s-call$ objective views !y are apt to feel n only t !y are false1 b t !y involve a p>ticul>ly poison\s k9d ( falsehood--! erect+ into a metaphysical entity ( :at is really susceptible ( a simple naturali/ic explanation4 ,!y feel t to hold su* a view is n m]ely to make a mi/ake1 b to make a sup]/iti\s mi/ake4 ,!y feel ! same k9d ( contempt = ^? :o hold x1 :i* we are apt to feel t[>ds ^? :om we reg>d z grossly sup]/iti\s1 & :i* is felt by c]ta9 p]sons = :at !y call metaphysics4 ,obvi\sly1 !re=e1 :at !y really object to is n simply ! view t ^! pr$icates are objective1 b some?+ else--some?+ :i* does n at all foll[ f ! cont5tion t !y are objective1 b :i* does foll[ f ! cont5tion t !y are intr9sic4 ,9 disputes1 !re=e1 z to :e!r p>ticul> k9ds ( value are or are n subjective1 ,i ?9k t ! issue :i* is really felt to be important1 almo/ always by "o side1 & (t5 by bo?1 is n really ! issue betwe5 subjective & non-subjective1 b betwe5 intr9sic & non-intr9sic4 ,& n only is ?is felt to be ! m important issue2 ,i ?9k x really is s4 ,= ! diff]5ce t mu/ be made to our view ( ! ,univ]se1 accord+ z we hold t "s k9ds ( value are intr9sic or t none are1 is mu* great] ?an any :i* foll[s f a m]e diff]5ce ( op9ion z to :e!r "s are non-subjective1 or all )\t exception subjective4 ,to hold t any k9ds ( value are intr9sic entails ! recognition ( a k9d ( pr$icate extremely diff]5t f any we %\ld o!rwise h to recognise & p]haps unique2 :]eas x is 9 any case c]ta9 t !re are objective pr$icates z well z subjective4 ,b n[ :at is ?is int]nality ( :i* ,i h be5 speak+8 ,:at is meant by say+ ) reg>d to a k9d ( value t x is intr9sic8 ,to express r\ghly :at is meant is1 ,i ?9k1 simple en\gh2 & ev]ybody w recognise x at once1 z a notion :i* is con/antly 9 p's heads2 b ,i want to dwell ^u x at "s l5g?1 because ,i "k ( no place :]e x is expressly expla9$ & def9$1 & because1 ?\gh x seems v simple & fundam5tal1 ! task ( def9+ x precisely is by no moans easy & involves "s difficulties :i* ,i mu/ confess t ,i d n "k h[ to solve4 ,i h already giv5 incid5tally ! ma9 idea 9 speak+ ( t evolution>y int]pretation ( goodness1 accord+ to :i*1 z ,i said1 goodness w\ld be objective b w\ld n be intr9sic4 ,i !re us$ z equival5t to ! ass]tion t 'bett]1' on t def9ition1 w\ld n be 'intr9sic1' ! ass]tion t ! "q :e!r "o type ( be+ ,a 0 bett] ?an ano!r ,b w\ld n dep5d solely on ! intr9sic natures ( ,a & ,b1 b on circum/ances & ! laws ( nature4 ,& ,i ?9k t ?is phrase w 9 fact sugge/ to ev]ybody j :at ,i d mean by intr9sic value4 ,we c1 9 fact1 set up ! foll[+ def9ition4 ,to say t a k9d ( value is intr9sic means m]ely t ! "q :e!r a ?+ possesses x1 & 9 :at degree x possesses x1 dep5ds solely on ! intr9sic nature ( ! ?+ 9 "q4 ,b ?\gh ?is def9ition does1 ,i ?9k1 convey exactly :at ,i mean1 ,i want to dwell ^u its mean+1 p>tly because ! conception ( 'diff]+ 9 intr9sic nature :i* ,i believe to be ( fundam5tal importance1 is liable to be confus$ ) o!r conceptions1 & p>tly because ! def9ition involves notions1 :i* ,i d n "k h[ to def9e exactly4 ,:5 ,i say1 ) reg>d to any p>ticul> k9d ( value1 t ! "q :e!r & 9 :at degree any?+ possesses x dep5ds solely on ! intr9sic nature ( ! ?+ 9 "q1 ,i mean to say two diff]5t ?+s at ! same "t4 ,i mean to say 7#a7 t x is impossible = :at is /rictly "o & ! same ?+ to possess t k9d ( value at "o "t1 or 9 "o set ( circum/ances1 & n to possess x at ano!r2 & equally impossible = x to possess x 9 "o degree at "o "t1 or 9 "o set ( circum/ances1 & to possess x 9 a diff]5t degree at ano!r1 or 9 a diff]5t set4 ,?is1 ,i ?9k1 is obvi\sly "p ( :at is naturally convey$ by say+ t ! "q :e!r & 9 :at degree a ?+ possesses ! k9d ( value 9 "q always dep5ds solely on ! intr9sic nature ( ! ?+4 ,= if x & y h diff]5t intr9sic natures1 x foll[s t x _c be q /rictly "o & ! same ?+ z y2 & h5ce if x & y c h a diff]5t intr9sic value1 only :]e _! intr9sic natures are diff]5t1 x foll[s t "o & ! same ?+ mu/ always h ! same intr9sic value4 ,?is1 !n1 is "p ( :at is meant2 & ab\t ?is "p ,i ?9k ,i ne$ say no m1 except to call att5tion to ! fact t x involves a conception1 :i* z we %all see is also involv$ 9 ! o!r "p1 & :i* involves ! same difficulty 9 bo? cases--,i mean1 ! conception :i* is express$ by ! ^w 'impossible4' 7#b7 ,! second "p ( :at is meant is t if a giv5 ?+ possesses any k9d ( intr9sic value 9 a c]ta9 degree1 !n n only mu/ t same ?+ possess x1 "u all circum/ances1 9 ! same degree1 b also any?+ exactly l x1 mu/1 "u all circum/ances1 possess x 9 exactly ! same degree4 ,or to put x 9 ! correspond+ negative =m3 ,x is impossible t ( two exactly simil> ?+s "o %\ld possess x & ! o!r n1 or t "o %\ld possess x 9 "o degree1 & ! o!r 9 a diff]5t "o4 ,i ?9k ?is second proposition also is naturally convey$ by say+ t ! k9d ( value 9 "q dep5ds solely on ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses x4 ,= we %\ld naturally say ( two ?+s :i* 7 exactly alike intr9sically1 9 spite ( _! be+ two1 t !y possess$ ! same intr9sic nature4 ,b x is important to call att5tion expressly to ! fact t :at ,i mean by ! expression 'hav+ a diff]5t intr9sic nature' is equival5t to 'n exactly alike' because "h !re is real risk ( confusion betwe5 ?is conception & a diff]5t "o4 ,?is comes ab\t z foll[s4 ,x is natural to suppose t ! phrase 'hav+ a diff]5t intr9sic nature' is equival5t to ! phrase 'intr9sically diff]5t' or 'hav+ diff]5t intr9sic prop]ties4' ,b1 if we d make ?is id5tification1 !re is a risk ( confusion4 ,= x is obvi\s t !re is a s5se 9 :i*1 :5 ?+s are exactly l1 !y mu/ be 'intr9sically diff]5t' & h diff]5t intr9sic prop]ties1 m]ely because !y are two4 ,= in/ance1 two pat*es ( col\r may be exactly alike1 9 spite ( ! fact t ea* possesses a con/itu5t :i* ! o!r does n possess1 provid$ only t _! two con/itu5ts are exactly alike4 ,& yet1 9 a c]ta9 s5se1 x is obvi\s t ! fact t ea* has a con/itu5t1 :i* ! o!r has n got1 does con/itute an intr9sic diff]5ce betwe5 !m1 & implies t ea* has an intr9sic prop]ty :i* ! o!r has n got4 ,& ev5 :]e ! two ?+s are simple ! m]e fact t !y are num]ically diff]5t does 9 a s5se con/itute an intr9sic diff]5ce betwe5 !m1 & ea* w h at lea/ "o intr9sic prop]ty :i* ! o!r has n got--namely t ( be+ id5tical ) itself4 ,x is obvi\s !re=e t ! phrases 'intr9sically diff]5t' & 'hav+ diff]5t intr9sic prop]ties' are ambigu\s4 ,!y may be us$ 9 su* a s5se t to say ( two ?+s t !y are intr9sically diff]5t or h diff]5t intr9sic prop]ties does n imply t !y are n exactly alike1 b only t !y are num]ically diff]5t4 ,or !y may be us$ 9 a s5se 9 :i* two ?+s c be said to be intr9sically diff]5t1 & to h diff]5t intr9sic prop]ties only :5 !y are n exactly alike4 ,x is1 !re=e1 extremely important to insi/ t :5 ,i say3 ,two ?+s c diff] 9 intr9sic value1 only :5 !y h diff]5t intr9sic natures1 ,i am us+ ! expression 'hav+ diff]5t intr9sic natures' 9 ! latt] s5se & n ! =m]3--9 a s5se 9 :i* ! m]e fact t two ?+s are two1 or diff] num]ically1 does n imply t !y h diff]5t intr9sic natures1 b 9 :i* !y c be said to h diff]5t intr9sic natures1 only :]e1 besides diff]+ num]ically1 !y are also n exactly alike4 ,b z soon z ?is is expla9$1 ano!r risk ( confusion arises ow+ to ! fact t :5 p contra/ m]e num]ical diff]5ce ) a k9d ( intr9sic diff]5ce1 :i* is n m]ely num]ical1 !y are apt to id5tify ! latt] ) qualitative diff]5ce4 ,x might1 !re=e1 easily be ?\ght t by 'diff]5ce 9 intr9sic nature' ,i mean 'diff]5ce 9 quality4' ,b ?is id5tification ( diff]5ce 9 quality ) diff]5ce 9 intr9sic nature w\ld also be a mi/ake4 ,x is true t :at is commonly meant by diff]5ce ( quality1 9 ! /rict s5se1 always is a diff]5ce ( intr9sic nature3 two ?+s _c diff] 9 quality )\t diff]+ 9 intr9sic nature2 & t fact is "o ( ! mo/ important facts ab\t qualitative diff]5ce4 ,b ! conv]se is by no means also true3 al?\gh two ?+s _c diff] 9 quality )\t diff]+ 9 intr9sic nature1 !y c diff] 9 intr9sic nature )\t diff]+ 9 quality2 or1 9 o!r words1 diff]5ce 9 quality is only "o species ( diff]5ce 9 intr9sic nature4 ,t ?is is s foll[s f ! fact t1 z ,i expla9$1 ,i am us+ ! phrase 'diff]5t 9 intr9sic nature' z equival5t to 'n exactly l = x is q pla9 t two ?+s may n be exactly alike1 9 spite ( ! fact t !y don't diff] 9 quality1 e4g4 if ! only diff]5ce betwe5 !m 7 9 respect ( ! degree 9 :i* !y possess "s quality !y d possess4 ,nobody w\ld say t a v l\d s\nd 0 exactly l a v s(t "o1 ev5 if !y 7 exactly l 9 quality2 & yet x is pla9 !re is a s5se 9 :i* _! intr9sic nature is diff]5t ,= ?is reason alone qualitative diff]5ce _c be id5tifi$ ) diff]5ce 9 intr9sic nature4 ,& !re are /ill o!r reasons4 ,diff]5ce 9 size1 = in/ance may be a diff]5ce 9 intr9sic nature1 9 ! s5se ,i mean1 b x c h>dly be call$ a diff]5ce 9 quality4 ,or take su* a diff]5ce z ! diff]5ce betwe5 two patt]ns consi/+ 9 ! fact t ! "o is a yell[ circle ) a r$ spot 9 ! middle1 & ! o!r a yell[ circle ) a blue spot 9 ! middle4 ,?is diff]5ce w\ld p]haps be loosely call$ a diff]5ce ( quality2 b obvi\sly x w\ld be m accurate to call x a diff]5ce :i* consi/s 9 ! fact t ! "o patt]n has a con/itu5t :i* is qualitatively diff]5t f any :i* ! o!r has2 & ! diff]5ce betwe5 be+ qualitatively diff]5t & hav+ qualitatively diff]5t con/itu5ts is important bo? because ! latt] c only be def9$ 9 t]ms ( ! =m]1 & because x is possible = simple ?+s to diff] f "o ano!r 9 ! =m] way1 :]eas x is only possible = complex ?+s to diff] 9 ! latt]4 ,i hope ?is is suffici5t to make cle> exactly :at ! conception is :i* ,i am express+ by ! phrase diff]5t 9 intr9sic nature4 ,! important po9ts are 7#a7 t x is a k9d ( diff]5ce :i* does n hold betwe5 two ?+s1 :5 !y are m]ely num]ically diff]5t1 b only :51 besides be+ num]ically diff]5t1 !y are also n exactly alike & 7#b7 t x is n id5tical ) qualitative diff]5ce2 al?\gh qualitative diff]5ce is "o p>ticul> species ( x4 ,! conception seems to me to be an extremely important & fundam5tal "o1 al?\gh1 s f> z ,i c see1 x has no q simple & unambigu\s "n3 & ?is is ! reason :y ,i h dwelt on x at su* l5g?4 ,n exactly l is ! lea/ ambigu\s way ( express+ x2 b ?is has ! disadvantage t x looks z if ! idea ( exact lik5ess 7 ! fundam5tal "o f :i* ?is 0 d]iv$1 :]eas ,i believe ! contr>y to be ! case4 ,= ?is reason x is p]haps bett] to /ick to ! cumbr\s phrase diff]5t 9 intr9sic nature4 ,s mu* = ! "q :at is meant by say+ ( two ?+s t !y diff] 9 intr9sic nature4 ,we h n[ to turn to ! m difficult "q z to :at is meant by ! words impossible & necess>y 9 ! /atem5t3 ,a k9d ( value is intr9sic if & only if1 x is impossible t x & y %\ld h diff]5t values ( ! k9d1 unless !y diff] 9 intr9sic nature2 & 9 ! equival5t /atem5t3 ,a k9d ( value is intr9sic if & only if1 :5 any?+ possesses x1 t same ?+ or any?+ exactly l x w\ld necess>ily or mu/ always1 "u all circum/ances1 possess x 9 exactly ! same degree4 ,z reg>ds ! mean+ ( ?is necessity & impossibility1 we may beg9 by mak+ two po9ts cle>4 7#a7 ,x is sometimes cont5d$1 & ) "s plausibility1 t :at we mean by say+ t x is possible = a ?+ :i* possesses "o pr$icate ,f to possess ano!r ,g1 is1 sometimes at lea/1 m]ely t "s ?+s :i* possess ,f d 9 fact also possess ,g4 ,& if we give ?is mean+ to possible1 ! correspond+ mean+ ( ! /atem5t x is impossible = a ?+ :i* possesses ,f to possess ,g w be m]ely3 ,?+s :i* possess ,f nev] d 9 fact possess ,g4 ,if1 !n1 we und]/ood impossible 9 ?is s5se1 ! condition = ! int]nality ( a k9d ( value1 :i* ,i h /at$ by say+ t if a k9d ( value is to be intr9sic x mu/ be impossible = two ?+s to possess x 9 diff]5t degrees1 if !y are exactly l "o ano!r1 w am\nt m]ely to say+ t no two ?+s :i* are exactly l "o ano!r ev] d1 9 fact1 possess x 9 diff]5t degrees4 ,x foll[s1 t1 if ?is 7 all t 7 meant1 ?is condition w\ld be satisfi$1 if only x 7 true 7z = all ,i "k x may be7 t1 9 ! case ( all ?+s :i* possess any p>ticul> k9d ( intr9sic value1 !re happ5s to be no?+ else 9 ! ,univ]se exactly l any "o ( !m2 = if ?is 7 s1 x w\ld1 ( c\rse1 foll[ t no two ?+s :i* are exactly alike did 9 fact possess ! k9d ( value 9 "q 9 diff]5t degrees1 = ! simple reason t ev]y?+ :i* possess$ x at all w\ld be unique 9 ! s5se t !re 0 no?+ else exactly l x4 ,if ?is 7 all t 7 meant1 !re=e1 we c\ld prove any p>ticul> k9d ( value to satisfy ?is condition1 by m]ely prov+ t !re nev] has 9 fact & nev] w be any?+ exactly l any "o ( ! ?+s :i* possess x3 & our ass]tion t x satisfi$ ?is condition w\ld m]ely be an empirical g5]alisation4 ,moreov] if ?is 7 all t 0 meant x w\ld obvi\sly be by no means c]ta9 t purely subjective pr$icates c\ld n satisfy ! condition 9 "q2 s9ce x w\ld be satisfi$ by any subjective pr$icate ( :i* x happ5$ to be true t ev]y?+ :i* possess$ x 01 9 fact1 unique--t !re 0 no?+ exactly l x2 & = all ,i "k !re may be _m subjective pr$icates ( :i* ?is is true4 ,x is1 !re=e1 sc>cely necess>y to say t ,i am n us+ impossible 9 ?is s5se4 ,:5 ,i say t a k9d ( value1 to be intr9sic1 mu/ satisfy ! condition t x mu/ be impossible = two ?+s exactly alike to possess x 9 diff]5t degrees1 ,i d n mean by ?is condition any?+ :i* a k9d ( value c\ld be prov$ to satisfy1 by ! m]e empirical fact t !re 0 no?+ else exactly l any ( ! ?+s :i* possess$ x4 ,x is1 ( c\rse1 an ess5tial "p ( my mean+ t we mu/ be able to say n m]ely t no two exactly simil> ?+s d 9 fact possess x 9 diff]5t degrees1 b t1 if !re _h be5 or 7 go+ to be any?+ exactly simil> to a ?+ :i* does possess x1 ev5 ?\gh1 9 fact1 !re has n & won't be any su* ?+1 t ?+ w\ld h possess$ or w\ld possess ! k9d ( value 9 "q 9 exactly ! same degree4 ,x is ess5tial to ?is mean+ ( impossibility t x %\ld entitle u to ass]t :at w\ld h be5 ! case1 "u conditions :i* nev] h be5 & nev] w be realis$2 & x seems obvi\s t no m]e empirical g5]alisation c entitle u to d ?is4 ,b 7#b7 to say t ,i am n us+ 'necessity' 9 ?is fir/ s5se1 is by no means suffici5t to expla9 :at ,i d mean4 ,= x c]ta9ly seems z if causal laws 7?\gh ?is is disput$7 d entitle u to make ass]tions ( ! v k9d t m]e empirical g5]alisations d n entitle u to make4 ,9 virtue ( a causal law we d seem to be entitl$ to ass]t su* ?+s z t1 if a giv5 ?+ _h _h a prop]ty or 7 to h a prop]ty ,f :i* x didn't h or won't h1 x w\ld h _h or w\ld h "s o!r prop]ty ,g4 ,& x might1 !re=e1 be ?\ght t ! k9d ( 'necessity' & 'impossibility' ,i am talk+ ( is ?is k9d ( causal 'necessity' & 'impossibility4' ,x is1 !re=e1 important to insi/ t ,i d n mean ?is k9d ei!r4 ,if ?is 7 all ,i meant1 x w\ld aga9 be by no means obvi\s1 t purely subjective pr$icates might n satisfy our second condition4 ,x may1 = in/ance1 = all ,i "k1 be true t !re are causal laws :i* insure t 9 ! case ( ev]y?+ t is 'beautiful1' any?+ exactly l any ( ^! ?+s w\ld1 9 ?is ,univ]se1 excite a p>ticul> k9d ( feel+ 9 ev]ybody to :om x 7 pres5t$ 9 a p>ticul> way3 & if t 7 s1 we %\ld h a subjective pr$icate :i* satisfi$ ! condition t1 :5 a giv5 ?+ possesses t pr$icate1 x is impossible 79 ! causal s5se7 t any exactly simil> ?+ %\ld n also possess x4 ,! k9d ( necessity ,i am talk+ ( is n1 !re=e1 m]e causal necessity ei!r4 ,:5 ,i say t if a giv5 ?+ possesses a c]ta9 degree ( intr9sic value1 any?+ precisely simil> to x w\ld necess>ily h possess$ t value 9 exactly ! same degree1 ,i mean t x w\ld h done s1 ev5 if x _h exi/$ 9 a ,univ]se 9 :i* ! causal laws 7 q diff]5t f :at !y are 9 ?is "o4 ,i mean1 9 %ort1 t x is impossible = any precisely simil> ?