phenomenology of mind-第60部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


permanent　or　real。　Meanwhile；　as　mind　itself　is　not　an　abstractly　simple　entity；　but　a　system　of
processes；　wherein　it　distinguishes　itself　into　moments；　but　in　the　very　act　of　distinguishing　remains
free　and　detached；　and　as　mind　articulates　its　body　as　a　whole　into　a　variety　of　functions；　and
designates　one　particular　part　of　the　body　for　only　one　function：　—　so　too　one　can　represent　to
oneself　the　fluent　state　of　its　internal　existence　＇its　existence　within　itself＇　as　something　that　is
articulated　into　parts。　Moreover；　it　seems　bound　to　be　thought　of　in　this　way；　because　the
self…reflected　being　of　mind　in　the　brain　itself　is　again　merely　a　middle　term　between　its　pure
essential　nature　and　its　bodily　articulation；　an　intermediate　link；　which　consequently　must　partake
of　the　nature　of　both；　and　thus　in　respect　of　the　latter　must　also　again　have　in　it　actual　articulation。

The　psycho…organic　being　has　at　the　same　time　the　necessary　aspect　of　a　stable　subsistent
existence。　The　former　must　retire；　qua　extreme　of　self…existence；　and　have　this　latter　as　the　other
extreme　over　against　it；　an　extreme　which　is　then　the　object　on　which　the　former　acts　as　a　cause。　If
now　brain　and　spinal　cord　are　that　bodily　self…existence　of　mind；　the　skull　and　vertebral　column
form　the　other　extreme　separated　off；　viz。　the　solid　fixed　stable　thing。

When；　however；　any　one　thinks　of　the　proper　place　where　mind　exists；　it　is　not　the　back　that
occurs　to　him；　but　merely　the　head。　Since　this　is　so；　we　can；　in　examining　a　form　of　knowledge　like
what　we　are　at　present　dealing　with；　content　ourselves　with　this　reason　—　not　a　very　bad　one　in　the
present　case　—　in　order　to　confine　the　existence　of　mind　to　the　skull。　Should　it　strike　any　one　to
take　the　vertebral　column　for　the　seat　of　mind；　in　so　far　as　by　it　too　knowledge　and　action
doubtless　are　sometimes　partly　induced　and　partly　educed；　this　would　prove　nothing　in　defence　of
the　view　that　the　spinal　cord　must　be　taken　as　well　for　the　indwelling　seat　of　mind；　and　the
vertebral　column　for　the　existential　counterpart；　because　this　proves　too　much。　For　we　may　bear　in
mind　that　there　are　also　other　approved　external　ways　for　getting　at　the　activity　of　mind　in　order　to
stimulate　or　inhibit　its　activity。

The　vertebral　column；　then；　if　we　like；　drops　rightly　out　of　account；　and　it　is　as　well　made　out　as
many　another　doctrine　of　the　philosophy　of　nature　that　the　skull　alone　does　not　indeed　contain　the
〃organs〃　of　mind　（but　its　existent　embodiment）。　For　this　was　previously　excluded　from　the
conception　of　this　relation；　and　on　that　account　the　skull　was　taken　for　the　aspect　of　existence；　or；
if　we　may　not　be　allowed　to　recall　the　conception　involved；　then　experience　unquestionably
teaches　that；　as　we　see　with　the　eye　qua　organ；　so　it　is　not　with　the　skull　that　we　commit　murder；
steal；　write　poetry；　etc。

We　must　on　that　account　refrain　from　using　the　expression　〃organ〃　also　when　speaking　of　that
significance　of　the　skull　which　we　have　still　to　mention。　For　although　it　is　a　common　thing　to　hear
people　say；　that　to　reasonable　men　it　is　not　words　but　facts　that　really　matter；　yet　that　does　not
give　us　permission　to　describe　a　thing　in　terms　not　appropriate　to　it。　For　this　is　at　once　stupidity
and　deceit；　pretending　merely　not　to　have　the　right　〃word〃；　and　biding　from　itself　that　in　reality　it
has　not　got　hold　of　the　fact　itself；　the　notion。　If　the　latter　were　there；　it　would　soon　find　the　right
word。

