MANSEL ON THE AXIOMS.

73

ness, inability to get rid of an idea or inability to get rid of a belief, Mr. Spencer's argument fails to be convincing.

HENRY L. MANSEL. Mr. Mansel has examined the subject of Intuition in his Prolegomena Logica, Chap. III.—VI., and in his Metaphysics. He takes up four kinds of necessity: mathematical, metaphysical, logical, and moral. He, to a great degree, follows Kant and Sir W. Hamilton.

I.-MATHEMATICAL NECESSITY. Mr. Mansel adopts the criterion of Necessity, enounced by Leibnitz. Whatever truths we must admit as everywhere and always necessary, must arise, not from observation, but from the constitution of the mind. Attempts have indeed been made to explain this necessity by a constant association of ideas, but associations, however frequent and uniform, fail to produce a higher conviction than one of mere physical necessity.

1. The Axioms of Geometry. The axioms of Geometry contain both analytical and synthetical judgments, (the distinction corresponding to Mill's verbal and real propositions)."

It is upon the synthetical judgments that the dispute turns. Are those axioms à priori, or derived from experience? Mr. Mansel says that Mr. Mill's argument contradicts the direct evidence of consciousness, and, however powerful as an argumentum ad hominem against Dr. Whewell, fails to meet the real question at issue. What is required is to account, not for the necessity of geometrical axioms as truths relating to objects without the mind, but as thoughts relating to objects within.' 'Why must I invest imaginary objects with attributes not contained in the definition of them? I can imagine the sun remaining continually fixed in the meridian, or a stone sinking 99 times and floating the 100th; and yet my experience of the contrary is as invariable as my experience of the geometrical properties of bodies.' Why then do we attribute a higher necessity to the axioms of Geometry? The answer is taken direct from Kant. It is because space is itself an à priori notion, not derived from without, but part of the original furniture of the mind. The author here draws a distinction between the part played by imagination in empirical and in necessary judgments. In empirical judgments, its value depends upon the fidelity of its adherency to the original. Geometrical truths, on the other hand, are absolutely true of the objects of imagination, but only nearly true of real objects. The reason is, that the truths of physical science depend on experience alone, but geometry relates to the figures of that à priori space, which is the indispensable condition of all experience.

2. Arithmetic. Arithmetic is richly, as geometry is scantily,

Analytical judgments are: "The whole is greater than its part; ' 'If equals be added to equals, the sums are equal;' Things that are equal to the same are equal to each other.' Synthetical judgments are: A straight line is the shortest distance between two points;' 'Two straight lines which, being met by a third, make the interior angles less than two right angles, will meet, if produced.'

supplied with a priori principles. It is not by reasoning we learn that two and two make four, nor from this proposition can we in any way deduce that four and two make six.' We must have recourse in each separate case to the senses or the imagination, and, by presenting to the one or to the other a number of individual objects corresponding to each term separately, envisage the resulting sum."

No number is capable of definition. Six cannot be defined as 51. In this view of Arithmetic, Mansel remarks that he differs from Leibnitz, Hegel, and Mill. [It is not proper to put Mill along with Leibnitz in this connexion.]

II.-METAPHYSICAL NECESSITY. Metaphysics, as well as Mathematics, has been regarded as possessed of Synthetical judgments. Two are selected for examination, the Principles of Substance and Causality.

1. The Principle of Substance is that all objects of perception are qualities that exist in some subject to which they belong. Reid said a ball has colour and figure, but it is not colour and figure; it is something that has colour and figure,-it is a substance. Berkeley thought it more consonant even with common sense to reject this imperceptible support of perceived attributes. Hume observed that, as we are conscious of nothing but impressions and ideas, we may as well throw away the barren figment of Mind. In opposition to this, Reid appealed to the Principle of Substance as a dictate of common sense. But are we conscious of substance? Reid and Stewart have again and again conceded that we are not; they have consequently abandoned the only position from which a successful attack could be made on either Berkeley or Hume. Mr. Mansel therefore, after Maine de Biran, affirms that we are immediately conscious of Self as substance. The one intuited substance is myself, in the form of a power conscious of itself. The notion of substance, thus derived, may be applied to other conscious beings, but not farther. In regard to physical phenomena, we have no positive notion of substance other than the phenomena themselves. Mr. Mansel is thus unable to prove substance against Berkeley, but he nevertheless complains that Berkeley denied, instead of merely doubting, the existence of matter. In conclusion, it is not a necessary truth that all sensible qualities belong to a subject. 'Nor is it correct to call it a fundamental law of human belief; if by that expression is meant anything more than an assertion of the universal tendency of men to liken other things to themselves, and to speak of them under forms of expression adapted to such likeness, far beyond the point where the parallel fails.'