+ to possess a diff]5t value1 9 precisely su* a s5se z t1 9 :i* x is1 ,i ?9k1 g5]ally admitt$ t x is n impossible t causal laws %\ld h be5 diff]5t f :at !y are--a s5se ( impossibility1 !re=e1 :i* c]ta9ly does n dep5d m]ely on causal laws4 ,t !re is su* a s5se ( necessity--a s5se :i* entitles u to say t :at has ,f w\ld h ,g1 ev5 if causal laws 7 q diff]5t f :at !y are--is1 ,i ?9k1 q cle> f su* in/ances z ! foll[+4 ,suppose y take a p>ticul> pat* ( col\r1 :i* is yell[4 ,we c1 ,i ?9k1 say ) c]ta9ty t any pat* exactly l t "o1 w\ld be yell[1 ev5 if x exi/$ 9 a ,univ]se 9 :i* causal laws 7 q diff]5t f :at !y are 9 ?is "o4 ,we c say t any su* pat* mu/ be yell[1 q unconditionally1 :atev] ! circum/ances1 & :atev] ! causal laws4 ,& x is 9 a s5se simil> to ?is1 9 respect ( ! fact t x is nei!r empirical nor causal1 t ,i mean ! 'mu/' to be und]/ood1 :5 ,i say t if a k9d ( value is to be 'intr9sic1' !n1 suppos+ a giv5-?+ possesses x 9 a c]ta9 degree1 any?+ exactly l t ?+ mu/ possess x 9 exactly ! same degree4 ,to say1 ( 'beauty' or 'goodness' t !y are 'intr9sic' is only1 !re=e1 to say t ?is ?+ :i* is obvi\sly true ( 'yell[ness' & 'blu5ess' & 'r$ness' is true ( !m4 ,& if we give ?is s5se to 'mu/' 9 our def9ition1 !n ,i ?9k x is obvi\s t to say ( a giv5 k9d ( value t x is intr9sic is inconsi/5t ) its be+ 'subjective4' ,= !re is1 ,i ?9k1 pretty cle>ly no subjective pr$icate ( :i* we c say ?us unconditionally1 t1 if a giv5 ?+ possesses x1 !n any?+ exactly l t ?+1 w\ld1 "u any circum/ances1 & "u any causal laws1 also possess x4 ,= in/ance1 :atev] k9d ( feel+ y take1 x is pla9ly n true t suppos+ ,i h t feel+ t[>ds a giv5 ?+ ,a1 !n ,i %\ld necess>ily "u any circum/ances h t feel+ t[>ds any?+ precisely simil> to ,a3 = ! simple reason t a ?+ precisely simil> to ,a might exi/ 9 a ,univ]se 9 :i* ,i did n exi/ at all4 ,& simil>ly x is n true ( any feel+ :atev]1 t if somebody has t feel+ t[>ds a giv5 ?+ ,a1 !n1 9 arty ,univ]se1 9 :i* a ?+ precisely simil> to ,a exi/$1 somebody w\ld h t feel+ t[>ds x4 ,nor f9ally is x ev5 true1 t if x is true ( a giv5 ?+ ,a1 t1 "u actual causal laws1 any "o to :om ,a 7 pres5t$ 9 a c]ta9 way w\ld h a c]ta9 feel+ t[>ds x1 !n ! same hypo!tical pr$icate w\ld1 9 any ,univ]se1 belong to any?+ precisely simil> to ,a3 9 e case x seems to be possible t !re might be a ,univ]se1 9 :i* ! causal laws 7 su* t ! proposition w\ld n be true4 ,x is1 !n1 because 9 my def9ition ( 'intr9sic' value ! 'mu/' is to be und]/ood 9 ?is unconditional s5se1 t ,i ?9k t ! proposition t a k9d ( value is 'intr9sic' is inconsi/5t ) its be+ subjective4 ,b x %\ld be obs]v$ t 9 hold+ t !re is ?is inconsi/5cy1 ,i am contradict+ a doctr9e :i* seems to be held by _m philosoph]s4 ,!re are1 z y probably "k1 "s philosoph]s :o insi/ /rongly on a doctr9e :i* !y express by say+ t no relations are purely ext]nal4 ,& s f> z ,i c make out "o ?+ :i* !y mean by ?is is j t1 :5ev] r has any relation :atev] :i* y has n got1 x & y _c be exactly alike3 ,t any diff]5ce 9 relation necess>ily entails a diff]5ce 9 intr9sic nature4 ,!re is1 ,i ?9k1 no d\bt t :5 ^! philosoph]s say ?is1 !y mean by _! '_c' & 'necess>ily' an unconditional '_c' & 'mu/4' ,& h5ce x foll[s !y are hold+ t1 if1 = in/ance1 a ?+ ,a pleases me n[1 !n any o!r ?+1 ,b1 precisely simil> to ,a1 mu/1 "u any circum/ances1 & 9 any ,univ]se1 please me also3 s9ce1 if ,b did n please me1 x w\ld n possess a relation :i* ,a does possess1 & !re=e1 by _! pr9ciple1 c\ld n be precisely simil> to ,a--mu/ diff] f x 9 intr9sic nature4 ,b x seems to me to be obvi\s t ?is pr9ciple is false4 ,if x 7 true1 x w\ld foll[ t ,i c "k a priori su* ?+s z t no pat* ( col\r :i* is se5 by y & is n se5 by me is ev] exactly l any pat* :i* is se5 by me & is n se5 by y2 or t no pat* ( col\r :i* is surr\nd$ by a r$ r+ is ev] exactly l "o :i* is n s surr\nd$4 ,b x is surely obvi\s1 t1 :e!r ^! ?+s are true or n !y are ?+s :i* ,i _c "k a priori4 ,x is simply n evid5t a priori t no pat* ( col\r :i* is se5 by ,a & n by ,b is ev] exactly l "o :i* is se5 by ,b & n by ,a1 & t no pat* ( col\r :i* is surr\nd$ by a r$ r+ is ev] exactly l "o :i* is n4 ,& ?is illu/ration s]ves to br+ out v well bo? :at is meant by say+ ( su* a pr$icate z 'beautiful 't x is intr9sic1' & :y1 if x is1 x _c be subjective4 ,:at is meant is j t if ,a is beautiful & ,b is n1 y c\ld "k a priori t ,a & ,b are n exactly alike2 :]eas1 ) any su* subjective pr$icate1 z t ( excit+ a p>ticul> feel+ 9 me1 or t ( be+ a ?+ :i* w\ld excite su* a feel+ 9 any spectator1 y _c tell a priori t a ?+ ,a :i* did possess su* a pr$icate & a ?+ ,b :i* did n1 c\ld n be exactly alike4 ,x seems to me1 !re=e1 q c]ta91 9 spite ( ! dogma t no relations are purely ext]nal1 t !re are _m pr$icates1 su* = in/ance z mo/ 7if n all7 subjective pr$icates or ! objective "o ( be+ surr\nd$ by a r$ r+1 :i* d n dep5d solely on ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses !m3 or1 9 o!r words1 ( :i* x is n true t if x possesses !m & y does n1 x & y mu/ diff] 9 intr9sic nature4 ,b :at precisely is meant by ?is unconditional 'mu/1' ,i mu/ confess ,i don't "k4 ,! obvi\s ?+ to sugge/ is t x is ! logical 'mu/1' :i* c]ta9ly is unconditional 9 j ?is s5se3 ! k9d ( necessity1 :i* we ass]t to hold1 = in/ance1 :5 we say t :atev] is a "r-angl$ triangle mu/ be a triangle1 or t :atev] is yell[ mu/ be ei!r yell[ or blue4 ,b ,i mu/ say ,i _c see t all unconditional necessity is ( ?is nature4 ,i d n see h[ x c be d$uc$ f any logical law t1 if a giv5 pat* ( col\r be yell[1 !n any pat* :i* 7 exactly l ! fir/ w\ld be yell[ too4 ,& simil>ly 9 our case ( 'intr9sic' value1 ?\gh ,i ?9k x is true t beauty1 = in/ance1 is 'intr9sic1' ,i d n see h[ x c be d$uc$ f any logical law1 t if ,a is beautiful1 any?+ t 7 exactly l ,a w\ld be beautiful too1 9 exactly ! same degree4 ,moreov]1 ?\gh ,i d believe t bo? yell[ 79 ! s5se 9 :i* x applies to s5se-data7 & beautiful are pr$icates :i*1 9 ?is unconditional s5se1 dep5d only on ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses !m1 !re seems to me to be an extremely important diff]5ce betwe5 !m :i* con/itutes a fur!r difficulty 9 ! way ( gett+ q cle> z to :at ?is unconditional s5se ( mu/ is4 ,! diff]5ce ,i mean is "o :i* ,i am incl9$ to express by say+ t ?\gh bo? yell[ness & beauty are pr$icates :i* dep5d only on ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses !m1 yet :ile yell[ness is itself an intr9sic pr$icate1 beauty is n4 ,inde$ x seems to me to be "o ( ! mo/ important tru?s ab\t pr$icates ( value1 t ?\gh _m ( !m are intr9sic k9ds ( value1 9 ! s5se ,i h def9$1 yet none ( !m are intr9sic prop]ties1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* su* prop]ties z yell[ or ! prop]ty ( be+ a /ate ( pleasure or be+ a /ate ( ?+s :i* conta9s a balance ( pleasure are intr9sic prop]ties4 ,x is obvi\s1 = in/ance1 t1 if we are to reject all naturali/ic !ories ( value1 we mu/ n only reject ^? !ories1 accord+ to :i* no k9d ( value w\ld be intr9sic1 b mu/ also reject su* !ories z ^? :i* ass]t1 = in/ance1 t to say t a /ate ( m9d is good is to say t x is a /ate ( be+ pleas$2 or t to say t a /ate ( ?+s is good is to say t x conta9s a balance ( pleasure ov] pa94 ,!re are1 9 %ort1 two entirely diff]5t types ( naturali/ic !ory1 ! diff]5ce betwe5 :i* may be illu/rat$ by ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! ass]tion1 ,a is good means ,a is pleasant & ! ass]tion ,a is good means ,a is a /ate ( pleasure4 ,!ories ( ! =m] type imply t goodness is n an intr9sic k9d ( value1 :]eas !ories ( ! latt] type imply equally emphatically t x is3 s9ce obvi\sly su* pr$icates z t ( be+ a /ate ( pleasure1 or conta9+ a balance ( pleasure1 are pr$icates l yell[ 9 respect ( ! fact t if a giv5 ?+ possesses !m1 any?+ exactly l ! ?+ 9 "q mu/ possess !m4 ,x seems to me equally obvi\s t bo? types ( !ory are false3 b ,i d n "k h[ to exclude !m bo? except by say+ t two diff]5t propositions are bo? true ( goodness1 namely3 7#a7 t x does dep5d only on ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses x--:i* excludes !ories ( ! fir/ type & 7#b7 t1 ?\gh ?is is s1 x is yet n itself an intr9sic prop]ty--:i* excludes ^? ( ! second4 ,x 0 = ?is reason t ,i said above t1 if !re are any intr9sic k9ds ( value1 !y w\ld con/itute a class ( pr$icates :i* is1 p]haps1 unique2 = ,i _c ?9k ( any o!r pr$icate :i* resembles !m 9 respect ( ! fact1 t ?\gh n itself intr9sic1 x yet %>es ) intr9sic prop]ties ! *>act]i/ics ( dep5d+ solely on ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses x4 ,s f> z ,i "k1 c]ta9 pr$icates ( value are ! only non-intr9sic prop]ties :i* %>e ) intr9sic prop]ties ?is *>act]i/ic ( dep5d+ only on ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses !m4 ,if1 h[ev]1 we are ?us to say t pr$icates ( value1 ?\gh dep5d5t solely on intr9sic prop]ties1 are n !mselves intr9sic prop]ties1 !re mu/ be "s *>act]i/ic belong+ to intr9sic prop]ties :i* pr$icates ( value nev] possess4 ,& x seems to me q obvi\s t !re is2 only ,i c't see :at x is4 ,x seems to me q obvi\s t if y ass]t ( a giv5 /ate ( ?+s t x conta9s a balance ( pleasure ov] pa91 y are ass]t+ ( x n only a diff]5t pr$icate1 f :at y w\ld be ass]t+ ( x if y said x 0 good--b a pr$icate :i* is ( q a diff]5t k9d2 & 9 ! same way t :5 y ass]t ( a pat* ( col\r t x is yell[1 ! pr$icate y ass]t is n only diff]5t f beautiful1 b ( q a diff]5t k9d1 9 ! same way z be=e4 ,& ( c\rse ! m]e fact t _m p h ?\ght t goodness & beauty 7 subjective is evid5ce t !re is "s great diff]5ce ( k9d betwe5 !m & su* pr$icates z be+ yell[ or conta9+ a balance ( pleasure4 ,b :at ! diff]5ce is1 if we suppose1 z ,i suppose1 t goodness & beauty are n subjective1 & t !y d %>e ) yell[ness & conta9+ pleasure1 ! prop]ty ( dep5d+ solely on ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses !m1 ,i confess ,i _c say4 ,i c only vaguely express ! k9d ( diff]5ce ,i feel !re to be by say+ t intr9sic prop]ties seem to describe ! intr9sic nature ( :at possesses !m 9 a s5se 9 :i* pr$icates ( value nev] d4 ,if y c\ld enum]ate all ! intr9sic prop]ties a giv5 ?+ possess$1 y w\ld h giv5 a complete description ( x1 & w\ld n ne$ to m5tion any pr$icates ( value x possess$2 :]eas no description ( a giv5 ?+ c\ld be complete :i* omitt$ any intr9sic prop]ty4 ,b1 9 any case1 ow+ to ! fact t pr$icates ( intr9sic value are n !mselves intr9sic prop]ties1 y _c def9e intr9sic prop]ty1 9 ! way :i* at fir/ sight seems obvi\sly ! "r "o4 ,y _c say t an intr9sic prop]ty is a prop]ty su* t1 if "o ?+ possesses x & ano!r does n1 ! intr9sic nature ( ! two ?+s mu/ be diff]5t4 ,= ?is is ! v ?+ :i* we are ma9ta9+ to be true ( pr$icates ( intr9sic value1 :ile at ! same "t we say t !y are n intr9sic prop]ties4 ,su* a def9ition ( intr9sic prop]ty w\ld !re=e only be possible if1 we c\ld say t ! necessity !re is t1 if x & y possess diff]5t intr9sic prop]ties1 _! nature mu/ be diff]5t1 is a necessity ( a diff]5t k9d f ! necessity !re is t1 if x & y are ( diff]5t intr9sic values1 _! nature mu/ be diff]5t1 al?\gh bo? necessities are unconditional4 ,& x seems to me possible t ?is is ! true explanation4 ,b1 if s1 x obvi\sly adds to ! difficulty ( expla9+ ! mean+ ( ! unconditional mu/1 s9ce1 9 ?is case1 !re w\ld be two diff]5t mean+s ( mu/1 bo? unconditional1 & yet nei!r1 app>5tly1 id5tical ) ! logical mu/4 ,,ext]nal ,,& ,,int]nal ,,relations ,propositions & t]ms surr\nd$ by are ov]-lign$ 9 orig9al4 ,9 ! index to ,appe>ance & ,reality 7,fir/ ,edition7 ,mr4 ,bradley decl>es t all relations are intr9sical2 & ! foll[+ are "s ( ! phrases by means ( :i* he tries to expla9 :at he means by ?is ass]tion4 ,a relation mu/ at bo? ends affect1 & pass into1 ! be+ ( its t]ms 7p4 #cfd74 ,e relation ess5tially p5etrates ! be+ ( its t]ms1 & is1 9 ?is s5se1 intr9sical 7p4 #cib74 ,to /& 9 a relation & n to be relative1 to support x & yet n to be infect$ & und]m9$ by x1 seems out ( ! "q 7p4 #adb74 ,& a good _m o!r philosoph]s seem incl9$ to take ! same view ab\t relations :i* ,mr4 ,bradley is "h try+ to express4 ,o!r phrases :i* seem to be sometimes us$ to express x1 or a "p ( x1 are ^!3 ,no relations are purely ext]nal2 ,all relations qualify or modify or make a diff]5ce to ! t]ms betwe5 :i* !y hold2 ,no t]ms are indep5d5t ( any ( ! relations 9 :i* !y /& to o!r t]ms4 7,see e4g41 ,joa*im1 ,! ,nature ( ,tru?1 pp4 #aa1 #ab1 #df74 ,x is1 ,i ?9k1 by no means easy to make out exactly :at ^! philosoph]s mean by ^! ass]tions4 ,& ! ma9 object ( ?is pap] is to try to def9e cle>ly "o proposition1 :i*1 ev5 if x does n give ! :ole ( :at !y mean1 seems to me to be always impli$ by :at !y mean1 & to be c]ta9ly false4 ,i %all try to make cle> ! exact mean+ ( ?is proposition1 to po9t out "s ( its mo/ important consequ5ces1 & to di/+ui% x cle>ly f c]ta9 o!r propositions :i* are1 ,i ?9k1 m or less liable to be confus$ ) x4 ,& ,i %all ma9ta9 t1 if we give to ! ass]tion t a relation is int]nal ! mean+ :i* ?is proposition w\ld give to x1 !n1 ?\gh1 9 t s5se1 "s relations are int]nal1 o!rs1 no less c]ta9ly1 are n1 b are purely ext]nal4 ,to beg9 )1 we may1 ,i ?9k1 cle> ! gr\nd1 by putt+ on "o side two propositions ab\t relations1 :i*1 ?\gh !y seem sometimes to be confus$ ) ! view we are discuss+1 d1 ,i ?9k1 q c]ta9ly n give ! :ole mean+ ( t view4 ,! fir/ is a proposition :i* is q c]ta9ly & obvi\sly true ( all relations1 )\t exception1 & :i*1 ?\gh x raises po9ts ( great difficulty1 c1 ,i ?9k1 be cle>ly en\gh /at$ = its tru? to be obvi\s4 ,x is ! proposition t1 9 ! case ( any relation :atev]1 ! k9d ( fact :i* we express by say+ t a giv5 t]m ,a has t relation to ano!r t]m ,b1 or to a pair ( t]ms ,b & ,c1 or to ?ree t]ms ,b1 ,c1 & ,d1 & s on1 9 no case simply consi/s 9 ! t]ms 9 "q toge!r ) ! relation4 ,?us ! fact :i* we express by say+ t ,edw>d ,,vii 0 fa!r ( ,george ,v1 obvi\sly does n simply consi/ 9 ,edw>d1 ,george1 & ! relation ( fa!rhood4 ,9 ord] t ! fact may be1 x is obvi\sly n suffici5t t !re %\ld m]ely be ,george & ,edw>d & ! relation ( fa!rhood2 x is fur!r necess>y t ! relation %\ld relate ,edw>d to ,george1 & n only s1 b also t x %\ld relate !m 9 ! p>ticul> way :i* we express by say+ t ,edw>d 0 fa!r ( ,george1 & n m]ely 9 ! way :i* we %\ld express by say+ t ,george 0 fa!r ( ,edw>d4 ,?is proposition is1 ,i ?9k1 obvi\sly true ( all relations )\t exception3 & ! only reason :y ,i h m5tion$ x is because1 9 an article 9 :i* ,mr4 ,bradley criticises ,mr4 ,russell 7,m9d1 #aiaj1 p4 #agi71 he seems to sugge/ t x is inconsi/5t ) ! proposition t any relations are m]ely ext]nal1 & because1 s f> z ,i c make out1 "s o!r p :o ma9ta9 t all relations are int]nal seem sometimes to ?9k t _! cont5tion foll[s f ?is proposition4 ,! way 9 :i* ,mr4 ,bradley puts x is t su* facts are unities :i* are n completely analysable2 & ?is is1 ( c\rse1 true1 if x means m]ely t 9 ! case ( no su* fact is !re any set ( con/itu5ts ( :i* we c truly say3 ,?is fact is id5tical ) ^! con/itu5ts4 ,b :e!r f ?is x foll[s t all relations are int]nal mu/ ( c\rse dep5d ^u :at is meant by ! latt] /atem5t4 ,if x be m]ely us$ to express ?is proposition itself1 or any?+ :i* foll[s f x1 !n1 ( c\rse1 !re c be no d\bt t all relations are int]nal4 ,b ,i ?9k !re is no d\bt t ^? :o say ?is d n mean by _! words m]ely ?is obvi\s proposition itself2 & ,i am go+ to po9t out some?