What　has　been　here　determined　is；　in　the　first　instance；　merely　that　just　as　the　brain　is　the　caput
vivum；　the　skull　is　the　caput　mortuum。

It　is　in　this　ens　mortuum；　then；　that　the　mental　processes　and　specific　functions　of　the　brain　would
have　to　find　their　external　reality　manifested；　a　reality　which　is　none　the　less　in　the　individual
himself。　For　the　relation　of　those　processes　and　functions　to　what；　being　an　ens　mortuum；　does
not　contain　mind　indwelling　within　it；　there　is　offered；　in　the　first　instance；　the　external　and
mechanical　relation　defined　above；　so　that　the　organs　proper　—　and　these　are　in　the　brain　—　here
press　the　skull　out　round；　there　make　it　broad；　or　force　it　flat；　or　in　whatever　way　we　care　to　state
the　effect　thus　exerted。　Being　itself　a　part　of　the　organism；　it　must　be　supposed　to　have　in　it　too；　as
is　the　case　in　every　bone；　an　active；　living；　formative　influence；　so　that；　from　this　point　of　view；　it
really；　from　its　side；　presses　the　brain；　and　fixes　its　external　boundary　—　which　it　is　the　better　able
to　do　being　the　harder。　In　that　case；　however；　the　relation　of　the　activity　of　the　one　to　the　other
would　always　maintain　the　same　character；　for　whether　the　skull　is　the　determining　factor　or　the
factor　determined；　this　would　effect　no　alteration　in　the　general　causal　connexion；　only　that　the
skull　would　then　be　made　the　immediate　organ　of　self…consciousness；　because　in　it　qua　cause　the
aspect　of　existence…for…self　would　find　expression。　But；　since　self…existence　in　the　sense　of　organic
living　activity　belongs　to　both　in　the　same　manner；　the　causal　connexion　between　them　in　point　of
fact　drops　altogether。

This　development　of　the　two；　however；　would　be　inwardly　connected；　and　would　be　an　organic
preestablished　harmony；　which　leaves　the　two　interrelated　aspects　free　as　regards　one　another；
each　with　its　own　proper　form　and　shape；　without　this　shape　needing　to　correspond　to　that　of　the
other；　and　still　more　so　as　regards　the　relation　of　the　shape　and　the　quality　—　just　as　the　form　of
the　grape　and　the　taste　of　wine　are　mutually　independent　of　one　another。

Since；　however；　the　character　of　self…existence　appertains　to　the　aspect　of　brain；　while　that　of
existence　to　the　feature　of　skull；　there　is　also　a　causal　connexion　to　be　set　up　between　them　inside
the　organic　unity　—　a　necessary　relation　between　them　as　external　for　one　another；　i。e。　a　relation
itself　external；　whereby　their　form　and　shape　are　determined　the　one　through　the　other。

As　regards　the　condition；　however；　in　which　the　organ　of　self…consciousness　would　operate
causally　on　the　opposite　aspect；　all　sorts　of　statements　can　be　made。　For　the　question　concerns
the　constitution　of　a　cause　which　is　considered　in　regard　to　its　indifferent　existence；　its　shape　and
quantity；　a　cause　whose　inner　nature　and　self…existence　are　to　be　precisely　what　leave　quite
unaffected　the　immediately　existing　aspect。　The　organic　self…formation　of　the　skull　is；　to　begin　with；
indifferent　to　the　mechanical　influence　exerted；　and　the　relationship　in　which　these　two　processes
stand；　since　the　former　consists　in　relating　itself　to　itself；　is　just　this　very　indeterminateness　and
boundlessness。　Furthermore；　even　though　the　brain　accepted　the　distinctions　of　mind；　and　took
them　into　itself　as　existential　distinctions；　and　were　a　plurality　of　inner　organs　occupying　each　a
different　space；　it　would　be　left　undecided　whether　a　mental　element　would；　according　as　it　was
originally　stronger　or　weaker；　either　be　bound　to　possess　in　the　first　case　a　more　expanded
brain…organ；　or　in　the　latter　case　a　more　contracted　brain…organ；　or　just　the　other　way　about。　But　it
is　contradictory　to　nature　for　the　brain　to　be　such　a　plurality　of　internal　organs；　for　nature　gives　the
moments　of　the　notion　an　existence　of　their　own；　and　hence　puts　the　fluent　simplicity　of　organic　life
clear　on　one　side；　and　its　articulation　and　division　with　its　distinctions　on　the　other；　so　that；　in　the
way　they　have　to　be　taken　here；　they　assume　the　form　of　particular　anatomical　facts。