* In a note, Mr. Mansel adds, "The real point at issue is not whether 4 and 2+2 are at bottom identical-so that both being given, an analysis of each will ultimately show their correspondence; but whether the former notion, definition and all, is contained in the latter. In other words, whether a man who has never learned to count beyond two, could obtain 3, 4, 5, and all higher numbers, by mere dissection of the numbers which he possesses already.'

2. The Principle of Causality.-Whatever begins to exist must take place in consequence of some cause. Hume and Brown regard cause as mere invariable sequence. This theory of causation confounds two facts. That every event must have some antecedent or other, is one thing; that this particular event must have this particular antecedent, is a very different thing. The uniformity of nature is only a law of things, an observed fact, the contradictory of which is at any time conceivable. This portion of the principle of causation is not a necessary truth. But that every event must have some antecedent or other is a necessary truth. For we must think every event as occurring in time, and therefore as related to some antecedent in time. Thus far Mr. Mansel adopts the theory of Sir W. Hamilton.

The analysis that resolves causation into mere temporal antecedents is, however, imperfect. To complete the notion of cause, we must add the idea of productive power. Reid was unable to meet Hume's theory of causation, as he was unable to meet his theory of substance, and in both cases for the same reason. He denied a consciousness of mind as distinguished from its states and operations. Hume showed that volition had no power to move a limb, for paralysis might supervene, and the supposed power of volition would be destroyed. Mr. Mansel seeks for an intuition of power. "The intuition of Power is not immediately given in the action of matter upon matter; nor yet can it be given in the action of matter upon mind, nor in that of mind upon matter; for to this day we are utterly ignorant how matter and mind operate upon each other.' Where, then, is such an intuition to be found? In mind as determining its own modifications. In every act of volition, I am fully conscious that it is in my power to form the resolution or to abstain; and this constitutes the presentative consciousness of free will and of power.' The idea of power is thus a relation between ourselves and our volitions (not our movements). Can any similar relation exist between the heat of fire and the melting of wax? It cannot be said that there is; and thus Causality, as applied to matter, is a negative notion. The only positive meaning of cause is either some antecedent or an invariable antecedent. Mr. Mansel (in this respect following Hamilton) draws attention to the fact that by breaking through the objective necessity of Causality, a door is opened for the admission of free-will.

III.-LOGICAL NECESSITY consists of the three laws of thought, the well-known principles of Identity, Contradiction, and Excluded Middle. The discussion of those laws, however, falls more within the province of logic.

IV.-MORAL NECESSITY. Moral judgments are necessary, as, e.g., ingratitude and treachery must at all times be worthy of condemnation. (For the theory of duty, see ETHICAL SYSTEMS, Mansel.)

C.-On Happiness.

The highest application of the facts and laws of the mind is to Human Happiness. The doctrines relative to the Feelings have the most direct bearing on this end. It may be useful to resume briefly the various considerations bearing upon Happiness, and to compare them with the maxims that have grown up in the experience of mankind. We shall thus also supply an indispensable chapter of Ethics.

Happiness being defined the surplus of pleasure over pain, its pursuit must lie in accumulating things agreeable, and in warding off the opposites. The susceptibilities of the mind to enjoyment should be gratified to the utmost, and the susceptibilities to suffering should be spared to the utmost. It is impossible to contest this general conclusion, without altering the signification of the word. Still, the practical carrying out of the maxim, under all the complications of the human system, bodily and mental, demands many adjustments and reservations.