+ :i* ,i ?9k !y always imply1 & :i* c]ta9ly does n foll[ f x4 ,! second proposition :i*1 ,i ?9k1 may be put aside at once z c]ta9ly n giv+ ! :ole ( :at is meant1 is ! proposition :i* is1 ,i ?9k1 ! natural mean+ ( ! phrases ,all relations modify or affect _! t]ms or ,all relations make a diff]5ce to _! t]ms4 ,!re is "o p]fectly natural & intelligible s5se 9 :i* a giv5 relation may be said to modify a t]m :i* /&s 9 t relation1 namely1 ! s5se 9 :i* we %\ld say t1 if1 by putt+ a /ick ( seal+-wax into a flame1 we make ! seal+-wax melt1 its relation%ip to ! flame has modifi$ ! seal+-wax4 ,?is is a s5se ( ! ^w modify 9 :i* "p ( :at is meant by say+ ( any t]m t x is modifi$1 is t x has actually und]gone a *ange3 & ,i ?9k x is cle> t a s5se 9 :i* ?is is "p ( its mean+ is ! only "o 9 :i* ! ^w modify c prop]ly be us$4 ,if1 h[ev]1 ^? :o say t all relations modify _! t]ms 7 us+ ! ^w 9 ?is1 its prop]1 s5se1 "p ( :at w\ld be meant by ?is ass]tion w\ld be t all t]ms :i* h relations at all actually und]go *anges4 ,su* an ass]tion w\ld be obvi\sly false1 = ! simple reason t !re are t]ms :i* h relation8 & :i* yet nev] *ange at all4 ,& ,i ?9k x is q cle> t ^? :o ass]t t all relations are int]nal1 9 ! s5se we are conc]n$ )1 mean by ?is some?+ :i* c\ld be consi/5tly ass]t$ to be true ( all relations )\t exception1 ev5 if x 7 admitt$ t "s t]ms :i* h relations d n *ange4 ,:51 !re=e1 !y use ! phrase t all relations modify _! t]ms z equival5t to all relations are int]nal1 !y mu/ be us+ modify 9 "s metaphorical s5se o!r ?an its natural "o4 ,i ?9k1 inde$1 t mo/ ( !m w\ld be incl9$ to ass]t t 9 e case 9 :i* a t]m ,a comes to h to ano!r t]m ,b a relation1 :i* x did n h to ,b 9 "s imm$iately prec$+ int]val1 its hav+ ( t relation to t t]m causes x to und]go "s *ange1 :i* x w\ld n h und]gone if x _h n /ood 9 precisely t relation to ,b & ,i ?9k p]haps !y w\ld ?9k t ?is proposition foll[s f "s proposition :i* is true ( all relations1 )\t exception1 & :i* is :at !y mean by say+ t all relations are int]nal4 ,! "q :e!r ! com+ into a new relation does ?us always cause "s modification 9 ! t]m :i* comes into x is "o :i* is (t5 discuss$1 z if x _h some?+ to d ) ! "q :e!r all relations are int]nal z :51 = in/ance1 x is discuss$ :e!r k ( a ?+ alt]s ! ?+ kn[n4 ,& = my "p ,i %\ld ma9ta9 t ?is proposition is c]ta9ly n true4 ,b :at ,i am conc]n$ ) n[ is n ! "q :e!r x is true1 b simply to po9t out t1 s f> z ,i c see1 x c h no?+ to d ) ! "q :e!r all relations are int]nal1 = ! simple reason t x _c possibly foll[ f any proposition ) reg>d to all relations )\t exception4 ,x ass]ts ) reg>d to all relational prop]ties ( a c]ta9 k9d1 t !y h a c]ta9 k9d ( effect2 & no proposition ( ?is sort c1 ,i ?9k foll[ f any univ]sal proposition ) reg>d to all relations4 ,we h1 !re=e1 reject$ z c]ta9ly n giv+ ! :ole mean+ ( ! dogma t all relations are int]nal3 7#a7 ! obvi\sly true proposition t no relational facts are completely analysable1 9 ! precise s5se :i* ,i gave to t ass]tion2 & 7#b7 ! obvi\sly false proposition t all relations modify _! t]ms1 9 ! natural s5se ( ! t]m modify1 9 :i* x always has z "p ( its mean+ cause to und]go a *ange4 ,& we h also se5 t ?is false proposition t any relation :i* a t]m comes to h always causes x to und]go a *ange is :olly irrelevant to ! "q :e!r all relations are int]nal or n4 ,we h se5 f9ally t if ! ass]tion t all relations modify _! t]ms is to be und]/ood z equival5t to ! ass]tion t all are int]nal1 modify mu/ be und]/ood 9 "s metaphorical s5se4 ,! "q is3 ,:at is ?is metaphorical s5se8 ,& "o po9t is1 ,i ?9k1 pretty cle> to beg9 )4 ,x is obvi\s t1 9 ! case ( "s relations1 a giv5 t]m ,a may h ! relation 9 "q1 n only to "o o!r t]m1 b to sev]al diff]5t t]ms4 ,if1 = in/ance1 we consid] ! relation ( fa!rhood1 x is obvi\s t a man may be fa!r1 n only ( "o1 b ( sev]al diff]5t *ildr54 ,& ^? :o say t all relations modify _! t]ms always mean1 ,i ?9k1 n m]ely t e diff]5t relation :i* a t]m has modifies x2 b also t1 :]e ! relation is "o :i* ! t]m has to sev]al diff]5t o!r t]ms1 !n1 9 ! case ( ea* ( ^! t]ms1 x is modifi$ by ! fact t x has ! relation 9 "q to t p>ticul> t]m4 ,if1 = in/ance1 ,a is fa!r ( ?ree *ildr51 ,b1 ,c1 & ,d1 !y mean to ass]t t he is modifi$1 n m]ely by be+ a fa!r1 b by be+ ! fa!r ( ,b1 also by be+ ! fa!r ( ,c1 & also by be+ ! fa!r ( ,d4 ,! m]e ass]tion t all relations modify _! t]ms does n1 ( c\rse1 make x q cle> t ?is is :at is meant2 b ,i ?9k !re is no d\bt t x is always meant2 & ,i ?9k we c express x m cle>ly by us+ a t]m1 :i* ,i h already introduc$1 & say+ ! doctr9e is t all relational prop]ties modify _! t]ms1 9 a s5se :i* rema9s to be def9$4 ,i ?9k !re is no difficulty 9 und]/&+ :at ,i mean by a relational prop]ty4 ,if ,a is fa!r ( ,b1 !n :at y ass]t ( ,a :5 y say t he is s is a relational prop]ty--namely ! prop]ty ( be+ fa!r ( ,b2 & x is q cle> t ?is prop]ty is n itself a relation1 9 ! same fundam5tal s5se 9 :i* ! relation ( fa!rhood is s2 & also t1 if ,c is a diff]5t *ild f ,b1 !n ! prop]ty ( be+ fa!r ( ,c is a diff]5t relational prop]ty f t ( be+ fa!r ( ,b1 al?\gh !re is only "o relation1 t ( fa!rhood1 f :i* bo? are d]iv$4 ,s f> z ,i c make out1 ^? philosoph]s :o talk ( all relations be+ int]nal1 (t5 actually mean by relations relational prop]ties2 :5 !y talk ( all ! relations ( a giv5 t]m1 !y mean all its relational prop]ties1 & n m]ely all ! diff]5t relations1 ( ea* ( :i* x is true t ! t]m has t relation to some?+4 ,x w1 ,i ?9k1 conduce to cle>ness to use a diff]5t ^w = ^! two entirely diff]5t uses ( ! t]m relation to call fa!rhood a relation1 & fa!rhood ( ,b a relational prop]ty4 ,& ! fundam5tal proposition1 :i* is meant by ! ass]tion t all relations are int]nal1 is1 ,i ?9k1 a proposition ) reg>d to relational prop]ties1 & n ) reg>d to relations prop]ly s-call$4 ,!re is no d\bt t ^? :o ma9ta9 ?is dogma mean to ma9ta9 t all relational prop]ties are relat$ 9 a peculi> way to ! t]ms :i* possess !m--t !y modify or are int]nal to !m1 9 "s metaphorical s5se4 ,& once we h def9$ :at ?is s5se is 9 :i* a relational prop]ty c be said to be int]nal to a t]m :i* possesses x1 we c easily d]ive f x a correspond+ s5se 9 :i* ! relations1 /rictly s call$1 f :i* relational prop]ties are d]iv$1 c be said to be int]nal4 ,our "q is !n3 ,:at is ! metaphorical s5se ( modify 9 :i* ! proposition t all relations are int]nal is equival5t to ! proposition t all relational prop]ties modify ! t]ms :i* possess !m8 ,i ?9k x is cle> t ! t]m modify w\ld nev] h be5 us$ at all to express ! relation meant1 unless !re _h be5 "s analogy betwe5 ?is relation & t :i* we h se5 is ! prop] s5se ( modify1 namely1 causes to *ange4 ,& ,i ?9k we c see :]e ! analogy comes 9 by consid]+ ! /atem5t1 ) reg>d to any p>ticul> t]m ,a & any relational prop]ty ,p :i* belongs to x1 t ,a w\ld h be5 diff]5t f :at x is if x _h n _h ,p3 ! /atem5t1 = in/ance1 t ,edw>d ,,vii w\ld h be5 diff]5t if he _h n be5 fa!r ( ,george ,v4 ,?is is a ?+ :i* we c obvi\sly truly say ( ,a & ,p1 9 "s s5se1 :5ev] x is true ( ,p t x modifi$ ,a 9 ! prop] s5se ( ! ^w3 if ! be+ held 9 ! flame causes ! seal+-wax to melt1 we c truly say 79 "s s5se7 t ! seal+-wax w\ld n h be5 9 a melt$ /ate if x _h n be5 9 ! flame4 ,b x seems z if x 7 a ?+ :i* might also be true ( ,a & ,p1 :]e x is n true t ! possession ( ,p caus$ ,a to *ange2 s9ce ! m]e ass]tion t ,a w\ld h be5 diff]5t1 if x _h n _h ,p1 does n necess>ily imply t ! possession ( ,p caus$ ,a to h any prop]ty :i* x w\ld n h _h o!rwise4 ,& ^? :o say t all relations are int]nal d sometimes t5d to speak z if :at !y meant c\ld be put 9 ! =m3 ,9 ! case ( e relational prop]ty :i* a ?+ has1 x is always true t ! ?+ :i* has x w\ld h be5 diff]5t if x _h n _h t prop]ty2 !y sometimes say ev53 ,if ,p be a relational prop]ty & ,a a t]m :i* has x1 !n x is always true t ,a w\ld n h be5 ,a if x _h n _h ,p4 ,?is is1 ,i ?9k1 obvi\sly a clumsy way ( express+ any?+ :i* c\ld possibly be true1 s9ce1 tak5 /rictly1 x implies ! self-contradictory proposition t if ,a _h n _h ,p1 x w\ld n h be5 true t ,a did n h ,p4 ,b x is nev]!less a m or less natural way ( express+ a proposition :i* might q well be true1 namely1 t1 suppos+ ,a has ,p1 !n any?+ :i* _h n _h ,p w\ld necess>ily h be5 diff]5t f ,a4 ,?is is ! proposition :i* ,i wi% to sugge/ z giv+ ! metaphorical mean+ ( ,p modifies ,a1 ( :i* we are 9 se>*4 ,x is a proposition to :i* ,i ?9k a p]fectly precise mean+ c be giv51 & "o :i* does n at all imply t ! possession ( ,p caus$ any *ange 9 ,a1 b :i* might conceivably be true ( all t]ms & all ! relational prop]ties !y h1 )\t exception4 ,& x seems to me t x is n unnatural t ! proposition t ?is is true ( ,p & ,a1 %\ld h be5 express$ 9 ! =m1 ,p modifies ,a1 s9ce x c be m or less naturally express$ 9 ! p]v]t$ =m1 ,if ,a _h n _h ,p x w\ld h be5 diff]5t1--a =m ( words1 :i*1 z we saw1 c also be us$ :5ev] ,p does1 9 ! prop] s5se1 modify ,a4 ,i want to sugge/1 !n1 t "o ?+ :i* is always impli$ by ! dogma t1 ,all relations are int]nal1 is t1 9 ! case ( e relational prop]ty1 x c always be truly ass]t$ ( any t]m ,a :i* has t prop]ty1 t any t]m :i* _h n _h x w\ld necess>ily h be5 diff]5t f ,a4 ,?is is ! proposition to :i* ,i want to direct att5tion4 ,& !re are two phrases 9 x1 :i* require "s fur!r explanation4 ,! fir/ is ! phrase w\ld necess>ily h be54 ,& ! mean+ ( ?is c be expla9$1 9 a prelim9>y way1 z foll[s3--,to say ( a pair ( prop]ties ,p & ,q1 t any t]m :i* _h _h ,p w\ld necess>ily h _h ,q1 is equival5t to say+ t1 9 e case1 f ! proposition ) reg>d to any giv5 t]m t x has ,p1 x foll[s t t t]m has ,q3 foll[s be+ und]/ood 9 ! s5se 9 :i* f ! proposition ) reg>d to any t]m1 t x is a "r angle1 x foll[s t x is an angle1 & 9 :i* f ! proposition ) reg>d to any t]m t x is r$ x foll[s t x is col\r$4 ,!re is obvi\sly "s v important s5se 9 :i* f ! proposition t a ?+ is a "r angle1 x does foll[ t x is an angle1 & f ! proposition t a ?+ is r$ x does foll[ t x is col\r$4 ,& :at ,i am ma9ta9+ is t ! metaphorical s5se ( modify1 9 :i* x is ma9ta9$ t all relational prop]ties modify ! subjects :i* possess !m1 c be def9$ by ref]5ce to ?is s5se ( foll[s4 ,! def9ition is3 ,to say ( a giv5 relational prop]ty ,p t x modifies or is int]nal to a giv5 t]m ,a :i* possesses x1 is to say t f ! proposition t a ?+ has n got ,p x foll[s t t ?+ is diff]5t f ,a4 ,9 o!r words1 x is to say t ! prop]ty ( n possess+ ,p1 & ! prop]ty ( be+ diff]5t f ,a are relat$ to "o ano!r 9 ! peculi> way 9 :i* ! prop]ty ( be+ a "r-angl$ triangle is relat$ to t ( be+ a triangle1 or t ( be+ r$ to t ( be+ col\r$4 ,to complete ! def9ition x is necess>y1 h[ev]1 to def9e ! s5se 9 :i* diff]5t f ,a is to be und]/ood4 ,!re are two diff]5t s5ses :i* ! /atem5t t ,a is diff]5t f ,b may be>4 ,x may be meant m]ely t ,a is num]ically diff]5t f ,b1 o!r ?an ,b1 n id5tical ) ,b4 ,or x may be meant t n only is ?is ! case1 b also t ,a is relat$ to ,b 9 a way :i* c be r\ghly express$ by say+ t ,a is qualitatively diff]5t f ,b4 ,& ( ^! two mean+s1 ^? :o say ,all relations make a diff]5ce to _! t]ms1 always1 ,i ?9k1 mean diff]5ce 9 ! latt] s5se & n m]ely 9 ! =m]4 ,t is to say1 !y mean1 t if ,p be a relational prop]ty :i* belongs to ,a1 !n ! abs5ce ( ,p entails n only num]ical diff]5ce f ,a1 b qualitative diff]5ce4 ,b1 9 fact1 f ! proposition t a ?+ is qualitatively diff]5t f ,a1 x does foll[ t x is also num]ically diff]5t4 ,& h5ce !y are ma9ta9+ t e relational prop]ty is int]nal to its t]ms 9 bo? ( two diff]5t s5ses at ! same "t4 ,!y are ma9ta9+ t1 if ,p be a relational prop]ty :i* belongs to ,a1 !n ,p is int]nal to ,a bo? 9 ! s5se 7#a7 t ! abs5ce ( ,p entails qualitative diff]5ce f ,a2 & 7#b7 t ! abs5ce ( ,p entails num]ical diff]5ce f ,a4 ,x seems to me t nei!r ( ^! propositions is true2 & ,i w say some?+ ab\t ea* 9 turn4 ,z = ! fir/1 ,i said be=e t ,i ?9k "s relational prop]ties really are int]nal to _! t]ms1 ?\gh by no means all are4 ,b1 if we und]/& int]nal to 9 ?is fir/ s5se1 ,i am n really sure t any are4 ,9 ord] to get an example ( "o :i* 01 we %\ld h1 ,i ?9k1 to say t any two diff]5t qualities are always qualitatively diff]5t f "o ano!r3 t1 = in/ance1 x is n only ! case t any?+ :i* is pure r$ is qualitatively diff]5t f any?+ :i* is pure blue1 b t ! quality pure r$ itself is qualitatively diff]5t f ! quality pure blue4 ,i am n q sure t we c say ?is1 b ,i ?9k we c2 & if s1 x is easy to get an example ( a relational prop]ty :i* is int]nal 9 our fir/ s5se4 ,! quality orange is int]m$iate 9 %ade betwe5 ! qualities yell[ & r$4 ,?is is a relational prop]ty1 & x is q cle> t1 on our assumption1 x is an int]nal "o4 ,s9ce x is q cle> t any quality :i* 7 n int]m$iate betwe5 yell[ & r$1 w\ld necess>ily be o!r ?an orange2 & if any quality o!r ?an orange mu/ be qualitatively diff]5t f orange1 !n x foll[s t int]m$iate betwe5 yell[ & r$ is int]nal to orange4 ,t is to say1 ! abs5ce ( ! relational prop]ty int]m$iate betwe5 yell[ & r$1 entails ! prop]ty diff]5t 9 quality f orange4 ,!re is !n1 ,i ?9k1 a difficulty 9 be+ sure t any relational prop]ties are int]nal 9 ?is fir/ s5se4 ,b1 if :at we want to d is to %[ t "s are n1 & t !re=e ! dogma t all relations are int]nal is false1 ,i ?9k ! mo/ conclusive reason = say+ ?is is t if all 7 int]nal 9 ?is fir/ s5se1 all w\ld necess>ily be int]nal 9 ! second1 & t ?is is pla9ly false4 ,i ?9k1 9 fact1 ! mo/ important consequ5ce ( ! dogma t all relations are int]nal1 is t x foll[s f x t all relational prop]ties are int]nal 9 ?is second s5se4 ,i propose1 !re=e1 at once to consid] ?is proposition1 ) a view to br++ out q cle>ly :at x means & involves1 & :at are ! ma9 reasons = say+ t x is false4 ,! proposition 9 "q is t1 if ,p be a relational prop]ty & ,a a t]m to :i* x does 9 fact belong1 !n1 no matt] :at ,p & ,a may be1 x may always be truly ass]t$ ( !m1 t any t]m :i* _h n possess$ ,p w\ld necess>ily h be5 o!r ?an--num]ically diff]5t f--,a3 or 9 o!r words1 t ,a w\ld necess>ily1 9 all conceivable circum/ances1 h possess$ ,p4 ,& ) ?is s5se ( int]nal1 z di/+ui%$ f t :i* says qualitatively diff]5t1 x is q easy to po9t out "s relational prop]ties :i* c]ta9ly are int]nal 9 ?is s5se4 ,let u take z an example ! relational prop]ty :i* we ass]t to belong to a visual s5se-datum :5 we say ( x t x has ano!r visual s5se-datum z a spatial "p3 ! ass]tion1 = in/ance1 ) reg>d to a col\r$ pat* half ( :i* is r$ & half yell[4 ,?is :ole pat* conta9s ?is pat* 7:]e ?is pat* is a prop] "n = ! r$ half74 ,x is "h1 ,i ?9k1 q pla9 t1 9 a p]fectly cle> & intelligible s5se1 we c say t any :ole1 :i* _h n conta9$ t r$ pat*1 c\ld n h be5 id5tical ) ! :ole 9 "q3 t f ! proposition ) reg>d to any t]m :atev] t x does n conta9 t p>ticul> pat* x foll[s t t t]m is o!r ?an ! :ole 9 "q--?\gh n necess>ily t x is qualitatively diff]5t f x4 ,t p>ticul> :ole c\ld n h exi/$ )\t hav+ t p>ticul> pat* = a "p4 ,b x seems no less cle>1 at fir/ sight1 t !re are _m o!r relational prop]ties ( :i* ?is is n true4 ,9 ord] to get an example1 we h only to consid] ! relation :i* ! r$ pat* has to ! :ole pat*1 in/ead ( consid]+ z be=e t :i* ! :ole has to x4 ,x seems q cle> t1 ?\gh ! :ole c\ld n h exi/$ )\t hav+ ! r$ pat* = a "p1 ! r$ pat* might p]fectly well h exi/$ )\t be+ "p ( t p>ticul> :ole4 ,9 o!r words1 ?\gh e relational prop]ty ( ! =m hav+ ?is = a spatial "p is int]nal 9 our s5se1 x seems equally cle> t e prop]ty ( ! =m is a spatial "p ( ?is :ole is n int]nal1 b purely ext]nal4 ,yet ?is la/1 accord+ to me1 is "o ( ! ?+s :i* ! dogma ( int]nal relations d5ies4 ,x implies t x is j z necess>y t any?+1 :i* is 9 fact a "p ( a p>ticul> :ole1 %\ld be a "p ( t :ole1 z t any :ole1 :i* has a p>ticul> ?+ = a "p1 %\ld h t ?+ = a "p4 ,x implies1 9 fact1 q g5]ally1 t any t]m :i* does 9 fact h a p>ticul> relational prop]ty1 c\ld n h exi/$ )\t hav+ t prop]ty4 ,& 9 say+ ?is x obvi\sly flies 9 ! face ( common s5se4 ,x seems q obvi\s t 9 ! case ( _m relational prop]ties :i* ?+s h1 ! fact t !y h !m is a m]e matt] ( fact3 t ! ?+s 9 "q might h exi/$ )\t hav+ !m4 ,t ?is1 :i* seems obvi\s1 is true1 seems to me to be ! mo/ important ?