第1章 概観 n.3 - W. ジェイムズの影響
同じ時期に、即ち1910年から1914年にかけて、私は物理的世界が何であるかということだけでなく、我々人間はどのようにして物理的世界を知るにいたるのかという問いに、関心持ち始めるようになった。知覚と物理学との関係は、この時期以来、断続的に(intermittently)私の関心を占めた問題である。私の哲学が最後の重要な変化を経験したのは(underwent 受けたのは),この問題に関係してのことであった。(それまで)私は知覚を主観と客観との間の二項関係とみなしていた。というのは,それは(そう考えることは),いかにして知覚が主観(subject)以外のなにものかに関する知識を与えうるか(ということ)を比較的容易に理解(できるように)させていたからである(as)。しかし,ウィリヤム・ジェイムズの影響のもと,私はこの見方(見解)は誤まっている、あるいは,少なくとも問題を不当に単純化している、と考えるようになった。(人間の)諸感覚は,少なくとも,視覚や聴覚という感覚でさえ、本質において、関係的な出来事ではない、と思われるようになった。もちろん、私と私の見るものとの間に何の関係もないなどと私は言うつもりはない。私の言おうとしているのは、その関係がそれまで私の考えて来たよりもはるかに間接的なものであり、私が何ものかを見るとき私(の脳)の中に起る全てのことは、その論理的構造のみに関する限り、私の見る何ものかが私の外の世界(=外界)に存在しなくとも(anything outside me for me to see)、十分起こりうる、ということである。私の見解のこの変化は、経験と外界(注:自分=認識主体の外の世界)とを結びつけることの中に含まれる問題の難しさは多いに増した(のである)。 |
Chapter 1: Introductory Outline, n.3When, however, after 1910 , I had done all that I intended to do as regards pure mathematics, I began to think about the physical world and, largely under Whitehead's influence, I was led to new applications of Occam's razor, to which I had become devoted by its usefulness in the philosophy of arithmetic. Whitehead persuaded me that one could do physics without supposing points and instants to be part of the stuff of the world. He considered - and in this I came to agree with him - that the stuff of the physical world could consist of events, each occupying a finite amount of space-time. As in all uses of Occam's razor, one was not obliged to deny the existence of the entities with which one dispensed, but one was enabled to abstain from ascertaining it. This had the advantage of diminishing the assumptions required for the interpretation of whatever branch of knowledge was in question. As regards the physical world, it is impossible to prove that there are not point-instants, but it is possible to prove that physics gives no reason whatever for supposing that there are such things.At the same time, that is to say in the years from 1910 to 1914, I became interested, not only in what the physical world is, but in how we come to know it. The relation of perception to physics is a problem which has occupied me intermittently ever since that time. It is in relation to this problem that my philosophy underwent its last substantial change. I had regarded perception as a two-term relation of subject and object, as this had made it comparatively easy to understand how perception could give knowledge of something other than the subject. But under the influence of William James, I came to think this view mistaken, or at any rate an undue simplification. Sensations, at least, even those that are visual or auditory, came to seem to me not in their own nature relational occurrences. I do not, of course, mean to say that when I see something there is no relation between me and what I see; but what I do mean to say is that the relation is much more indirect than I had supposed and that everything that happens in me when I see something could, so far as its logical structure is concerned, quite well occur without there being anything outside me for me to see. This change in my opinions greatly increased the difficulty of problems involved in connecting experience with the outer world. |