The　same　holds　good　in　regard　to　the　question　whether　the　improvement　of　the　brain　would
enlarge　or　diminish　the　organ；　whether　it　would　make　it　coarser　and　thicker　or　finer。　By　the　fact
that　it　remains　undetermined　how　the　cause　is　constituted；　it　is　left　in　the　same　way　undecided　bow
the　effect　exerted　on　the　skull　comes　about；　whether　it　is　a　widening　or　a　narrowing　and　shrinking
of　it。　Suppose　this　effect　is　named　in　perhaps　more　distinguished　phrase　a　〃solicitation〃；　we　cannot
say　whether　this　takes　place　by　swelling　like　the　action　of　a　cantharides…plaster；　or　by　shrivelling
like　the　action　of　vinegar。

In　defence　of　all　views　of　that　kind　plausible　reasons　can　be　adduced；　for　the　organic　relation；
which　quite　as　much　exerts　its　influence；　finds　one　fit　as　well　as　another；　and　is　indifferent　to　all　this
wit　of　mere　understanding。

It　is；　however；　not　the　interest　of　observation　to　seek　to　determine　this　relation。　For　it　is　in　any
case　not　the　brain　in　the　sense　of　a　physical　part　which　takes　its　stand　on　one　side；　but　brain　in　the
sense　of　the　existential　form　of　self…conscious　individuality。　This　individuality；　qua　abiding　character
and　self…moving　conscious　activity；　exists　for　itself　and　within　itself。　Opposed　to　this　existence
within　itself　and　on　its　own　account　stand　its　reality　and　its　existence　for　another。　Its　own　peculiar
existence　is　the　essential　nature；　and　is　subject；　having　a　being　in　the　brain；　this　being　is　subsumed
under　it；　and　gets　its　value　merely　through　its　indwelling　significance。　The　other　aspect　of
self…conscious　individuality；　however；　that　of　its　existence；　is　being　qua　independent　and　subject；
or　qua　a　thing；　viz。　a　bone：　the　real　existence　of　man　is　his　skull…bone。　This　is　the　relationship　and
the　sense　which　the　two　aspects　of　this　relation　have　when　the　mind　adopts　the　attitude　of
observation。

Observation　has　now　to　deal　with　the　more　determinate　relation　of　these　aspects。　The　skull…bone
doubtless　in　general　has　the　significance　of　being　the　immediate　reality　of　mind。　But　the
many…sidedness　of　mind　gives　its　existence　a　corresponding　variety　of　meanings。　What　we　have　to
find　out　is　the　specific　meaning　of　the　particular　regions　into　which　this　existence　is　divided；　and　we
have　to　see　how　the　reference　to　mind　is　denoted　in　them。

The　skull…bone　is　not　an　organ　of　activity；　nor　even　a　process　of　utterance。　We　neither　commit
theft；　murder；　etc。；　with　the　skull…bone；　nor　does　it　in　the　least　distort　its　face　to　suit　the　deed　in
such　cases；　so　that　the　skull　should　express　the　meaning　in　the　language　of　gesture。　Nor　does　this
existential　form　possess　the　value　even　of　a　symbol。　Look