+ t c be meant by say+ t "s relations are purely ext]nal4 ,& ! difficulty is to see h[ any philosoph] c\ld h suppos$ t x 0 n true3 t1 = in/ance1 ! relation ( "p to :ole is no m ext]nal ?an t ( :ole to "p4 ,i w give at once "o ma9 reason :i* seems to me to h l$ to ! view1 t all relational prop]ties are int]nal 9 ?is s5se4 ,:at ,i am ma9ta9+ is ! common-s5se view1 :i* seems obvi\sly true1 t x may be true t ,a has 9 fact got ,p & yet also true t ,a might h exi/$ )\t hav+ ,p4 ,& ,i say t ?is is equival5t to say+ t x may be true t ,a has ,p1 & yet n true t f ! proposition t a ?+ has n got ,p x foll[s t t ?+ is o!r ?an ,a--num]ically diff]5t f x4 ,& "o reason :y ?is is disput$ is1 ,i ?9k1 simply because x is 9 fact true t if ,a has ,p1 & x has n1 x does foll[ t x is o!r ?an ,a4 ,^! two propositions1 ! "o :i* ,i admit to be true 7#a7 t if ,a has ,p1 & x has n1 x does foll[ t x is o!r ?an ,a1 & ! "o :i* ,i ma9ta9 to be false 7#b7 t if ,a has ,p1 !n f ! proposition ) reg>d to any t]m x t x has n got ,p1 x foll[s t x is o!r ?an ,a1 are1 ,i ?9k1 easily confus$ ) "o ano!r4 ,& x is 9 fact ! case t if !y are n diff]5t1 or if 7#b7 foll[s f 7#a71 !n no relational prop]ties are ext]nal4 ,= 7#a7 is c]ta9ly true1 & 7#b7 is c]ta9ly equival5t to ass]t+ t none are4 ,x is !re=e absolutely ess5tial1 if we are to ma9ta9 ext]nal relations1 to ma9ta9 t 7#b7 does n foll[ f 7#a74 ,^! two propositions 7#a7 & 7#b71 ) reg>d to :i* ,i ma9ta9 t 7#a7 is true1 & 7#b7 is false1 c be put 9 ano!r way1 z foll[s3 7#a7 ass]ts t if ,a has ,p1 !n any t]m :i* has n1 mu/ be o!r ?an ,a4 7#b7 ass]ts t if ,a has ,p1 !n any t]m :i* _h n1 w\ld necess>ily be o!r ?an ,a4 ,& :5 !y are put 9 ?is =m1 x is1 ,i ?9k1 easy to see :y !y %\ld be confus$3 y h only to confuse mu/ or is necess>ily ) w\ld necess>ily be4 ,& _! connexion ) ! "q ( ext]nal relations c be br\ght out z foll[s3 ,to ma9ta9 ext]nal relations y h to ma9ta9 su* ?+s z t1 ?\gh ,edw>d ,,vii 0 9 fact fa!r ( ,george ,v1 he might h exi/$ )\t be+ fa!r ( ,george ,v4 ,b to ma9ta9 ?is1 y h to ma9ta9 t x is n true t a p]son :o 0 n fa!r ( ,george w\ld necess>ily h be5 o!r ?an ,edw>d4 ,yet x is1 9 fact1 ! case1 t any p]son :o 0 n ! fa!r ( ,george1 mu/ h be5 o!r ?an ,edw>d4 ,unless1 !re=e1 y c ma9ta9 t f ?is true proposition x does n foll[ t any p]son :o 0 n fa!r ( ,george w\ld necess>ily h be5 o!r ?an ,edw>d1 y w h to give up ! view t ,edw>d might h exi/$ )\t be+ fa!r ( ,george4 ,by f> ! mo/ important po9t 9 connexion ) ! dogma ( int]nal relations seems to me to be simply to see cle>ly ! diff]5ce betwe5 ^! two propositions 7#a7 & 7#b71 & t 7#b7 does n foll[ f 7#a74 ,if ?is is n und]/ood1 no?+ 9 connexion ) ! dogma1 c1 ,i ?9k1 be und]/ood4 ,& p]haps ! diff]5ce may seem s cle>1 t no m ne$ be said ab\t x4 ,b ,i _c help ?9k+ x is n cle> to ev]ybody1 & t x does involve ! rejection ( c]ta9 views1 :i* are sometimes held z to ! mean+ ( foll[s4 ,s ,i w try to put ! po9t aga9 9 a p]fectly /rict =m4 ,let ,p be a relational prop]ty1 & ,a a t]m to :i* x does 9 fact belong4 ,i propose to def9e :at is meant by say+ t ,p is int]nal to ,a 79 ! s5se we are n[ conc]n$ )7 z mean+ t f ! proposition t a ?+ has n got ,p1 x foll[s t x is o!r ?an ,a4 ,t is to say1 ?is proposition ass]ts t betwe5 ! two prop]ties n hav+ ,p & o!r ?an ,a1 !re holds t relation :i* holds betwe5 ! prop]ty be+ a "r angle & ! prop]ty be+ an angle1 or betwe5 ! prop]ty r$ & ! prop]ty col\r$1 & :i* we express by say+ t1 9 ! case ( any ?+ :atev]1 f ! proposition t t ?+ is a "r angle x foll[s1 or is d$ucible1 t x is an angle4 ,let u n[ adopt c]ta9 conv5tions = express+ ?is proposition4 ,we require1 fir/ ( all1 "s t]m to express ! conv]se ( t relation :i* we ass]t to hold betwe5 a p>ticul> proposition q & a p>ticul> proposition p1 :5 we ass]t t q foll[s f or is d$ucible f p4 ,let u use ! t]m entails to express ! conv]se ( ?is relation4 ,we %all !n be able to say truly t p entails q1 :5 & only :5 we are able to say truly t q foll[s f p or is d$ucible f p1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ! conclusion ( a syllogism 9 ,b>b>a foll[s f ! two premisses1 tak5 z "o conjunctive proposition2 or 9 :i* ! proposition ,?is is col\r$ foll[s f ,?is is r$4 p entails q w be relat$ to q foll[s f1 p 9 ! same way 9 :i* ,a is great] ?an ,b is relat$ to ,b is less ?an ,a4 ,we require1 next1 "s %ort & cle> me?od ( express+ ! proposition1 ) reg>d to two prop]ties ,p & ,q1 t any proposition :i* ass]ts ( a giv5 ?+ t x has ! prop]ty ,p entails ! proposition t ! ?+ 9 "q also has ! prop]ty ,q4 ,let u express ?is proposition 9 ! =m x,p entails x,q ,t is to say x,p entails x,q is to mean ! same z ,ea* "o ( all ! v>i\s propositions1 :i* are alike 9 respect ( ! fact t ea* ass]ts ) reg>d to "s giv5 ?+ t t ?+ has ,p1 entails t "o among ! v>i\s propositions1 alike 9 respect ( ! fact t ea* ass]ts ) reg>d to "s giv5 ?+ t t ?+ has ,q1 :i* makes ?is ass]tion ) reg>d to ! same ?+1 ) reg>d to :i* ! proposition ( ! fir/ class ass]ts t x has ,p4 ,9 o!r words x,p entails x,q is to be true1 if & only if ! proposition ,,ap entails ,,aq is true1 & if also all propositions :i* resemble ?is1 9 ! way 9 :i* ,,bp entails ,,bq resembles x1 are true also2 :]e ,,ap means ! same z ,a has ,p1 ,,aq ! same z ,a has ,q etc41 etc4 ,we require1 next1 "s way ( express+ ! proposition1 ) reg>d to two prop]ties ,p & ,q1 t any proposition :i* d5ies ( a giv5 ?+ t x has ,p entails ! proposition1 ) reg>d to ! ?+ 9 "q1 t x has ,q4 ,let u1 9 ! case ( any proposition1 p1 express ! contradictory ( t proposition by p4 ,! proposition ,x is n ! case t ,a has ,p w !n be express$ by ,,ap2 & x w !n be natural1 9 accordance ) ! la/ conv5tion to express ! proposition t any proposition :i* d5ies ( a giv5 ?+ t x has ,p entails ! proposition1 ) reg>d to ! ?+ 9 "q1 t x has ,q1 by x,p entails x,q4 ,& we require1 f9ally1 "s %ort way ( express+ ! proposition1 ) reg>d to two ?+s ,b & ,a1 t ,b is o!r ?an 7or n id5tical )7 ,a4 ,let u express ,b is id5tical ) ,a by ,b ,a2 & x w !n be natural1 accord+ to ! la/ conv5tion1 to express ,b is n id5tical ) ,a by ,b ,a4 ,we h n[ got ev]y?+ :i* is requir$ = express+1 9 a %ort symbolic =m1 ! proposition1 ) reg>d to a giv5 ?+ ,a & a giv5 relational prop]ty ,p1 :i* ,a 9 fact possesses1 t ,p is int]nal to ,a4 ,! requir$ expression is x,p entails 7x ,a7 :i* is to mean ! same z ,e proposition :i* ass]ts ( any giv5 ?+ t x has n got ,p entails ! proposition1 ) reg>d to ! ?+ 9 "q1 t x is o!r ?an ,a4 ,& ?is proposition is1 ( c\rse1 logically equival5t to 7x ,a7 entails x ,p :]e we are us+ logically equival5t1 9 su* a s5se t to say ( any proposition p t x is logically equival5t to ano!r proposition q is to say t bo? p entails q & q entails p4 ,?is la/ proposition aga91 is1 s f> z ,i c see1 ei!r id5tical ) or logically equival5t to ! propositions express$ by any?+ :i* 7 id5tical ) ,a w\ld1 9 any conceivable univ]se1 necess>ily h ,p or by ,a c\ld n h exi/$ 9 any possible _w )\t hav+ ,p2 j z ! proposition express$ by ,9 any possible _w a "r angle mu/ be an angle is1 ,i take x1 ei!r id5tical ) or logically equival5t to ! proposition 7x is a "r angle7 entails 7r is an angle74 ,we h n[1 !re=e1 got a %ort means ( symbolis+1 ) reg>d to any p>ticul> ?+ ,a & any p>ticul> prop]ty ,p1 ! proposition t ,p is int]nal to ,a 9 ! second ( ! two s5ses di/+ui%$ on p4 #bhf4 ,b we /ill require a means ( symbolis+ ! g5]al proposition t e relational prop]ty is int]nal to any t]m :i* possesses x--! proposition1 namely1 :i* 0 ref]r$ to on p4 #bhg1 z ! mo/ important consequ5ce ( ! dogma ( int]nal relations1 & :i* 0 call$ 7#b7 on p4 #bhi4 ,9 ord] to get ?is1 let u fir/ get a means ( express+ ) reg>d to "s "o p>ticul> relational prop]ty ,p1 ! proposition t ,p is int]nal to any t]m :i* possesses x4 ,?is is a proposition :i* takes ! =m ( ass]t+ ) reg>d to "o p>ticul> prop]ty1 namely ,p1 t any t]m :i* possesses t prop]ty also possesses ano!r--namely ! "o express$ by say+ t ,p is int]nal to x4 ,x is1 t is to say1 an ord9>y univ]sal proposition1 l ,all m5 are mortal4 ,b su* a =m ( words is1 z has (t5 be5 po9t$ out1 ambigu\s4 ,x may /& = ei!r ( two diff]5t propositions4 ,x may /& m]ely = ! proposition ,!re is no?+1 :i* bo? is a man1 & is n mortal--a proposition :i* may also be express$ by ,if any?+ is a man1 t ?+ is mortal1 & :i* is di/+ui%$ by ! fact t x makes no ass]tion z to :e!r !re are any m5 or n2 or x may /& = ! conjunctive proposition ,if any?+ is a man1 t ?+ is mortal1 & !re are m54 ,x w be suffici5t = our purposes to deal ) propositions ( ! fir/ k9d--^? namely1 :i* ass]t ) reg>d to "s two prop]ties1 say ,q & ,r1 t !re is no?+ :i* bo? does possess ,q & does n possess ,r1 )\t ass]t+ t any?+ does possess ,q4 ,su* a proposition is obvi\sly equival5t to ! ass]tion t any pair ( propositions :i* resembles ! pair ,,aq & ,,ar1 9 respect ( ! fact t "o ( !m ass]ts ( "s p>ticul> ?+ t x has ,q & ! o!r1 ( ! same ?+1 t x has ,r1 /& to "o ano!r 9 a c]ta9 relation3 ! relation1 namely1 :i*1 9 ! case ( ,,aq & ,,ar1 c be express$ by say+ t ,x is n ! case bo? t ,a has ,q & t ,a has n got ,r4 ,:5 we say ,!re is no?+ :i* does possess ,q & does n possess ,r we are obvi\sly say+ some?+ :i* is ei!r id5tical ) or logically equival5t to ! proposition ,9 ! case ( e su* pair ( propositions x is n ! case bo? t ! "o :i* ass]ts a p>ticul> ?+ to h ,q is true1 & t ! "o :i* ass]ts x to h ,r is false4 ,we require1 !re=e1 a %ort way ( express+ ! relation betwe5 two propositions p & q1 :i* c be express$ by ,x is n ! case t p is true & q false4 ,& ,i am go+1 q arbitr>ily to express ?is relation by writ+ p 99 q = ,x is n ! case t p is true & q false4 ,! relation 9 "q is "o :i* logicians h sometimes express$ by p implies q4 ,x is1 = in/ance1 ! "o :i* ,mr4 ,russell 9 ! ',pr9ciples ( ,ma!matics calls mat]ial implication1 & :i* he & ,dr4 ,:itehead 9 ,pr9cipia ,ma!matica call simply implication4 ,& if we d use implication to /& = ?is relation1 we1 ( c\rse1 got ! app>5tly p>adoxical results t e false proposition implies e o!r proposition1 bo? true & false1 & t e true proposition implies e o!r true proposition3 s9ce x is q cle> t if p is false !n1 :atev] q may be1 x is n ! case t p is true & q false1 & q cle> also1 t if p & q are bo? true1 !n also x is n ! case t p is true & q false4 ,& ^! results1 x seems to me1 appe> to be p>adoxical1 solely because1 if we use implies 9 any ord9>y s5se1 !y are q c]ta9ly false4 ,:y logicians %\ld h ?us *os5 to use ! ^w implies z a "n = a relation1 = :i* x nev] is us$ by any "o else1 ,i d n "k4 ,x is p>tly1 no d\bt1 because ! relation = :i* !y d use x--t express$ by say+ ,x is n ! case t p is true & q false--is "o = :i* x is v important t !y %\ld h a %ort "n1 because x is a relation :i* is v fundam5tal & ab\t :i* !y ne$ con/antly to talk1 :ile 7s f> z ,i c discov]7 x simply has no %ort "n 9 ord9>y life4 ,& x is p>tly1 p]haps1 = a reason :i* leads u back to our pres5t reason = giv+ "s "n to ?is relation4 ,x is1 9 fact1 natural to use p implies q to mean ! same z ,if p1 !n q4 ,& ?\gh ,if p !n q is h>dly ev]1 if ev]1 us$ to mean ! same z ,x is n ! case t p is true & q false2 yet ! expression ,if any?+ has ,q1 x has ,r may1 ,i ?9k1 be naturally us$ to express ! proposition t1 9 ! case ( e pair ( propositions :i* resembles ! pair ,a ,q & ,a ,r 9 respect ( ! fact t ! fir/ ( ! pair ass]ts ( "s p>ticul> ?+ t x has ,q & ! second1 ( ! same ?+1 t x has ,r1 x is n ! case t ! fir/ is true & ! second false4 ,t is to say1 if 7z ,i propose to d7 we express ,x is n ! case bo? t ,,aq is true & ,,ar false by ,,aq 99 ,,ar1 & if1 fur!r 7on ! analogy ( ! simil> case ) reg>d to entails71 we express ! proposition t ( e pair ( propositions :i* resemble ,a ,q & ,a ,r 9 ! respect j m5tion$1 x is true t ! fir/ has ! relation 99 to ! second by x,q 99 x,r !n1 x is natural to express x,q 99 x,r1 by ,if any?+ has ,q1 !n t ?+ has ,r4 ,& logicians may1 ,i ?9k1 h falsely inf]r$ t s9ce x is natural to express x,q 99 x,r by ,if any?+ has ,q1 !n t ?+ has ,r1 x mu/ be natural to express ,,aq 99 ,,ar by ,if ,,aq1 !n ,,ar1 & !re=e also by ,,aq implies ,,ar4 ,if ?is has be5 _! reason = express+ p 99 q by p implies q !n obvi\sly _! reason is a fallacy4 ,&1 :atev] ! reason may h be51 x seems to me q c]ta9 t ,,aq 99 ,,ar _c be prop]ly express$ ei!r by ,,aq implies ,,ar or by ,if ,,aq1 !n ,,ar1 al?\gh r,q 99 x,r c be prop]ly express$ by ,if any?+ has ,q1 !n t ?+ has ,r4 ,i am go+1 !n1 to express ! univ]sal proposition1 ) reg>d to two p>ticul> prop]ties ,q & ,r1 :i* ass]ts t ,:atev] has ,q1 has ,r or ,if any?+ has ,q1 x has ,r1 )\t ass]t+ t any?+ has ,q1 by x,q 99 x,r --a means ( express+ x1 :i* s9ce we h adopt$ ! conv5tion t p 99 q is to mean ! same z ,x is n ! case t p is true & q false1 br+s out ! important fact t ?is proposition is ei!r id5tical ) or logically equival5t to ! proposition t ( e su* pair ( propositions z ,,aq & ,,ar1 x is true t x is n ! case t ! fir/ is true & ! second false4 ,& hav+ adopt$ ?is conv5tion1 we c n[ see h[1 9 accordance ) x1 ! proposition1 ) reg>d to a p>ticul> prop]ty ,p1 t ,p is int]nal to ev]y?+ :i* possesses x1 is to be express$4 ,we saw t ,p is int]nal to ,a is to be express$ by x,p entails 7x ,a7 or by ! logically equival5t proposition 7x ,a7 entails x,p ,& we h n[ only to express ! proposition t any?+ t has ,p1 has also ! prop]ty t ,p is int]nal to x4 ,! requir$ expression is obvi\sly z foll[s4 ,j z ,any?+ t has ,q1 has ,r is to be express$ by x,q 99 x,r s ,any?+ t has ,p1 has also ! prop]ty t ,p is int]nal to x w be express$ by x,p 99 y,p entails 7y x7 or by x,p 99 7v x7 entails y,p4 ,we h ?us got1 9 ! case ( any p>ticul> prop]ty ,p1 a means ( express+ ! proposition t x is int]nal to e t]m t possesses x1 :i* is bo? %ort & br+s out cle>ly ! notions t are involv$ 9 x4 ,& we d n ne$1 ,i ?9k1 any fur!r special conv5tion = symbolis+ ! proposition t e relational prop]ty is int]nal to any t]m :i* possesses x--! proposition1 namely1 :i* ,i call$ 7#b7 above 7pp4 #bhi1 #bij71 & :i* on p4 #bhg1 ,i call$ ! mo/ important consequ5ce ( ! dogma ( int]nal relations4 ,we c express x simply en\gh z foll[s3-- 7#b7 ,:at we ass]t ( ,p :5 we say x,p 99 y,p entails 7y x7 c be truly ass]t$ ( e relational prop]ty4 ,& n[1 = ! purpose ( comp>+ 7#b7 ) 7#a71 & see+ exactly :at is involv$ 9 my ass]tion t 7#b7 does n foll[ f 7#a71 let u try to express 7#a7 by means ( ! same conv5tions4 ,let u fir/ take ! ass]tion ) reg>d to a p>ticul> ?+ ,a & a p>ticul> relational prop]ty ,p t1 f ! proposition t ,a has ,p x foll[s t no?+ :i* has n got ,p is id5tical ) ,a4 ,?is is an ass]tion :i* is q c]ta9ly true2 s9ce1 if any?+ :i* _h n got ,p 7 id5tical ) ,a1 x w\ld foll[ t ,,ap2 & f ! proposition ,,ap1 x c]ta9ly foll[s t ,,ap is false1 & !re=e also t ,some?+ :i* has n got ,p is id5tical ) ,a is false1 or t ,no?+ :i* has n got ,p is id5tical ) ,a is true4 ,& ?is ass]tion1 9 accordance ) ! conv5tions we h adopt$1 w be express$ by ,,ap entails x,p 99 7x ,a7 ,we want1 next1 9 ord] to express 7#a71 a means ( express+ ) reg>d to a p>ticul> relational prop]ty ,p1 ! ass]tion t1 f ! proposition1 ) reg>d to any?+ :atev]1 t t ?+ has got ,p1 x foll[s t no?+ :i* has n got ,p is id5tical ) ! ?+ 9 "q4 ,?is also is an ass]tion :i* is q c]ta9ly true2 s9ce x m]ely ass]ts 7:at is obvi\sly true7 t :at ,,ap entails x,p 99 7x ,a7 ass]ts ( ,a1 c be truly ass]t$ ( any?