If the enumeration of Muscular Feelings, Sensations, and Emotions be complete, it contains all our pleasures and pains. It is unnecessary to repeat the list in detail. On the side of PLEASURE, we have, as leading elements:-Muscular Exercise, Rest after exercise; Healthy Organic Sensibility in general, and Alimentary Sensations in particular; Sweet Tastes and Odours; Soft and Warm Touches; Melody and Harmony in Sound; Cheerful Light and Coloured Spectacle; the Sexual feelings; Liberty after constraint; Novelty and Wonder; the warm Tender Emotions; Sexual, Maternal and Paternal Love, Friendship, Admiration, Esteem, and Sociability in general; Self-complacency and Praise; Power, Influence, Command; Revenge; the Interest of Plot and Pursuit; the charms of Knowledge and Intellectual exertion; the cycle of the Fine Arts, culminating in Music, Painting, and Poetry, with which we couple the enjoyment of Natural Beauty; the satisfaction attainable through Sympathy and the Moral Sentiment. In such an array, we seem to have all, or nearly all, the ultimate gratifications of human nature. They may spread themselves by association on allied objects, and especially on the means or instrumentality for procuring them, as Health, Wealth, Knowledge, Power, Dignified Position, Virtue, Society, Country, Life.

The PAINS are mostly implied in the negation of the pleasures Muscular fatigue, Organic derangements and diseases, Cold, Hunger, ill Tastes and Odours; Skin lacerations; Discords in Sound; Darkness, Gloom, and excessive glare of Light; ungratified Sexual Appetite; Restraint after Freedom; Monotony; Fear in all its manifestations; privation in the Affections, Sorrow; Selfhumiliation and Shame; Impotence and Servitude; disappointed Revenge; baulked Pursuit or Plot; Intellectual Contradictions

THE ELEMENTARY PLEASURES AND PAINS.

77

and Obscurity; the Esthetically Ugly; Harrowed Sympathies; an evil Conscience.

As summed up in groups or aggregates, we have the pains or evils of Ill Health, Poverty, Toil, Ignorance, Meanness and Impotence, Isolation, and general Obstruction, Death.

Looking at human nature on the whole, we may single out as pleasures of the first order, Maternal love, Sexual love, Paternal love, Friendship, Complacency and Approbation, Power and Liberty newly achieved, Relishes, Stimulants, Warmth_after chillness, and the higher delights of the ordinary Senses. In the absence of any considerable pains, a small selection of these gratifications, regularly supplied, would make up a joyful existence.

There are various practically important distinctions among our pleasures. In the first place, a certain number are primary susceptibilities of the human constitution; as the organic pleasures, the simpler gratifications of the five senses, the appetite of sex, and the elementary emotions. Others are cultivated or acquired, or are incidental to a high mental cultivation; as the higher susceptibilities to Fine Art, the affections and tender associations, the pleasures of knowledge. While cultivation may thus enlarge the sphere of pleasure, it necessarily creates new susceptibilities to pain; the absence or negation of those qualities rendered artificially agreeable must needs be painful.

Another distinction of importance is between the pleasures that appear as appetite, and those that are desired only in consequence of gratification. The natural appetites are well known; to refuse the objects of these is to inflict suffering. Other pleasures, if unstimulated, are unfelt: the rustic, inexperienced in the excitement of cities, has no painful longings for their pleasures; not through the want of susceptibility, but from there being no craving for such things prior to actual tasting. Human beings cannot be contented without the gratification of natural appetites; as to the privation of other pleasures, mere ignorance is bliss.

While it is a property of pleasure generally to prompt to effort and to desire without limit, there are certain circumstances that neutralize this tendency. One of these is the occurrence of pain at a certain stage, as when appetite palls by exhausted irritability. Another mode of quenching the insatiability of the pleasurable is found in the soothing tendency of the massive pleasures; a gentle and diffused stimulus is quieting and soporific. These constitute an important exception to the law of pleasure, and give birth to our serene and satisfying enjoyments, as warmth, affection, and the forms of beauty suggestive of repose. But Fine Art also contains, and glories in, ways of stimulating unbounded desire, under the name of the Ideal.

A farther mode of classifying pleasures is into-(1) those that are productive of pleasure to others, as the sympathies and benevolent affections, and all the pleasurable associations with virtuous conduct; (2) the gratifications that all may share in, as most of the Fine Art pleasures; (3) those that are in their nature attain