+ :atev]4 ,& ?is ass]tion1 9 accordance ) ! conv5tions we h adopt$1 w be express$ by x,p entails y,p 99 7y x74 ,! proposition1 :i* ,i meant to call 7#a71 b :i* ,i express$ be=e r clumsily1 c n[ be express$ by 7#a7 ,:at we ass]t ( ,p1 :5 we say1 x,p entails y,p 99 7y x7 c be truly ass]t$ ( e relational prop]ty4 ,?is is a proposition :i* is aga9 q c]ta9ly true2 &1 9 ord] to comp>e x ) 7#b71 !re is1 ,i ?9k1 no ne$ to adopt any fur!r conv5tion = express+ x1 s9ce ! que/ions :e!r x is or is n diff]5t f 7#b71 & :e!r 7#b7 does or does n foll[ f x1 w obvi\sly dep5d on ! same que/ions ) reg>d to ! two propositions1 ) reg>d to ! p>ticul> relational prop]ty1 ,p1 x,p entails y,p 99 7y x7 & x,p 99 y,p entails 7y x7 ,n[ :at ,i ma9ta9 ) reg>d to 7#a7 & 7#b7 is t1 :]eas 7#a7 is true1 7#b7 is false4 ,i ma9ta91 t is to say1 t ! proposition ,:at we ass]t ( ,p1 :5 we say x,p 99 y,p entails 7y x74 is true ( e relational prop]ty is false1 ?\gh ,i admit t :at we "h ass]t ( ,p is true ( "s relational prop]ties4 ,^? ( :i* x is true1 ,i propose to call int]nal relational prop]ties1 ^? ( :i* x is false ext]nal relational prop]ties4 ,! dogma ( int]nal relations1 on ! o!r h&1 implies t 7#b7 is true2 t is to say1 t e relational prop]ty is int]nal & t !re are no ext]nal relational prop]ties4 ,& :at ,i sugge/ is t ! dogma ( int]nal relations has be5 held only because 7#b7 has be5 falsely ?\ght to foll[ f 7#a74 ,& t 7#b7 does n foll[ f 7#a71 c1 ,i ?9k1 be easily se5 z foll[s4 ,x c foll[ f 7#a7 only if f any proposition ( ! =m p entails 7q 99 r7 !re foll[s ! correspond+ proposition ( ! =m p 99 7q entails r71 ,& t ?is is n ! case c1 ,i ?9k1 be easily se5 by consid]+ ! foll[+ ?ree propositions4 ,let p ,all ! books on ?is %elf are blue1 let q ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples ( ,ma!matics is a book on ?is %elf1 & let r ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples ( ,ma!matics is blue4 ,n[ p "h does absolutely entail 7q 99 r74 ,t is to say1 x absolutely foll[s f p t ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples is on ?is %elf1 & ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples is n blue1 are n1 z a matt] ( fact1 bo? true4 ,b x by no means foll[s f ?is t p 99 7q entails r74 ,= :at ?is latt] proposition means is ,x is n ! case bo? t p is true & t 7q entails r7 is false4 ,&1 z a matt] ( fact1 7q entails r7 is q c]ta9ly false2 = f ! proposition ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples is on ?is %elf ! proposition ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples is blue does n foll[4 ,x is simply n ! case t ! second ( ^! two propositions c be d$uc$ f ! fir/ by itself3 x is simply n ! case t x /&s to x 9 ! relation 9 :i* x does /& to ! conjunctive proposition ,all ! books on ?is %elf are blue &1 my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples is on ?is %elf4 ,?is conjunctive proposition really does entail ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples is blue4 ,b ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples is on ?is %elf1 by itself q c]ta9ly does n entail ,my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples is blue4 ,x is simply n ! case t my copy ( ! ,pr9ciples c\ldn't h be5 on ?is %elf )\t be+ blue1 7q entails r7 is1 !re=e1 false4 ,& h5ce p 99 7q entails r71 c only foll[ f p entails 7q 99 r71 if f ?is latt] proposition p foll[s4 ,b p q c]ta9ly does n foll[ f ?is proposition3 f ! fact t 7q 99 r7 is d$ucible f p1 x does n 9 ! lea/ foll[ t p is true4 ,x is1 !re=e1 cle>ly n ! case t e proposition ( ! =m p entails 7q 99 r7 entails ! correspond+ proposition ( ! =m p 99 q entails r1 s9ce we h f\nd "o p>ticul> proposition ( ! fir/ =m :i* does n entail ! correspond+ proposition ( ! second4 ,to ma9ta91 !re=e1 t 7#b7 foll[s f 7#a7 is m]e confusion4 ,& "o s\rce ( ! confusion is1 ,i ?9k1 pretty pla94 7#a7 does all[ y to ass]t t1 if ,,ap is true1 !n ! proposition y,p 99 7y ,a7 mu/ be true4 ,:at ! mu/ "h expresses is m]ely t ?is proposition foll[s f ,,ap1 n t x is 9 itself a necess>y proposition4 ,b x is suppos$1 ?r\gh confusion1 t :at is ass]t$ is t x is n ! case bo? t ,,ap is true & t y,p 99 7y ,a7 is n1 9 itself1 a necess>y proposition2 t is to say1 x is suppos$ t :at is ass]t$ is ,,ap y,p entails 7y ,a72 s9ce to say t y,p 99 7y ,a7 is1 9 itself1 a necess>y proposition is ! same ?+ z to say t y,p entails 7y ,a7 is also true4 ,9 fact x seems to me pretty pla9 t :at is meant by say+ ( propositions ( ! =m x,p 99 x,q t !y are necess>y 7or apodeictic7 propositions1 is m]ely t ! correspond+ proposition ( ! =m x,p entails x,q is also true1 x,p entails x,q is n itself a necess>y proposition2 b1 if x,p entails x,q is true1 !n x,p 99 x,q is a necess>y proposition--& a necess>y tru?1 s9ce no false propositions are necess>y 9 !mselves4 ,?us :at is meant by say+ t ,:atev] is a "r angle1 is also an angle is a necess>y tru?1 is1 s f> z ,i c see1 simply t ! proposition 7x is a "r angle7 entails 7x is an angle7 is also true4 ,?is seems to me to give :at has1 9 fact1 be5 g5]ally meant 9 philosophy by necess>y tru?s1 e4g4 by ,leibniz2 & to po9t out ! di/9ction betwe5 !m & ^? true univ]sal propositions :i* are m]e matt]s ( fact4 ,& if we want to ext5d ! mean+ ( ! "n necess>y tru? 9 su* a way t "s s+ul> propositions may also be said to be necess>y tru?s1 we c1 ,i ?9k1 easily d x z foll[s4 ,we c say t ,,ap is itself a necess>y tru?1 if & only if ! univ]sal proposition 7x ,a7 99 x,p 7:i*1 z we h se51 foll[s f ,,ap7 is a necess>y tru?3 t is to say1 if & only if 7x ,a7 entails x,p4 ,) ?is def9ition1 :at ! dogma ( int]nal relations ass]ts is t 9 e case 9 :i* a giv5 ?+ actually has a giv5 relational prop]ty1 ! fact t x has t prop]ty is a necess>y tru?2 :]eas :at ,i am ass]t+ is t1 if ! prop]ty 9 "q is an int]nal prop]ty1 !n ! fact 9 "q w be a necess>y tru?1 :]eas if ! prop]ty 9 "q is ext]nal1 !n ! fact 9 "q w be a m]e matt] ( fact4 ,s mu* = ! di/9ction betwe5 7#a7 :i* is true1 & 7#b71 or ! dogma ( int]nal relations1 :i* ,i hold to be false4 ,b ,i said above1 9 pass+1 t my cont5tion t 7#b7 does n foll[ f 7#a71 involves ! rejection ( c]ta9 views t h sometimes be5 held z to ! mean+ ( foll[s2 & ,i ?9k x is wor? :ile to say some?+ ab\t ?is4 ,x is obvi\s t ! possibility ( ma9ta9+ t 7#b7 does n foll[ f 7#a71 dep5ds ^u its be+ true t f x,p 99 x,q ! proposition x,p entails x,q does n foll[4 ,& ?is has sometimes be5 disput$1 & is1 ,i ?9k1 (t5 n cle>ly se54 ,to beg9 )1 ,mr4 ,russell1 9 ! ,pr9ciples ( ,ma!matics 7p4 #cd71 treats ! phrase q c be d$uc$ f p z if x meant exactly ! same ?+ z p 99 q or p mat]ially implies q2 & has repeat$ ! same error else:]e1 e4g4 9 ,philosophical ,essays 7p4 #aff71 :]e he is discuss+ :at he calls ! axiom ( int]nal relations4 ,& ,i am afraid a good _m p h be5 l$ to suppose t1 s9ce ,mr4 ,russell has said ?is1 x mu/ be true4 ,if x 7 true1 !n1 ( c\rse1 x w\ld be impossible to di/+ui% betwe5 7#a7 & 7#b71 & x w\ld foll[ t1 s9ce 7#a7 c]ta9ly is true1 :at ,i am call+ ! dogma ( int]nal relations is true too4 ,b ,i imag9e t ,mr4 ,russell himself w\ld n[ be will+ to admit t1 s f> f be+ true1 ! /atem5t t q c be d$uc$ f p means ! same z p 99 q is simply an enorm\s h[l]2 & ,i d n ?9k ,i ne$ sp5d any "t 9 try+ to %[ t x is s4 ,b x may be held t1 ?\gh p entails q does n mean ! same z p 99 q1 yet nev]!less f x,p 99 x,q ! proposition x,p entails x,q does foll[1 = a some:at m subtle reason2 &1 if ?is 7 s1 x w\ld aga9 foll[ t :at ,i am call+ ! dogma ( int]nal relations mu/ be true4 ,x may be held1 namely1 t ?\gh ,,ap entails ,,aq does n mean simply ,,ap 99 ,,aq yet :at x does mean is simply ! conjunction ,,ap 99 ,,aq & ?is proposition is an in/ance ( a true =mal implication 7! phrase =mal implication be+ und]/ood 9 ,mr4 ,russell's s5se1 9 :i* x,p 99 x,q ass]ts a =mal implication74 ,?is view z to :at ,,ap entails ,,aq means1 has1 = in/ance1 if ,i und]/& him rightly1 be5 ass]t$ by ,mr4 ,o4 ,/ra*ey 9 ,m9d1 ,n4,s41 #ic4 ,& ! same view has be5 frequ5tly sugge/$ 7?\gh ,i d n "k t he has actually ass]t$ x7 by ,mr4 ,russell himself 7e4g41 ,pr9cipia ,ma!matica1 p4 #ba74 ,if ?is view 7 true1 !n1 ?\gh x,p entails x,q w\ld n be id5tical 9 mean+ ) x,p 99 x,q1 yet x w\ld foll[ f x2 s9ce1 if x,p 99 x,q 7 true1 !n e p>ticul> ass]tion ( ! =m ,,ap 99 ,,aq1 w\ld n only be true1 b w\ld be an in/ance ( a true =mal implication 7namely x,p 99 x,q7 & ?is1 accord+ to ! propos$ def9ition1 is all t x,p entails x,q ass]ts4 ,if1 !re=e1 x 7 true1 x w\ld aga9 foll[ t all relational prop]ties mu/ be int]nal4 ,b t ?is view also is untrue appe>s to me p]fectly obvi\s4 ,! proposition t ,i am 9 ?is room does mat]ially imply t ,i am m ?an five ye>s old1 s9ce bo? are true2 & ! ass]tion t x does is also an in/ance ( a true =mal implication1 s9ce x is 9 fact true t all ! p]sons 9 ?is room are m ?an five ye>s old2 b no?+ appe>s to me m obvi\s ?an t ! second ( ^! two propositions c n be d$uc$ f ! fir/--t ! k9d ( relation :i* holds betwe5 ! premisses & conclusion ( a syllogism 9 ,b>b>a does n hold betwe5 !m4 ,to put x 9 ano!r way3 x seems to me q obvi\s t ! prop]ties be+ a p]son 9 ?is room & be+ m ?an five ye>s old are n relat$ 9 ! k9d ( way 9 :i* be+ a "r angle is relat$ to be+ an angle1 & :i* we express by say+ t1 9 ! case ( e t]m1 ! proposition t t t]m is an angle c be d$uc$ f ! proposition t x is a "r angle4 ,^! are ! only two sugge/ions z to ! mean+ ( p entails q kn[n to me1 :i*1 if true1 w\ld yield ! result t 7#b7 does foll[ f 7#a71 & t !re=e all relational prop]ties are int]nal2 & bo? ( ^!1 x seems to me1 are obvi\sly false4 ,all o!r sugge/$ mean+s1 s f> z ,i "k1 w\ld leave x true t 7#b7 does n foll[ f 7#a71 & !re=e t ,i may possibly be "r 9 ma9ta9+ t "s relational prop]ties are ext]nal4 ,x might1 = in/ance1 be sugge/$ t ! la/ propos$ def9ition %\ld be am5d$ z foll[s--t we %\ld say3 p entails q means p 99 q & ?is proposition is an in/ance ( a =mal implication1 :i* is n m]ely true b self-evid5t1 l ! laws ( ,=mal ,logic4 ,?is propos$ def9ition w\ld avoid ! p>adoxes involv$ 9 ,mr4 ,/ra*ey's def9ition1 s9ce su* true =mal implications z all ! p]sons 9 ?is room are m ?an five ye>s old are c]ta9ly n self-evid5t2 &1 s f> z ,i4 c see1 x may /ate some?+ :i* is 9 fact true ( p & q1 :5ev] & only :5 p entails q4 ,i d n myself ?9k t x gives ! mean+ ( p entails q1 s9ce ! k9d ( relation :i* ,i see to hold betwe5 ! premisses & conclusion ( a syllogism seems to me to be "o :i* is purely objective 9 ! s5se t no psy*ological t]m1 su* z is involv$ 9 ! mean+ ( self-evid5t1 is involv$ 9 its def9ition 7if x has "o74 ,i am n1 h[ev]1 conc]n$ to dispute t "s su* def9ition ( p entails q z ?is may be true4 ,s9ce x is evid5t t1 ev5 if x 71 my proposition t x,p entails x,q does n foll[ f x,p 99 x,q1 w\ld /ill be true2 & h5ce also my cont5tion t 7#b7 does n foll[ f 7#a74 ,s mu* by way ( argu+ t we are n b\nd to hold t all relational prop]ties are int]nal 9 ! p>ticul> s5se1 ) :i* we are n[ conc]n$1 9 :i* to say t !y are means t 9 e case 9 :i* a ?+ ,a has a relational prop]ty1 x foll[s f ! proposition t a t]m has n got t prop]ty t ! t]m 9 "q is o!r ?an ,a4 ,b ,i h gone fur!r & ass]t$ t "s relational prop]ties c]ta9ly are n int]nal4 ,& 9 def5ce ( ?is proposition ,i d n "k t ,i h any?+ to say b t x seems to me evid5t 9 _m cases t a t]m :i* has a c]ta9 relational prop]ty might q well n h _h x3 t1 = in/ance1 f ! m]e proposition t ?is is ?is1 x by no means foll[s t ?is has to o!r ?+s all ! relations :i* x 9 fact has4 ,ev]ybody1 ( c\rse1 mu/ admit t if all ! propositions :i* ass]t ( x t x has ^! prop]ties1 d 9 fact foll[ f ! proposition t ?is is ?is1 we _c see t !y d4 ,& s f> z ,i c see1 !re is no reason ( any k9d = ass]t+ t !y d1 except ! confusion :i* ,i h expos$4 ,b x seems to me fur!r t we c see 9 _m cases t ! proposition t ?is has t relation does n foll[ f ! fact t x is ?is3 t1 = in/ance1 ! proposition t ,edw>d ,,vii 0 fa!r ( ,george ,v is a m]e matt] ( fact4 ,i want n[ to return = a mom5t to t o!r mean+ ( int]nal1 7p4 #bhf7 9 :i* to say t ,p is int]nal to ,a means n m]ely t any?+ :i* _h n ,p w\ld necess>ily be o!r ?an ,a1 b t x w\ld necess>ily be qualitatively diff]5t4 ,i said t ?is 0 ! mean+ ( int]nal 9 :i* ! dogma ( int]nal relations holds t all relational prop]ties are int]nal2 & t "o ( ! mo/ important consequ5ces :i* foll[$ f x1 0 t all relational prop]ties are int]nal 9 ! less extreme s5se t we h j be5 consid]+4 ,b1 if ,i am n mi/ak51 !re is ano!r important consequ5ce :i* also foll[s f x1 namely1 ! ,id5tity ( ,indisc]nibles4 ,= if x be true1 9 ! case ( e relational prop]ty1 t any t]m :i* _h net t prop]ty w\ld necess>ily be qualitatively diff]5t f any :i* _h1 x foll[s ( c\rse t1 9 ! case ( two t]ms "o ( :i* has a relational prop]ty1 :i* ! o!r has n ! two are qualitatively diff]5t4 ,b1 f ! proposition t x is o!r ?an y1 x does foll[ t x has "s relational prop]ty :i* y has n2 & h5ce1 if ! dogma ( int]nal relations be true1 x w foll[ t if x is o!r ?an y1 x is always also qualitatively diff]5t f y1 :i* is ! pr9ciple ( ,id5tity ( ,indisc]nibles4 ,?is is1 ( c\rse1 a fur!r objection to ! dogma ( int]nal relations1 s9ce ,i ?9k x is obvi\s t ! pr9ciple ( ,id5tity ( ,indisc]nibles is n true4 ,inde$1 s f> z ,i c see1 ! dogma ( int]nal relations ess5tially consi/s 9 ! jo9t ass]tion ( two indef5sible propositions3 7#a7 ! proposition t 9 ! case ( no relational prop]ty is x true ( any t]m :i* has got t prop]ty1 t x might n h _h x & 7#b7 ! ,id5tity ( ,indisc]nibles4 ,i want1 f9ally1 to say some?+ ab\t ! phrase :i* ,mr4 ,russell uses 9 ! ,philosophical ,essays to express ! dogma ( int]nal relations4 ,he says x may be express$ 9 ! =m ,e relation is gr\nd$ 9 ! natures ( ! relat$ t]ms 7p4 #afj74 ,& x c be easily se51 if ! acc\nt :i* ,i h giv5 be true1 9 :at precise s5se x does hold ?is4 ,mr4 ,russell is unc]ta9 z to :e!r by ! nature ( a t]m is to be und]/ood ! t]m itself or some?+ else4 ,= my "p x seems to me t by a t]m's nature is meant1 n ! t]m itself1 b :at may r\ghly be call$ all its qualities z di/+ui%$ f its relational prop]ties4 ,b :i*ev] mean+ we take1 x w foll[ f :at ,i h said1 t ! dogma ( int]nal relations does imply t e relational prop]ty :i* a t]m has is1 9 a p]fectly precise s5se1 gr\nd$ 9 its nature4 ,x w foll[ t e su* prop]ty is gr\nd$ 9 ! t]m1 9 ! s5se t1 9 ! case ( e su* prop]ty1 x foll[s f ! m]e proposition t t t]m is t t]m t x has ! prop]ty 9 "q4 ,& x w also foll[ t any su* prop]ty is gr\nd$ 9 ! qualities :i* ! t]m has1 9 ! s5se1 t if y take all ! qualities :i* ! t]m has1 x w aga9 foll[ 9 ! case ( ea* relational prop]ty1 f ! proposition t ! t]m has all ^? qualities t x has ! relational prop]ty 9 "q2 s9ce ?is is impli$ by ! proposition t 9 ! case ( any su* prop]ty1 any t]m :i* _h n _h x w\ld necess>ily h be5 diff]5t 9 quality f ! t]m 9 "q4 ,9 bo? ( ^! two s5ses1 !n1 ! dogma ( int]nal relations does1 ,i ?9k1 imply t e relational prop]ty is gr\nd$ 9 ! nature ( e t]m :i* possesses x2 & 9 ?is s5se t proposition is false4 ,yet x is wor? not+1 ,i ?9k1 t !re is ano!r s5se ( gr\nd$ 9 :i* x may q well be true t e relational prop]ty is gr\nd$ 9 ! nature ( any t]m :i* possesses x4 ,namely t1 9 ! case ( e su* prop]ty1 ! t]m 9 "q has "s quality )\t :i* x c\ld n h _h ! prop]ty4 ,9 o!r words t ! relational prop]ty entails "s quality 9 ! t]m1 ?\gh no quality 9 ! t]m entails ! relational prop]ty4 ,,! ,,nature ,,( ,,moral ,,philosophy ,i %\ld l1 if ,i c1 to int]e/ y to-night 9 "o p>ticul> "q ab\t ,moral ,philosophy4 ,x is a "q :i* resembles mo/ philosophical que/ions1 9 respect ( ! fact t philosoph]s are by no means agre$ z to :at is ! "r answ] to x3 "s seem to be v /rongly conv9c$ t "o answ] is correct1 :ile o!rs are equally /rongly conv9c$ ( ! opposite4 ,= my own "p ,i d feel "s d\bt z to :i* answ] is ! "r "o1 al?\gh1 z y w see1 ,i incl9e r /rongly to "o ( ! two alt]natives4 ,i %\ld l v mu*1 if ,i c\ld1 to f9d "s consid]ations :i* seem$ to me absolutely conv9c+ on ! "o side or ! o!r2 = ! "q seems to me 9 itself to be an exce$+ly int]e/+ "o4 ,i h said t ! "q is a "q ab\t ,moral ,philosophy2 & x seems to me 9 fact to be a v l>ge & g5]al "q :i* affects ! :ole ( ,moral ,philosophy4 ,9 ask+ x1 we are do+ no less ?an ask+ :at x is t p are do+ :5 !y /udy ,moral ,philosophy at all3 we are ask+ :at sort ( que/ions x is :i* x is ! bus9ess ( ,moral ,philosophy to discuss & try to f9d ! "r answ] to4 ,b ,i int5d1 = ! sake ( simplicity1 to conf9e myself to ask+ x 9 two p>ticul> in/ances4 ,moral ,philosophy has1 9 fact1 to discuss a good _m diff]5t ideas2 & ?\gh ,i ?9k ?is same "q may be rais$ ) reg>d to !m all1 ,i int5d to pick out two1 :i* seem to me p>ticul>ly fundam5tal1 & to ask x ) reg>d to !m only4 ,my fir/ bus9ess mu/ be to expla9 :at ^! two ideas are4 ,! "n ,moral ,philosophy naturally sugge/s t :at is meant is a dep>tm5t ( philosophy :i* has some?+ to d ) morality4 ,& we all und]/& r\ghly :at is meant by morality4 ,we are accu/om$ to ! di/9ction betwe5 moral good & evil1 on ! "o h&1 & :at is sometimes call$ physical good & evil on ! o!r4 ,we all make ! di/9ction betwe5 a man's moral "*1 on ! "o h&1 & 8 agreeabl5ess or intellectual end[m5ts1 on ! o!r4 ,we feel t to accuse a man ( immoral conduct is q a diff]5t ?+ f accus+ him m]ely ( bad ta/e or bad mann]s1 or f accus+ him m]ely ( /upidity or ignorance4 ,& no less cle>ly we di/+ui% betwe5 ! idea ( be+ "u a moral obligation to d a ?+1 & ! idea ( be+ m]ely "u a legal obligation to d x4 ,x is a commonplace t ! sph]e ( morality is mu* wid] ?an ! sph]e ( law3 t we are morally b\nd to d & avoid _m ?+s1 :i* are n enjo9$ or =bidd5 by ! laws ( our c\ntry2 & x is also sometimes held t1 if a p>ticul> law is unju/ or immoral1 x may ev5 be a moral duty to disobey x--t is to say t !re may be a positive conflict betwe5 moral & legal obligation2 & ! m]e fact t ?is is held1 :e!r truly or falsely1 %[s1 at all ev5ts1 t ! "o idea is q di/9ct f ! o!r4 ,! "n ,moral ,philosophy1 !n1 naturally sugge/s t x is a dep>tm5t ( philosophy conc]n$ ) morality 9 ?is common s5se4 ,& x is1 9 fact1 true t "o l>ge dep>tm5t ( ,moral ,philosophy is s conc]n$4 ,b x w\ld be a mi/ake to ?9k t ! :ole subject is only conc]n$ ) morality4 ,ano!r important dep>tm5t ( x is1 z ,i %all try to %[1 conc]n$ ) ideas :i* are n moral ideas1 9 ?is ord9>y s5se1 ?\gh1 no d\bt1 !y may h some?+ to d ) !m4 ,& ( ! two ideas :i* ,i propose to pick out = discussion1 :ile "o ( !m is a moral idea1 ! o!r belongs to t dep>tm5t ( ,moral ,philosophy1 :i* is n conc]n$ solely ) morality1 & is n1 ,i ?9k1 prop]ly speak+1 a moral idea at all4 ,let u beg9 ) ! "o ( ! two1 :i* is a moral idea4 ,! p>ticul> moral idea :i* ,i propose to pick out = discussion is ! "o :i* ,i h call$ above ! idea ( moral obligation--! idea ( be+ morally b\nd to act 9 a p>ticul> way on a p>ticul> occasion4 ,b :at is1 s f> z ,i c see1 precisely ! same idea is also call$ by sev]al o!r names4 ,to say t ,i am "u a moral obligation to d a c]ta9 ?+ is1 ,i ?9k1 cle>ly to say ! same ?+ z :at we commonly express by say+ t ,i ought to d x1 or t x is my duty to d x4 ,t is to say1 ! idea ( moral obligation is id5tical ) ! idea ( ! moral ought & ) ! idea ( duty4 ,& x also seems at fir/ sight z if we might make yet ano!r id5tification4 ,! ass]tion t ,i ought to d a c]ta9 ?+ seems z if x meant mu* ! same z ! ass]tion t x w\ld be wrong ( me n to d ! ?+ 9 "q3 at all ev5ts x is q cle> t1 :5ev] x is my duty to d any?+1 x w\ld be wrong ( me n to d x1 & t :5ev] x w\ld be wrong ( me to d any?+1 !n x is my duty to refra9 f do+ x4 ,9 ! case ( ^! two ideas1 ! idea ( :at is wrong1 & ! idea ( :at is my duty or :at ,i ought to d1 diff]5t views may be tak5 z to :e!r ! "o is m fundam5tal ?an ! o!r1 or :e!r bo? are equally s2 & on ! "q3 ,if "o ( ! two is m fundam5tal ?an ! o!r1 :i* ( ! two is s8 ,?us "s p w\ld say1 t ! idea ( wrong is ! m fundam5tal1 & t ! idea ( duty is to be def9$ 9 t]ms ( x3 t1 9 fact1 ! /atem5t ,x is my duty to keep t promise m]ely means ,x w\ld be wrong ( me n to keep x2 & ! /atem5t ,x is my duty n to tell a lie m]ely means ,x w\ld be wrong ( me to tell "o4 ,o!rs aga9 w\ld app>5tly say j ! opposite3 t duty is ! m fundam5tal notion1 & wrong is to be def9$ 9 t]ms ( x4 ,:ile o!rs p]haps w\ld hold t nei!r is m fundam5tal ?an ! o!r2 t bo? are equally fundam5tal1 & t ! /atem5t x w\ld be wrong to d s & s is only equival5t to1 n id5tical 9 mean+ )1 ,i ought n to d x4 ,b :i*ev] ( ^! ?ree views be ! true "o1 !re is1 ,i ?9k1 no d\bt :atev] ab\t ! equival5ce notion ( ! two ideas2 & no d\bt1 !re=e1 t :atev] answ] be giv5 to ! "q ,i am go+ to raise ab\t ! "o1 ! same answ] mu/ be giv5 to ! correspond+ "q ab\t ! o!r4 ,! moral idea1 !n1 :i* ,i propose to discuss1 is ! idea ( duty or moral obligation1 or1 :at comes to ! same ?+1 ! idea ( :at is wrong--morally wrong4 ,ev]ybody w\ld agree t ?is idea--or1 to speak m accurately1 "o or bo? ( ^! two ideas--is among ! mo/ fundam5tal ( our moral ideas1 :e!r or n !y w\ld admit t all o!rs1 = example ! ideas ( moral goodness1 involve a ref]5ce to ?is "o 9 _! def9ition1 or w\ld hold t we h "s o!rs :i* are indep5d5t ( x1 & equally fundam5tal ) x4 ,b !re is a good deal ( difficulty 9 gett+ cle> z to :at ?is idea ( moral obligation itself is4 ,is !re 9 fact only "o idea :i* we call by ?is "n8 ,or is x possible t on "s occasions :5 we say t s & s is a duty1 we mean some?+ diff]5t by ?is expression f :at we d on o!rs8 ,& t simil>ly :5 we say t s & s is morally wrong1 we sometimes use ?is "n morally wrong = "o idea & sometimes = ano!r2 s t "o & ! same ?+ may be morally wrong 9 "o s5se ( ! ^w1 & yet n morally wrong 9 ano!r8 ,i ?9k1 9 fact1 !re are two diff]5t s5ses 9 :i* we use ^! t]ms2 & to po9t out ! diff]5ce betwe5 !m1 w help to br+ out cle>ly m ! nature ( ea*4 ,& ,i ?9k p]haps ! diff]5ce c be br\ght out mo/ cle>ly by consid]+ ! sort ( moral rules ) :i* we are all ( u famili>4 ,ev]ybody kn[s t moral tea*]s are l>gely conc]n$ 9 lay+ d[n moral rules1 & 9 disput+ ! tru? ( rules :i* h be5 previ\sly accept$4 ,& moral rules seem to consi/1 to a v l>ge ext5t1 9 ass]tions to ! effect t x is always wrong to d c]ta9 actions or to refra9 f do+ c]ta9 o!rs2 or 7:at comes to ! same ?+7 t x is always y\r duty to refra9 f c]ta9 actions1 & positively to d c]ta9 o!rs4 ,! ,t5 ,comm&m5ts = example1 are in/ances ( moral rules2 & mo/ ( !m are examples ( :at are call$ negative rules--t is to say rules :i* ass]t m]ely t x is wrong to d c]ta9 positive actions1 & !re=e our duty to refra9 f ^! actions2 in/ead ( rules :i* ass]t ( c]ta9 positive actions1 t x is our duty to d !m & !re=e wrong to refra9 f do+ !m4 ,! fif? comm&m5t1 :i* tells u to hon\r our fa!r & "m1 is app>5tly an exception2 x seems to be a positive rule4 ,x is n1 l ! o!rs1 express$ 9 ! negative =m ,?\ %alt n d s & s1 & x is app>5tly really meant to ass]t t we ought to d c]ta9 positive actions1 n m]ely t !re are "s positive action f :i* we ought to refra94 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 ?is "o & ! re/ w ?us s]ve z an example ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 positive & negative moral rules1 a diff]5ce :i* is sometimes treat$ z if x 7 ( great importance4 ,& ,i d n wi% to d5y t !re may be "s important diff]5ce betwe5 see+ only t c]ta9 positive actions are wrong1 & see+ also t1 9 c]ta9 cases1 to refra9 f do+ c]ta9 actions is j z wrong z positively to d c]ta9 o!rs4 ,b ?is di/9ction betwe5 positive & negative rules is c]ta9ly ( mu* less importance ?an ano!r :i* is1 ,i ?9k1 liable to be confus$ ) x4 ,s f> z ?is di/9ction goes x is only a di/9ction betwe5 an ass]tion t x is wrong to d a positive action & an ass]tion t x is wrong to refra9 f do+ "o3 & ea* ( ^! ass]tions is equival5t to "o :i* ass]ts a duty--! fir/ ) an ass]tion t x is a duty to refra91 ! second ) an ass]tion t a positive action is a duty4 ,b !re is ano!r di/9ction betwe5 "s moral rules & o!rs1 :i* is ( mu* great] importance ?an ?is "o1 & :i* does1 ,i ?9k1 give a reason = ?9k+ t ! t]m moral obligation is actually us$ 9 diff]5t s5ses on diff]5t occasions4 ,i h said t moral rules seem to consi/1 to a l>ge ext5t1 9 ass]tions to ! effect t x is always wrong to d c]ta9 actions or to refra9 f do+ c]ta9 o!rs1 or ! equival5t ass]tions 9 t]ms ( duty4 ,b !re is a l>ge class ( moral rules1 ) :i* we are all ( u v famili>1 :i* d n come "u ?is def9ition4 ,!y are rules :i* are conc]n$ n ) our actions1 9 ! natural s5se ( ! ^w1 b ) our feel+s1 ?\ghts & desires4 ,an illu/ration ( ?is k9d ( rule c aga9 be giv5 f ! ,t5 ,comm&m5ts4 ,mo/ ( ! t51 z we all "k1 are conc]n$ m]ely ) actions2 b ! t5? at lea/ is cle>ly an exception4 ,! t5? says ,?\ %alt n covet ?y neighb\r's h\se1 nor 8 wife1 nor 8 s]vant1 nor 8 ox1 nor 8 ass1 nor any?+ t is 81 &1 unless covet is m]ely a mi/ranslation ( a ^w :i* /&s = "s k9d ( action1 we pla9ly h "h a rule :i* is conc]n$ ) our feel+s & n ) our actions4 ,& "o reason :i* makes ! di/9ction betwe5 rules ( ?is k9d & rules conc]n$ ) actions important1 is t our feel+s are n1 z a rule1 directly )9 ! control ( our w 9 ! s5se 9 :i* _m ( our actions are4 ,i _c1 = in/ance1 by any s+le act ( w directly prev5t f aris+ 9 my m9d a desire = some?+ t belongs to "s "o else1 ev5 if1 :5 once ! desire has arriv$1 ,i c by my w prev5t its cont9uance2 & ev5 ?is la/ ,i c h>dly d directly b only by =c+ myself to att5d to o!r consid]ations :i* may ext+ui% ! desire4 ,b ?\gh ,i ?us _c prev5t myself altoge!r f covet+ my neighb\r's possessions1 ,i c altoge!r prev5t myself f /eal+ !m4 ,! action ( /eal+1 & ! feel+ ( covet\sness1 are cle>ly on a v diff]5t level 9 ?is respect4 ,! action is directly )9 ! control ( my w1 :]eas ! feel+ is n4 ,if ,i w n to take ! ?+ 7?\gh ( c\rse "s p may f9d a great difficulty 9 will+ ?is7 x does 9 g5]al foll[ directly t ,i d n take x2 :]eas1 x ,i w n to desire x1 x emphatically does n1 ev5 9 g5]al1 foll[ directly t no desire = x w be !re4 ,?is di/9ction betwe5 ! way 9 :i* our feel+s & our actions are "u ! control ( our wills is1 ,i ?9k1 a v real "o inde$2 we _c help con/antly recognis+ t x exi/s4 ,& x has an important be>+ on ! di/9ction betwe5 ^? moral rules :i* deal ) actions & ^? :i* deal ) feel+s1 = ! foll[+ reason4 ,! philosoph] ,kant laid d[n a well-kn[n proposition to ! effect t ought implies c3 t is to say1 t x _c be true t y ought to d a ?+1 unless x is true t y c\ld d x1 if y *ose4 ,& z reg>ds "o ( ! s5ses 9 :i* we commonly use ! words ought & duty1 ,i ?9k ?is rule is pla9ly true4 ,:5 we say absolutely ( ourselves or o!rs1 ,i ought to d s & s or y ought to1 we imply1 ,i ?9k1 v (t5 t ! ?+ 9 "q is a ?+ :i* we c\ld d1 if we *ose2 ?\gh ( c\rse x may (t5 be a ?+ :i* x is v difficult to *oose to d4 ,?us x is cle> t ,i _c truly say ( anyone t he ought to d a c]ta9 ?+1 if x is a ?+ :i* x is physically impossible = him to d1 h[ev] desirable x may be t ! ?+ %\ld be done4 ,& 9 ?is s5se x is cle> t x _c be truly said ( me t ,i ought n to h a c]ta9 feel+1 or t ,i ought n to h _h x1 if x is a feel+ :i* ,i c\ld n1 by any ef=t ( my w1 prev5t myself f hav+4 ,! hav+ or ! prev5tion ( a c]ta9 feel+ is n1 ( c\rse1 /rictly ev] a physical impossibility1 b x is v (t5 impossible1 9 exactly ! same s5se1 9 :i* actions are physically impossible--t is to say t ,i c\ld n possibly get x or prev5t x1 ev5 if ,i w\ld4 ,b ?is be+ s1 x is pla9 t su* a moral rule z t ,i ought n to covet my neighb\r's possessions is1 if x means to ass]t t ,i ought n1 9 t s5se 9 :i* ought implies c1 a rule :i* _c possibly be true4 ,:at x appe>s to ass]t is1 absolutely univ]sally1 ( e feel+ ( covet\sness1 t ! feel+ 9 "q is "o :i* ! p]son :o felt x ought n to h felt4 ,b 9 fact a v l>ge proportion ( su* feel+s 7,i am incl9$ to say ! va/ majority7 are feel+s :i* ! p]son :o felt !m c\ld n h prev5t$ feel+1 if he w\ld3 !y 7 beyond ! control ( 8 w4 ,& h5ce x is q emphatically n true t none ( ^! feel+s ought to h be5 felt1 if we are us+ ought 9 ! s5se :i* implies t ! p]son :o felt !m c\ld h avoid$ !m4 ,s f> f its be+ true t absolutely none ( !m ought to h be5 felt1 ?is is only true ( ^? among !m1 probably a small m9ority1 :i* ! p]son :o felt !m c\ld h avoid$ feel+4 ,if1 !re=e1 moral rules ) reg>d to feel+s are to h a *ance ( be+ ne>ly true1 we mu/ und]/& ! ought :i* occurs 9 !m 9 "s o!r s5se4 ,b ) moral rules t ref] to actions ! case is v diff]5t4 ,take /eal+ = example4 ,"h aga9 :at ! ,eigh? ,comm&m5t appe>s to imply is t absolutely e !ft :i* has ev] occurr$ 0 an act :i* ! ag5t ought n to h done2 &1 if ! ought is ! "o :i* implies c1 x implies1 !re=e1 t e !ft 0 an act :i* ! ag5t1 if he _h *os51 c\ld h avoid$4 ,& ?is /atem5t t e !ft :i* has be5 committ$ 0 an act :i* ! ?ief1 if he _h s will$1 c\ld h avoid$1 ?\gh x may be d\bt$ if x is absolutely univ]sally true1 is n a /atem5t :i* is cle>ly absurd1 l ! /atem5t t e covet\s desire c\ld h be5 avoid$ by ! w ( ! p]son :o felt x4 ,x is probable t ! va/ majority ( acts ( !ft h be5 acts :i* x 0 9 ! p[] ( ! ?ief to avoid1 if he _h will$ to d s2 :]eas ?is is cle>ly n true ( ! va/ majority ( covet\s desires4 ,x is1 !re=e1 q possible t ^? :o believe we ought nev] to /eal are us+ ought 9 a s5se :i* implies t /eal+ always c\ld h be5 avoid$2 :]eas x is ,i ?9k q c]ta9 t _m ( ^? :o believe t we ought to avoid all covet\s desires1 d n believe = a mom5t t e covet\s desire t has ev] be5 felt 0 a desire :i* ! p]son :o felt x c\ld h avoid$ feel+1 if he _h *os54 ,& yet !y c]ta9ly d believe1 9 "s s5se or o!r1 t no covet\s desire ought ev] to h be5 felt4 ,! conclusion is1 !re=e1 x seems to me1 unavoidable t we d use ought1 ! moral ought1 9 two diff]5t s5ses2 ! "o a s5se 9 :i* to say t ,i ought to h done s & s does really imply t ,i c\ld h done x1 if ,i _h *os51 & ! o!r a s5se 9 :i* x c>ries ) x no su* implication4 ,i ?9k p]haps ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! two c be express$ 9 ?is way4 ,if we express ! mean+ ( ! fir/ ought1 ! "o :i* does imply c1 by say+ t ,i ought to h done s & s means ,x actually 0 my duty to d x2 we c express ! mean+ ( ! second by say+ t e4g4 ,i ought n to h felt s & s means n x 0 my duty to avoid t feel+1 b x w\ld h be5 my duty to avoid x1 if ,i _h be5 able4 ,& correspond+ to ^! two mean+s ( ought we %\ld1 ,i ?9k1 probably di/+ui% two diff]5t sorts ( moral rules1 :i* ?\gh express$ 9 ! same language1 d 9 fact mean v diff]5t ?+s4 ,! "o is a set ( rules :i* ass]t 7:e!r truly or falsely7 t x always actually is a duty to d or to refra9 f c]ta9 actions1 & ass]t !re=e t x always is 9 ! p[] ( ! ag5t's w to d or to refra9 f !m2 :]eas ! o!r sort only ass]t t s & s w\ld be a duty1 if x 7 )9 our p[]1 )\t at all ass]t+ t x always is )9 our p[]4 ,we may1 p]haps1 give a "n to ! di/9ction ,i mean1 by call+ ! fir/ k9d ( rules--^? :i* d ass]t t some?+ actually is a duty--rules ( duty1 & by call+ ! second k9d--^? :i* recomm5d or condemn some?+ n 9 ! control ( our wills--ideal rules3 *oos+ ?is latt] "n because !y c be said to inculcate a moral ideal--some?+ ! atta9m5t ( :i* is n directly )9 ! p[] ( our wills4 ,z a fur!r example ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 ideal rules & rules ( duty we may take ! fam\s passage f ! ,new ,te/am5t 7,luke #f1 #bg7 ,love y\r enemies1 d good to !m t hate y1 bless !m t curse y1 pray = !m t despitefully use y4 ,( ^! f\r rules1 ! ?ree la/ may be rules ( duty1 because !y ref] to ?+s :i* are pla9ly1 z a rule1 at lea/1 9 ! p[] ( y\r w2 b ! fir/1 if love be und]/ood 9 its natural s5se z ref]r+ to y\r feel+s1 is pla9ly only an ideal rule1 s9ce su* feel+s are obvi\sly n directly "u our own control1 9 ! same way 9 :i* su* actions z do+ good to1 bless+ or pray+ = a p]son are s4 ,to love c]ta9 p1 or to feel no ang] aga9/ !m1 is a ?+ :i* x is q impossible to atta9 directly by w1 or p]haps ev] to atta9 completely at all4 ,:]eas y\r behavi\r t[>ds !m is a matt] )9 y\r own control3 ev5 if y hate a p]son1 or feel angry ) him1 y c s control y\rself z n to d him h>m1 & ev5 to conf] b5efits ^u him4 ,to d good to y\r enemies may1 !n1 really be y\r duty2 b x _c1 9 ! /rict s5se1 be y\r duty n to h evil feel+s t[>ds !m3 all t c possibly be true is t x w\ld be y\r duty if y 7 able4 ,yet ,i ?9k !re c be no d\bt t :at ,*ri/ meant to condemn 0 ! occurr5ce ( su* feel+s altoge!r2 & s9ce1 if :at he meant to ass]t ab\t !m 9 condemn+ !m1 w\ld h be5 c]ta9ly false1 if he _h meant to say t y c\ld avoid ev] feel+ !m1 ,i ?9k x is cle> t :at he meant to ass]t 0 n ?is1 or n ?is only1 b some?+ else1 :i* may q possibly be true4 ,t is to say1 he 0 ass]t+ an ideal rule1 n m]ely a rule ( duty4 ,x w be se5 t ?is di/9ction :i* ,i am mak+ co9cides1 r\ghly at all ev5ts1 ) ! di/9ction :i* is (t5 express$ z ! di/9ction betwe5 rules :i* tell y :at y ought to be & rules :i* tell y m]ely :at y ought to d2 or z ! di/9ction betwe5 rules :i* are conc]n$ ) y\r inn] life--) y\r ?\ghts & feel+s--& ^? :i* are conc]n$ only ) y\r ext]nal actions4 ,! rules :i* are conc]n$ ) :at y ought to be or ) y\r inn] life are1 = ! mo/ "p at all ev5ts1 ideal rules2 :ile ^? :i* are conc]n$ ) :at y ought to d or y\r ext]nal actions are v (t51 at lea/1 rules ( duty4 ,& x is (t5 said t "o great diff]5ce betwe5 ! ,new ,te/am5t & ! ,old is its comp>atively great] insi/5ce on ideal rules--^u a *ange ( he>t--z oppos$ to m]e rules ( duty4 ,& t !re is a comp>atively great] insi/5ce on ideal rules ,i d n wi% to d5y4 ,b t !re are pl5ty ( ideal rules 9 ! ,old ,te/am5t too mu/ n be =gott54 ,i h already giv5 an example f ! ,t5 ,comm&m5ts3 namely ! rule :i* says y ought n to covet any?+ :i* belongs to y\r neighb\r4 ,& ano!r is suppli$ by ! ,old ,te/am5t comm&m5t1 ,love ?y neighb\r z ?yself1 if by love is "h meant a feel+ :i* is n )9 our own control1 & n m]ely t ! ,jew is to help o!r ,jews by 8 ext]nal actions4 ,inde$1 h[ev] great may be ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! ,old ,te/am5t & ! ,new 9 respect ( comp>ative insi/5ce on ideal rules r ?an rules ( duty1 ,i am incl9$ to ?9k t !re is at lea/ z great a diff]5ce1 illu/rat$ by ?is v rule1 9 ano!r1 q diff]5t1 respect--namely 9 ! k9d ( rules1 bo? ideal & ( duty1 :i* are insi/$ on4 ,= :]eas by ?y neighb\r 9 ! ,old ,te/am5t !re is pla9ly meant only o!r ,jews1 & x is n conceiv$ ei!r t x is ! duty ( a ,jew to help =eign]s 9 g5]al1 or an ideal = him to love !m2 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t1 :]e ! same words are us$1 my neighb\r pla9ly is meant to include all mank9d4 ,& ?is di/9ction betwe5 ! view t b5efic5t action & b5evol5t feel+s %\ld be conf9$ to ^? ( our own nation1 & ! view t bo? %\ld be ext5d$ equally to all mank9d1--a di/9ction :i* has no?+ to d ) ! di/9ction betwe5 be+ & do+1 betwe5 inn] & out]1 b affects bo? equally--is1 ,i am incl9$ to ?9k1 at lea/ z important a diff]5ce betwe5 ,new ,te/am5t & ,old1 z ! comp>atively great] insi/5ce on ideal rules4 ,h[ev]1 ! po9t ^u :i* ,i want at pres5t to insi/ is ! di/9ction betwe5 ideal rules & rules ( duty4 ,bo? k9ds are commonly includ$ among moral rules1 &1 z my examples h %[n1 are (t5 m5tion$ toge!r z if no great diff]5ce 7 se5 betwe5 !m4 ,:at ,i want to insi/ on is t !re is a great diff]5ce betwe5 !m3 t :]eas rules ( duty d directly ass]t ( ! idea ( duty1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* to say t some?+ is y\r duty implies t y c d x1 t c]ta9 ?+s are duties1 ! ideal rules d n ass]t ?is1 b some?+ diff]5t4 ,yet ! ideal rules c]ta9ly d1 9 a s5se1 ass]t a moral obligation4 ,& h5ce we h to recognise t ! phrase moral obligation is n m]ely a "n = "o idea only1 b = two v diff]5t ideas2 & ! same w1 ( c\rse1 be true ( ! correspond+ phrase morally wrong4 ,:51 !re=e1 ,i say t ! idea ( moral obligation is "o ( ! fundam5tal ideas ) :i* ,moral ,philosophy is conc]n$1 ,i ?9k we mu/ admit t ?is "o "n really /&s = two diff]5t ideas4 ,b x does n matt] = my purpose :i* ( ! two y take4 ,ea* ( !m is und\bt$ly a moral idea1 & :atev] answ] be giv5 to ! "q we are go+ to raise ab\t ! "o1 w also c]ta9ly apply to ! o!r4 ,b x is n[ "t to turn to ! o!r idea1 ) :i* ,i said t ,moral ,philosophy has be5 l>gely conc]n$1 ?\gh x is n1 /rictly speak+1 a moral idea1 at all4 ,& ,i ?9k1 p]haps1 a good way ( br++ out :at ?is idea is1 is to ref] to ! ,e?ics ( ,ari/otle4 ,ev]ybody w\ld admit t ! fundam5tal idea1 ) :i* ,ari/otle's ,e?ics is conc]n$1 is an idea :i* x is ! bus9ess ( ,moral ,philosophy to discuss2 & yet ,i ?9k x is q pla9 t ?is idea is n a moral idea at all4 ,ari/otle does n set out f' ! idea ( moral obligation or duty 7inde$ ?r\gh\t 8 treatise he only m5tions ?is idea q incid5tally72 nor ev5 f ! idea ( moral goodness or moral excell5ce1 ?\gh he has a good deal m to say ab\t t2 b f ! idea ( :at he calls ! human good1 or good = man4 ,he />ts by rais+ ! "q :at ! good = man is1 & 8 :ole book is arrang$ 9 ! =m ( giv+ a detail$ answ] to t "q4 ,& ,i ?9k we c ga!r pretty well :at ! idea is1 :i* he calls by ?is "n1 by consid]+ :at he says ab\t x4 ,!re are two po9ts1 9 p>ticul>1 :i* he insi/s ^u f ! outset3 fir/1 t no?+ c be good1 9 ! s5se he means1 unless x is some?+ :i* is wor? hav+ = its own sake1 & n m]ely = ! sake ( some?+ else2 x mu/ be good 9 itself2 x mu/ n1 l weal? 7to use "o example :i* he gives7 be wor? hav+ m]ely = ! sake ( :at y c d ) x2 x mu/ be a ?+ :i* is wor? hav+ ev5 if no?+ fur!r comes ( x4 ,& secondly 7:at p>tly cov]s ! =m]1 b also1 ,i ?9k1 says some?+ m7 x mu/1 he says1 be some?+ t is self-suffici5t3 some?+ :i*1 ev5 if y _h no?+ else w\ld make y\r life wor? hav+4 ,& fur!r light is ?r[n ^u 8 mean+ :5 he comes to tell y :at he ?9ks ! good = man is3 ! good1 he says1 is m5tal1 activity--:]e su* activity is ( an excell5t k9d1 or1 if !re are sev]al diff]5t k9ds ( excell5t m5tal activity1 t :i* has ! be/ & mo/ p]fect k9d ( excell5ce2 & also 7he significantly adds7 m5tal activity :i* la/s ?r\gh a suffici5tly long life4 ,! ^w :i* ,i h "h translat$ excell5ce is :at is commonly translat$ virtue2 b x does n mean q ! same z we mean by virtue1 & t 9 a v important respect4 ,virtue has come to mean exclusively moral excell5ce2 & if t 7 all ,ari/otle meant1 y might ?9k t :at he means by good came v ne> be+ a moral idea4 ,b x turns out t he includes among excell5ces1 intellectual excell5ce1 & ev5 t he ?9ks t ! be/ & mo/ p]fect excell5ce ( :i* he speaks is a p>ticul> k9d ( intellectual excell5ce1 :i* no "o w\ld ?9k ( call+ a moral quality1 namely1 ! sort ( excell5ce :i* makes a man a good philosoph]4 ,& z = ! ^w :i* ,i h translat$ activity1 ! mean+ ( ?is c be be/ br\ght out by m5tion+ ! reason :i* ,ari/otle himself gives = say+ t m]e excell5ce itself is n 7z "s ( ! ,greeks _h said7 ! good = man4 ,he says1 truly en\gh1 t a man may possess ! greate/ excell5ce--he may be a v excell5t man--ev5 :5 he is asleep1 or is do+ no?+2 & he po9ts out t ! possession ( excell5ce :5 y are asleep is n a ?+ t is desirable = its own sake--obvi\sly only = ! sake ( ! effects x may produce :5 y wake up4 ,x is n !re=e1 he ?9ks1 m]e m5tal excell5ce1 b ! active ex]cise ( m5tal excell5ce--! /ate ( a man's m9d1 :5 he n only possesses excell5t faculties1 moral or intellectual1 b is actively engag$ 9 us+ !m1 :i* really con/itutes ! human good4 ,n[1 :5 ,ari/otle talks ( ! good = man1 !re is1 ,i ?9k1 z my quotation is suffici5t to %[1 a c]ta9 confusion 9 8 m9d betwe5 :at is good = man & :at is be/ = man4 ,:at he really holds is t any m5tal activity :i* exhibits excell5ce & is pleasurable is a good2 & :5 he adds t1 if !re are _m excell5ces1 ! good mu/ be m5tal activity :i* exhibits ! be/ ( !m1 & t x mu/ la/ ?r\gh a suffici5tly long life1 he only means t ?is is necess>y if a man is to get ! be/ he c get1 n t ?is is ! only good he c get4 ,& ! idea :i* ,i wi% to insi/ on is n1 !re=e1 ! idea ( ! human good1 b ! m fundam5tal idea ( good 2 ! idea1 ) reg>d to :i* he holds t ! work+ ( our m9ds 9 "s excell5t fa%ion is ! only good ?+ t any ( u c possess2 & ! idea ( :i* bett] is ! comp>ative1 :5 he says t m5tal activity :i* exhibits "s sorts ( excell5ce is bett] ?an m5tal activity :i* exhibits o!rs1 ?\gh bo? are good1 & t excell5t m5tal activity cont9u$ ov] a long] "t is bett] ?an ! same cont9u$ = a %ort]4 ,?is idea ( :at is good1 9 ! s5se 9 :i* ,ari/otle uses x 9 ^! cases1 is an idea :i* we all ( u con/antly use1 & :i* is c]ta9ly an idea :i* x is ! bus9ess ( ,moral ,philosophy to discuss1 ?\gh x is n a moral idea4 ,! ma9 difficulty ) reg>d to x is to di/+ui% x cle>ly f o!r s5ses 9 :i* we use ! same ^w4 ,=1 :5 we say t a ?+ is good1 or "o ?+ bett] ?an ano!r1 we by no means always mean t x is bett] 9 ?is s5se4 ,(t51 :5 we call a ?+ good we are n attribut+ to x any *>act]i/ic :i* x w\ld possess if x exi/$ q alone1 & if no?+ fur!r 7 to come ( x2 b are m]ely say+ ( x t x is a sort ( ?+ f :i* o!r good ?+s d 9 fact come1 or :i* is su* t1 :5 accompani$ by o!r ?+s1 ! :ole ?us =m$ is good 9 ,ari/otle's s5se1 al?\gh1 by itself1 x is n4 ,?us a man may be good1 & 8 "* may be good1 & yet nei!r are good 9 ?is fundam5tal s5se1 9 :i* goodness is a *>act]i/ic :i* a ?+ w\ld possess1 if x exi/$ q alone4 ,=1 z ,ari/otle says1 a good man may exi/1 & may h a good "*1 ev5 :5 he is fa/ asleep2 & yet if !re 7 no?+ 9 ! ,univ]se b good m51 ) good *>act]s1 all fa/ asleep1 !re w\ld be no?+ 9 x :i* 0 good 9 ! fundam5tal s5se ) :i* we are conc]n$4 ,?us moral goodness1 9 ! s5se ( good "*1 z di/+ui%$ f ! actual work+ ( a good "* 9 v>i\s =ms ( m5tal activity1 is c]ta9ly n good 9 ! s5se 9 :i* good means good = its own sake4 ,& ev5 ) reg>d to ! actual ex]cise ( c]ta9 =ms ( moral excell5ce1 x seems to me t 9 e/imat+ ! value ( su* ex]cise relatively to o!r ?+s1 we are apt to take into acc\nt1 n m]ely its intr9sic value--! sort ( value :i* x w\ld possess1 if x exi/$ q alone--b also its effects3 we rate x high] ?an we %\ld d if we 7 consid]+ only its intr9sic value1 because we take into acc\nt ! o!r good ?+s :i* we "k are apt to fl[ f x4 ,c]ta9 ?+s :i* h intr9sic value are di/+ui%$ f o!rs1 by ! fact t m good consequ5ces are apt to fl[ f !m2 & :]e ?is is ! case1 we are apt1 ,i ?9k1 q unju/ly1 to ?9k t _! intr9sic value mu/ be high] too4 ,"o ?+1 ,i ?9k1 is cle> ab\t intr9sic value--goodness 9 ,ari/otle's s5se--namely t x is only actual occurr5ces1 actual /ates ( ?+s ov] a c]ta9 p]iod ( "t--n su* ?+s z m51 or *>act]s1 or mat]ial ?+s1 t c h any intr9sic value at all4 ,b ev5 ?is is n suffici5t to di/+ui% intr9sic value cle>ly f o!r sorts ( goodness3 s9ce ev5 9 ! case ( actual occurr5ces1 we (t5 call !m good or bad = ! sake ( _! effects or _! promise ( effects4 ,?us we all hope t ! /ate ( ?+s 9 ,engl&1 z a :ole1 w really be bett] "s day ?an x has be5 9 ! pa/--t !re w be progress & improvem5t3 we hope1 = in/ance1 t1 if we consid] ! :ole ( ! lives liv$ 9 ,engl& dur+ "s ye> 9 ! next c5tury1 x may turn out t ! /ate ( ?+s1 z a :ole1 dur+ t ye> w be really bett] ?an x ev] has be5 9 any pa/ ye>4 ,& :5 we use bett] 9 ?is way--9 ! s5se 9 :i* progress or improvem5t means a *ange to a bett] /ate ( ?+s--we are c]ta9ly ?9k+ p>tly ( a /ate ( ?+s :i* has a great] intr9sic value4 ,& we c]ta9ly d n mean by improvem5t m]ely moral improvem5t4 ,an improvem5t 9 moral conditions1 o!r ?+s be+ equal1 may no d\bt be a ga9 9 intr9sic value2 b we %\ld c]ta9ly hold t1 moral conditions be+ equal1 !re is yet room = improvem5t 9 o!r ways--9 ! dim9ution ( mis]y & purely physical evils1 = example4 ,b 9 consid]+ ! degree ( a real *ange = ! bett] 9 intr9sic value1 !re is c]ta9ly dang] ( confusion betwe5 ! degree 9 :i* ! actual lives liv$ are really intr9sically bett]1 & ! degree 9 :i* !re is improvem5t m]ely 9 ! means = liv+ a good life4 ,if we want to e/imate rightly :at w\ld con/itute an intr9sic improvem5t 9 ! /ate ( ?+s 9 our imag9$ ye> next c5tury1 & :e!r x w\ld on ! :ole be really good at all1 we h to consid] :at value x w\ld h if x 7 to be ! la/ ye> ( life ^u ?is planet2 if ! _w 7 go+ to come to an end1 z soon z x 0 ov]2 & !re=e to disc\nt entirely all ! promises x might conta9 ( future goods4 ,?is crit]ion = di/+ui%+ :e!r ! k9d ( goodness :i* we are attribut+ to any?+ is really intr9sic value or n1 ! crit]ion :i* consi/s 9 consid]+ :e!r x is a *>act]i/ic :i* ! ?+ w\ld possess1 if x 7 to h absolutely no fur!r consequ5ces or accompanim5ts1 seems to me to be "o :i* x is v necess>y to apply if we wi% to di/+ui% cle>ly betwe5 diff]5t mean+s ( ! ^w good4 ,& x is only ! idea ( :at is good1 :]e by good is meant a *>act]i/ic :i* has ?is m>k1 t ,i want n[ to consid]4 ,! two ideas1 !n1 ) reg>d to :i* ,i want to raise a "q1 are fir/ ! moral idea ( moral obligation or duty1 & secondly ! non-moral idea ( good 9 ?is special s5se4 ,& ! "q ) reg>d to !m1 :i* ,i want to raise1 is ?is4 ,) reg>d to bo? ideas _m philosoph]s h ?\ght & /ill ?9k--n only ?9k1 b seem to be absolutely conv9c$1 t :5 we apply !m to any?+--:5 we ass]t ( any action t x ought n to h be5 done1 or ( any /ate ( ?+s t x 0 or w\ld be good or bett] ?an ano!r1 !n x mu/ be ! case t all t we are ass]t+ ( ! ?+ or ?+s 9 "q is simply & solely t "s p]son or set ( p]sons actually does h1 or has a t5d5cy to h a c]ta9 sort ( feel+ t[>ds ! ?+ or ?+s 9 "q3 t !re is absolutely no m 9 x ?an ?is4 ,:ile o!rs seem to be conv9c$1 no less /rongly1 t !re is m 9 x ?an ?is3 t :5 we judge t an action is a duty or is really wrong1 we are n m]ely mak+ a judgm5t to ! effect t "s p]son or set ( p]sons1 h1 or t5d to h a c]ta9 sort ( feel+1 :5 !y witness or ?9k ( su* actions1 & t simil>ly :5 we judge t a c]ta9 /ate ( ?+s 0 or w\ld be bett] ?an ano!r1 we are n m]ely mak+ a judgm5t ab\t ! feel+s :i* "s p]son or set ( p]sons w\ld h1 9 witness+ or ?9k+ ( ! two /ates ( ?+s1 or 9 comp>+ !m toge!r4 ,! "q at issue betwe5 ^! two views is (t5 express$ 9 o!r less cle> =ms4 ,x is (t5 express$ z ! "q :e!r ! ideas ( duty & ( good or value1 are or are n1 objective ideas3 z ! problem z to ! objectivity ( duty & intr9sic value4 ,! fir/ set ( philosoph]s w\ld ma9ta9 t ! notion ( ! objectivity ( duty & ( value is a m]e *im]a2 :ile ! second w\ld ma9ta9 t ^! ideas really are objective4 ,& o!rs express x z ! "q :e!r ! ideas ( duty & ( good are absolute or purely relative3 :e!r !re is any su* ?+ z an absolute duty or an absolute good1 or :e!r good & duty are purely relative to human feel+s & desires4 ,b bo? ^! ways ( express+ x are1 ,i ?9k1 apt to lead to confusion4 ,& ano!r ev5 less cle> way 9 :i* x is put is by ask+ ! "q3 ,is ! ass]tion t su* & su* a ?+ is a duty1 or has intr9sic value1 ev] a dictate ( reason8 ,b s f> z ,i c ga!r1 ! "q really at issue1 & express$ 9 ^! obscure ways1 is ! "o :i* ,i h tri$ to /ate4 ,x is ! "q :e!r :5 we judge 7:e!r truly or falsely7 t an action is a duty or a /ate ( ?+s good1 all t we are ?9k+ ab\t ! action or ! /ate ( ?+s 9 "q1 is simply & solely t we ourselves or o!rs h or t5d to h a c]ta9 feel+ t[>ds x :5 we contemplate or ?9k ( x4 ,& ! "q seems to me to be ( great int]e/1 because1 if ?is is all1 !n x is evid5t t all ! ideas ) :i* ,moral ,philosophy is conc]n$ are m]ely psy*ological ideas2 & all moral rules1 & /atem5ts z to :at is intr9sically valuable1 m]ely true or false psy*ological /atem5ts2 s t ! :ole ( ,moral ,philosophy & ,e?ics w be m]ely dep>tm5ts ( ,psy*ology4 ,:]eas1 if ! contr>y is ! case1 !n ^! two ideas ( moral obligation & intr9sic value1 w be no m purely psy*ological ideas ?an are ! ideas ( %ape or size or numb]2 & ,moral ,philosophy w be conc]n$ ) *>act]i/ics ( actions & feel+s & /ates ( affairs1 :i* ^! actions & feel+s & /ates ( affairs w\ld or might h possess$1 ev5 if human psy*ology _h be5 q diff]5t f :at x is4 ,:i*1 !n1 ( ^! two views is ! true "o8 ,are ^! two ideas m]ely psy*ological ideas 9 ! s5se :i* ,i h tri$ to expla91 or are !y n8 ,z ,i h said1 ,i feel "s d\bts myself :e!r !y are or n3 x does n seem to me to be a matt] to dogmatize ^u4 ,b ,i am /rongly incl9$ to ?9k t !y are n m]ely psy*ological2 t ,moral ,philosophy & ,e?ics are n m]e dep>tm5ts ( ,psy*ology4 ,9 fav\r ( ! view t ! two ideas 9 "q are m]ely psy*ological1 !re is1 s f> z ,i am aw>e1 no?+ :atev] to be said1 except t s _m philosoph]s h be5 absolutely conv9c$ t !y are4 ,none ( !m seem to me to h succe$$ 9 br++ =w>d a s+le argum5t 9 fav\r ( _! view4 ,& aga9/ ! view t !y are1 !re seem to me to be "s q def9ite argum5ts1 ?\gh ,i am n satisfi$ t any ( ^! argum5ts are absolutely conclusive4 ,i w try to /ate briefly & cle>ly :at seem to me ! ma9 argum5ts aga9/ ! view t ^! are m]ely psy*ological ideas2 al?\gh1 9 do+ s1 ,i am fac$ ) a c]ta9 difficulty4 ,= ?\gh1 z ,i h said1 _m philosoph]s are absolutely conv9c$1 t duty & good d m]ely /& = psy*ological ideas1 !y are by no means agre$ :at ! psy*ological ideas are = :i* !y /&4 ,diff]5t philosoph]s h hit on v diff]5t ideas z be+ ! ideas = :i* !y /&2 & ?is v fact t1 if !y are psy*ological ideas at all1 x is s difficult to agree z to :at ideas !y are1 seems to me 9 itself to be an argum5t aga9/ ! view t !y are s4 ,let me take ea* ( ! two ideas sep>ately1 & try to exhibit ! sort ( objection !re seems to be to ! view t x is m]ely a psy*ological idea4 ,take fir/ ! idea ( moral obligation4 ,:at purely psy*ological ass]tion c ,i be mak+ ab\t an action1 :5 ,i ass]t t x 0 wrong1 t x ought n to h be5 done8 ,9 ?is case1 "o view1 :i* is 9 "s ways ! mo/ plausible t c be tak51 is t 9 e case ,i am m]ely mak+ an ass]tion ab\t my own psy*ology4 ,b :at ass]tion ab\t my own psy*ology c ,i be mak+8 ,let u take z an example1 ! view ( ,pr(4 ,we/]m>ck1 :i* is z plausible a view ( ?is type z any t ,i "k (4 ,he holds t :at ,i am judg+ :5 ,i judge an action to be wrong1 is m]ely t x is ( a sort :i* t5ds to excite 9 me a peculi> k9d ( feel+--! feel+ ( moral indignation or disapproval4 ,he does n say t :at ,i am judg+ is t ! action 9 "q is actually excit+ ?is feel+ 9 me4 ,= x is obvi\sly n true t1 :5 ,i judge an action to be mu* m wrong ?an ano!r1 ,i am always actually feel+ mu* indignation at ! ?\ght ( ei!r1 or mu* m indignation at ! ?\ght ( ! "o ?an at t ( ! o!r2 & x is inconceivable t ,i %\ld con/antly be mak+ s great a mi/ake z to my own psy*ology1 z to ?9k t ,i am actually feel+ great indignation :5 ,i am n4 ,b he ?9ks x is plausible to say t ,i am mak+ a judgm5t z to ! t5d5cy ( su* actions to excite indignation 9 me2 t1 = in/ance1 :5 ,i judge t "o is mu* m wrong ?an ! o!r1 ,i am m]ely ass]t+ ! fact1 taught me by my pa/ exp]i5ce1 t1 if ,i 7 to witness ! two actions1 "u simil> circum/ances1 ,i %\ld feel a mu* m int5se indignation at ! "o ?an at ! o!r4#a ,b !re is "o v s]i\s objection to su* a view1 :i* ,i ?9k t ^? :o take x are apt n fully to realise4 ,if ?is view be true1 !n :5 ,i judge an action to be wrong1 ,i am m]ely mak+ a judgm5t ab\t my own feel+s t[>ds x2 & :5 y judge x to be wrong1 y are m]ely mak+ a judgm5t ab\t y\rs4 ,& h5ce ! ^w wrong 9 my m\?1 means some?+ entirely diff]5t f :at x does 9 y\rs2 j z ! ^w ,i 9 my m\? /&s = an entirely diff]5t p]son f :at x does 9 y\rs--9 m9e x /&s = me1 9 y\rs x /&s = y4 ,t is to say :5 ,i judge ( a giv5 action t x 0 wrong1 & y p]haps ( ! v same action t x 0 n1 we are n 9 fact diff]+ 9 op9ion ab\t x at all2 any m ?an we are diff]+ 9 op9ion if ,i make ! judgm5t ,i came f ,cambridge to-day & y make ! judgm5t ,i did n come f ,cambridge to-day4 ,:5 ,i say ,t 0 wrong ,i am m]ely say+ ,t sort ( action excites indignation 9 me1 :5 ,i see x2 & :5 y say ,no2 x 0 n wrong y are m]ely say+ ,x does n excite indignation 9 me1 :5 ,i see x4 ,& obvi\sly bo? judgm5ts may p]fectly well be true toge!r2 j z my judgm5t t ,i did come f ,cambridge to-day & y\rs t y did n1 may p]fectly well be true toge!r4 ,9 o!r words1 & ?is is :at ,i want to insi/ on1 if ?is view be true1 !n !re is absolutely no su* ?+ z a diff]5ce ( op9ion ^u moral que/ions4 ,if two p]sons ?9k !y diff] 9 op9ion on a moral "q 7& x c]ta9ly seems z if !y sometimes ?9k s71 !y are always1 on ?is view1 mak+ a mi/ake1 & a mi/ake s gross t x seems h>dly possible t !y %\ld make x3 a mi/ake z gross z t :i* w\ld be involv$ 9 ?9k+ t :5 y say ,i did n come f ,cambridge to-day y are d5y+ :at ,i say :5 ,i say ,i did4 ,& ?is seems to me to be a v s]i\s objection to ! view4 ,don't p1 9 fact1 sometimes really diff] 9 op9ion on a moral "q8 ,c]ta9ly all appe>ances are 9 fav\r ( ! view t !y d3 & yet1 if !y d1 t c only be if :5 ,i ?9k a ?+ to be wrong1 & y ?9k x n to be wrong1 ,i mean by wrong ! v same *>act]i/ic :i* y mean1 & am ?9k+ t ! action possesses ?is *>act]i/ic :ile y are ?9k+ x does n4 ,x mu/ be ! v same *>act]i/ic :i* we bo? mean2 x _c be1 z ?is view says x is1 m]ely t ,i am ?9k+ t x has to my feel+s ! v same relation1 :i* y are ?9k+ t x has n got to y\rs2 s9ce1 if ?is 7 all1 !n !re w\ld be no diff]5ce ( op9ion betwe5 u4 ,& ?is view t :5 we talk ( wrong or duty1 we are n m]ely1 ea* ( u1 mak+ a /atem5t ab\t ! relation ( ! ?+ 9 "q to our own feel+s1 may be re9=c$ by ano!r consid]ation4 ,x is commonly believ$ t "s moral rules exhibit a high] morality ?an o!rs3 t1 = in/ance a p]son :o believes t x is our duty to d good to our enemies1 has a high] moral belief1 ?an "o :o believes t he has no su* duty1 b only a duty to d good to 8 fri5ds or fell[-c\ntrym54 ,& ,we/]m>ck himself believes t1 "s moral beliefs1 m>k a /age ( high] ref9em5t 9 ! evolution ( ! moral consci\sness4#b ,b :at1 on 8 view c be meant by say+ t "o moral belief is high] ?an ano!r8 ,if ,a believes t x is 8 duty to d good to 8 enemies & ,b believes t x is n1 9 :at s5se c ,a's belief be high] ?an ,b's8 ,n1 on ?is view1 9 ! s5se t :at ,a believes is true1 & :at ,b believes is n2 = :at ,a is believ+ is m]ely t ! idea ( n do+ good to y\r enemies t5ds to excite 9 him a feel+ ( moral indignation1 & :at ,b believes is m]ely t x does n t5d to excite ?is feel+ 9 him3 & bo? beliefs may p]fectly well be true2 x may really be true t ! same actions d excite ! feel+ 9 ,a1 & t !y don't 9 ,b4 ,:at !n1 c\ld ,we/]m>ck mean by say+ t ,a's morality is high] ?an ,b's8 ,s f> z ,i c see1 :at1 on 8 own views1 he w\ld h to mean is m]ely t he himself1 ,we/]m>ck1 %>es ,a's morality & does n %>e ,b's3 t x is true ( him1 z ( ,a1 t neglect+ to d good to enemies excites 8 feel+s ( moral indignation & n true ( him z x is ( ,b1 t x does n excite su* feel+s 9 him4 ,9 %ort he w\ld h to say t :at he means by call+ ,a's morality ! high] is m]ely ,a's morality is my morality1 & ,b's is n4 ,b x seems to me q cle> t :5 we say "o morality is high] ?an ano!r1 we d n m]ely mean t x is our own4 ,we are n m]ely ass]t+ t x has a c]ta9 relation to our own feel+s1 b are ass]t+1 if ,i may say s1 t ! p]son :o has x has a bett] moral ta/e ?an ! p]son :o has n4 ,& :e!r or n ?is means m]ely1 z ,i ?9k1 t :at ! "o believes is true1 & :at ! o!r believes is false1 x is at all ev5ts inconsi/5t ) ! view t 9 all cases we are m]ely mak+ a /atem5t ab\t our own feel+s4 ,= ^! reasons x seems to me extremely difficult to believe t :5 we judge ?+s to be wrong1 ea* ( u is m]ely mak+ a judgm5t ab\t 8 own psy*ology4 ,b if n ab\t our own1 !n ab\t ^:8 ,i h already said t ! view t1 if ! judgm5t is m]ely a psy*ological "o at all1 x is a judgm5t ab\t our own psy*ology1 is 9 "s ways m plausible ?an any o!r view4 ,& ,i ?9k we c n[ see t any o!r view is n plausible4 ,! alt]natives are t ,i %\ld be mak+ a judgm5t ab\t ! psy*ology ( all mank9d1 or ab\t t ( "s p>ticul> section ( x4 ,& t ! fir/ alt]native is n true1 is1 ,i ?9k1 evid5t f ! fact t1 :5 ,i judge an action to be wrong1 ,i may emphatically n believe t x is true ( all mank9d t !y w\ld reg>d x ) feel+s ( moral disapproval4 ,i may "k p]fectly well t "s w\ld n4 ,mo/ philosoph]s1 !re=e1 h n v5tur$ to say t ?is is ! judgm5t ,i am mak+2 !y say1 = in/ance1 t ,i am mak+ a judgm5t ab\t ! feel+s ( ! p>ticul> society to :i* ,i belong--ab\t1 = in/ance1 ! feel+s ( an imp>tial spectator 9 t society4 ,b1 if ?is view be tak51 x is op5 to ! same objections z ! view t ,i am m]ely mak+ a judgm5t ab\t my own feel+s4 ,if we c\ld say t e man1 :5 he judges a ?+ to be wrong1 0 mak+ a /atem5t ab\t ! feel+s ( all mank9d1 !n :5 ,a says ,?is is wrong & ,b says ,no1 x isn't1 !y w\ld really be diff]+ 9 op9ion1 s9ce ,a w\ld be say+ t all mank9d feel 9 a c]ta9 way t[>ds ! action1 & ,b w\ld be say+ t !y don't4 ,b if ,a is ref]r+ m]ely to 8 society & ,b to 81 & _! societies are diff]5t1 !n obvi\sly !y are n diff]+ 9 op9ion at all3 x may p]fectly well be true bo? t an imp>tial spectator 9 ,a's society does h a c]ta9 sort ( feel+ t[>ds actions ( ! sort 9 "q1 & t an imp>tial spectator 9 ,b's does n4 ,?is view1 !re=e1 implies t x is impossible = two m5 belong+ to diff]5t societies ev] to diff] 9 op9ion on a moral "q4 ,& ?is is a view :i* ,i f9d x almo/ z h>d to accept z ! view t no two m5 ev] diff] 9 op9ion on "o4 ,= ^! reasons ,i ?9k !re are s]i\s objections to ! view t ! idea ( moral obligation is m]ely a psy*ological idea4 ,b n[ let u briefly consid] ! idea ( good1 9 ,ari/otle's s5se1 or intr9sic value4 ,z reg>ds ?is idea1 !re is aga9 a diff]5ce ( op9ion among ^? :o hold t x is a psy*ological idea1 z to :at idea x is4 ,! majority seem to hold t x is to be def9$1 someh[1 9 t]ms ( desire2 :ile o!rs h held t :at we are judg+ :5 we judge t "o /ate ( ?+s is or w\ld be intr9sically bett] ?an ano!r1 is r t ! belief t ! "o 0 go+ to be realiz$ w\ld1 "u c]ta9 circum/ances1 give m pleasure to "s man or set ( m51 ?an ! belief t ! o!r 04 ,b ! same objections seem to me to apply :i*ev] ( ^! two views be tak54 ,let u take desire4 ,ab\t ^: desires am ,i mak+ a judgm5t1 :5 ,i judge t "o /ate ( ?+s w\ld be bett] ?an ano!r8 ,"h aga91 x may be said1 fir/ ( all1 t ,i am m]ely mak+ a judgm5t ab\t my own4 ,b 9 ?is case ! view t my judgm5t is m]ely ab\t my own psy*ology is1 ,i ?9k1 expos$ to an obvi\s objection to :i* ,we/]m>ck's view t my judgm5ts ( moral obligation are ab\t my own psy*ology 0 n expos$4 ,! obvi\s objection is t x is evid5tly n true t ,i d 9 fact always desire m1 :at ,i judge to be bett]3 ,i may judge "o /ate ( ?+s to be bett] ?an ano!r1 ev5 :5 ,i "k p]fectly well n only t ,i don't desire x m1 b t ,i h no t5d5cy to d s4 ,x is a notori\s fact t m5's /ronge/ desires are1 z a rule1 = ?+s 9 :i* !y !mselves h "s p]sonal conc]n2 & yet ! fact t ?is is s1 & t !y "k x to be s1 does n prev5t !m f judg+ t *anges1 :i* w\ld n affect !m p]sonally1 w\ld con/itute a v mu* great] improvem5t 9 ! _w's condition1 ?an *anges :i* w\ld4 ,= ?is reason alone ! view t :5 ,i judge "o /ate ( ?+s to be bett] ?an ano!r ,i am m]ely mak+ a judgm5t ab\t my own psy*ology1 mu/1 ,i ?9k1 be giv5 up3 x is incr$ible t we %\ld all be mak+ su* mi/akes ab\t our feel+s1 z1 on ?is view1 we %\ld con/antly be do+4 ,& !re is1 ( c\rse1 besides1 ! same objection1 z appli$ 9 ! case ( moral obligation3 namely t1 if ?is view 7 true1 no two m5 c\ld ev] diff] 9 op9ion z to :i* ( two /ates 0 ! bett]1 :]eas x appe>s t !y c]ta9ly sometimes d diff] 9 op9ion on su* an issue4 ,my judgm5t1 !n1 is n m]ely a judgm5t ab\t my own psy*ology3 b1 if s1 ab\t ^: psy*ology is x a judgm5t8 ,x _c be a judgm5t t all m5 desire ! "o /ate m ?an ! o!r2 because t w\ld include ! judgm5t t ,i myself d s1 :i*1 z we h se51 ,i (t5 "k to be false1 ev5 :ile ,i judge t ! "o /ate really is bett]4 ,& x _c1 ,i ?9k1 be a judgm5t m]ely ab\t ! feel+s or desires ( an imp>tial spectator 9 my own society2 s9ce t w\ld involve ! p>adox t m5 belong+ to diff]5t societies c\ld nev] diff] 9 op9ion z to :at 0 bett]4 ,b we h "h to consid] an alt]native1 :i* did n arise 9 ! case ( moral obligation4 ,x is a notori\s fact t ! satisfaction ( "s ( our desires is incompatible ) ! satisfaction ( o!rs1 & ! satisfaction ( ^? ( "s m5 ) ! satisfaction ( ^? ( o!rs4 ,& ?is fact has sugge/$ to "s philosoph]s t :at we mean by say+ t "o /ate ( ?+s w\ld be bett] ?an ano!r1 is m]ely t x is a /ate 9 :i* m ( ! desires1 ( ^? :o 7 9 x1 w\ld be satisfi$ at once1 ?an w\ld be ! case ) ! o!r4 ,b to ?is view ! fundam5tal objection seems to me to be t :e!r ! "o /ate 0 bett] ?an ! o!r w\ld dep5d n m]ely ^u ! numb] ( desires t 7 simultane\sly satisfi$ 9 x1 b ^u :at ! desires 7 desires =4 ,i c imag9e a /ate ( ?+s 9 :i* all desires 7 satisfi$1 & yet c judge ( x t x w\ld n be s good z ano!r 9 :i* "s 7 left unsatisfi$4 ,& = ?is reason ,i _c ass5t to ! view t my judgm5t1 t "o /ate ( ?+s is bett] ?an ano!r is m]ely a judgm5t ab\t ! psy*ology ( ! p conc]n$ 9 x4 ,?is is :y ,i f9d x h>d to believe t ei!r ! idea ( moral obligation or ! idea ( intr9sic value is m]ely a psy*ological idea4 ,x seems to me t ,moral ,philosophy _c be m]ely a dep>tm5t ( ,psy*ology4 ,b no d\bt !re may be argum5ts on ! o!r side to :i* ,i h n done ju/ice4 #a ,e ,we/]m>ck1 ,! ,orig9 & ,developm5t ( ,moral ,ideas1 ,vol4 ,i1 pp4 #d1 #ac1 #ag-ah1 #ajj-aja4 ,on p4 #aje1 h[ev]1 ,we/]m>ck sugge/s a view inconsi/5t ) ?is "o2 namely t1 :5 ,i judge an action to be wrong1 ,i am n m]ely ass]t+ t x has a t5d5cy to excite moral indignation 9 me1 b am also ass]t+ t o!r p w\ld be conv9c$ t x has a t5d5cy to excite moral indignation 9 !m1 if !y knew ! act & all its att5dant circum/ances z well z ,i d1 & if1 at ! same "t _! emotions 7 z ref9$ z m9e4 #b ,ibid4 p4 #hi4 ,,! ,,end ,,index ,ab/ractions1 illegitimate ,agno/icism ,analytic tru?s ,appreh5sion1 direct ,ari/otle's ,e?ics ,att5tion ,aw>5ess ,be+ & ,reality ,b]keley ,bradley ,causal connection necessity ,consci\sness ,cont5t ,d$uction ,diff]5ce1 num]ical & qualitative intr9sic ,direct appreh5sion obs]vation p]ception ,duty & ,wrong objectivity ( ,entails & implies ,esse & p]cipi1 ,exi/5ce & reality ( physical objects ,exp]i5ce1 ambiguity ( ,ext]nal objects & facts relations ,fact1 matt]s ( ,foll[s ,giv51 ambiguity ( ,good1 ambiguity ( objectivity ( = man ,hegel ,hume ,i4 ,idealism ,ideas ,id5tity ( ,indisc]nibles ,implication1 ,indisc]nibles1 ,id5tity ( ,induction1 conditions necess>y = ,int]nal relations1 dogma ( two s5ses ( ,intr9sic diff]5ce nature pr$icates value ,james1 ,william ,joa*im1 ,h4 ,h4 ,kant ,k & belief by description ,leibniz ,manife/ation ( ,mat]ial objects or ?+s ,mill4 ,j4 ,s4 ,m9ds1 9 our ,modify ,moral rules1 two k9ds ( ,necess>y tru?s ,necessity1 ?ree s5ses ( logical unconditional ,objectivity1 ambiguity ( ( k9ds ( value ,objects1 ext]nal mat]ial physical1 & s5sibles ,obs]vation ,organic unities ,ought1 two mean+s ( objectivity ( & wrong ,"p1 physical & :ole ,p]ception1 ambiguity ( direct ,p]cipi & esse ,physical objects & s5sibles ,pickwickian s5ses ,possible1 ?ree s5ses ( ,pragmati/ !ory ( tru? ,pres5t$1 ambiguity ( ,reality ,reason1 dictates ( ,reasons ,reid1 ,t4 ,relational prop]ties ,relations1 dogma ( int]nal ext]nal int]nal ,"r1 objectivity ( ,russell1 ,b4 ,see1 ambiguity ( ,seems ,s5sations prop] ,s5se-data ,s5sibles ,solipsism ,spiritual ,/ra*ey1 ,o4 ,subjective ,syn!tic tru?s ,taylor1 ,a4 ,e41 #h ,"t ,tru?1 & mutability pragmati/ !ory ( & utility & v]ification ( words ,tru?s1 analytic & syn!tic man-made necess>y ,value1 intr9sic objectivity ( ,we/]m>ck1 ,e4 ,wrong1 objectivity ( & ought