“Herein the chief point for our consideration is this: the higher power of understanding includes the lower, but the lower never rises to the higher.
“For the senses are capable of understanding nothing but the matter; imagination cannot look upon universal or natural kinds; reason cannot comprehend the absolute form; whereas the intelligence seems to look down from above and comprehend the form, and distinguishes all that lie below, but in such a way that it grasps the very form which could not be known to any other than itself.
“For it perceives and knows the general kind, as does reason; the appearance, as does the imagination; and the matter, as do the senses, but with one grasp of the mind it looks upon all with a clear conception of the whole.
“And reason too, as it views general kinds, does not make use of the imagination or the senses, but yet does perceive the objects both of the imagination and of the senses.
“It is reason which thus defines a general kind according to its conception: Man, for instance, is an animal, biped, and reasoning. This is a general notion of a natural kind, but no man denies that the subject can be approached by the imagination and by the senses, just because reason investigates it by a reasonable conception and not by the imagination or senses.
“Likewise, though imagination takes its beginning of seeing and forming appearances from the senses, yet without their aid it surveys each subject by an imaginative faculty of distinguishing, not by the distinguishing faculty of the senses.”
—from Book 5, Prose 4
Each level of awareness perceives in its own distinct way, and each level adds something further to the one that came before it, such that a more fundamental and more complete grasp is achieved at each stage. The degree of apprehension for the greater stages contains the scope of the lesser stages, even as the lesser stages cannot rise up to the fullness and depth of the greater stages.
By analogy, using only the level of sense, I think of the difference between eyes that can only see in black and white compared to eyes that can see in color, or ears that can only hear in narrower frequencies compared to ears that can hear in broader frequencies, or a nose that can only smell something close at hand compared to a nose that can smell something from a mile away.
A veterinarian once told me that a dog can’t see colors in the same range as I can, and so the furry fellow will not recognize certain patterns that are obvious to me. At the same time, let me give the dog his credit, because he surely feels that there is something wrong with me when I can’t hear that same whistle that he hears, or I am oblivious to that irresistible scent he has latched onto.
I swear, I think my cat is laughing at me whenever I trip over things in the dark.
Imagination includes the range of sensation, and yet rises above it by separating the appearance. Reason includes the ranges of sensation and imagination, but rises above them by separating the universal from the particular. Intelligence includes the range of all the others, but rises above them even further by grasping everything as an absolute and immediate whole.
I have little difficulty comprehending sensation and imagination through my own reason, and yet I will drive myself mad trying to comprehend the higher level of intelligence through my own reason. I can consider it only indirectly, by means of a likeness to what I do know, much like a man born blind can only conceive of colors from the context of hearing, taste, touch, or smell.
I was fascinated to once see a teacher explaining music to deaf children by replacing notes with visual images, and then having them perform a piece by rhythmically moving colored cards. He was using reason to fill in a gap in sensation, a higher power to define a lower power, yet when a philosopher tries to define the Divine Mind, he is vainly attempting to work from the bottom up.
I suppose all he can really say is that “This consciousness must be something like my own, but in a complete and self-sufficient way that is entirely beyond my limited range of experience.”
How does a goldfish see the world outside his bowl? What awareness does he have of me standing over him? I may think his reality is so terribly limited, but that divide comes nowhere close to the infinite expanse between my thoughts and God’s thoughts.
“For the senses are capable of understanding nothing but the matter; imagination cannot look upon universal or natural kinds; reason cannot comprehend the absolute form; whereas the intelligence seems to look down from above and comprehend the form, and distinguishes all that lie below, but in such a way that it grasps the very form which could not be known to any other than itself.
“For it perceives and knows the general kind, as does reason; the appearance, as does the imagination; and the matter, as do the senses, but with one grasp of the mind it looks upon all with a clear conception of the whole.
“And reason too, as it views general kinds, does not make use of the imagination or the senses, but yet does perceive the objects both of the imagination and of the senses.
“It is reason which thus defines a general kind according to its conception: Man, for instance, is an animal, biped, and reasoning. This is a general notion of a natural kind, but no man denies that the subject can be approached by the imagination and by the senses, just because reason investigates it by a reasonable conception and not by the imagination or senses.
“Likewise, though imagination takes its beginning of seeing and forming appearances from the senses, yet without their aid it surveys each subject by an imaginative faculty of distinguishing, not by the distinguishing faculty of the senses.”
—from Book 5, Prose 4
Each level of awareness perceives in its own distinct way, and each level adds something further to the one that came before it, such that a more fundamental and more complete grasp is achieved at each stage. The degree of apprehension for the greater stages contains the scope of the lesser stages, even as the lesser stages cannot rise up to the fullness and depth of the greater stages.
By analogy, using only the level of sense, I think of the difference between eyes that can only see in black and white compared to eyes that can see in color, or ears that can only hear in narrower frequencies compared to ears that can hear in broader frequencies, or a nose that can only smell something close at hand compared to a nose that can smell something from a mile away.
A veterinarian once told me that a dog can’t see colors in the same range as I can, and so the furry fellow will not recognize certain patterns that are obvious to me. At the same time, let me give the dog his credit, because he surely feels that there is something wrong with me when I can’t hear that same whistle that he hears, or I am oblivious to that irresistible scent he has latched onto.
I swear, I think my cat is laughing at me whenever I trip over things in the dark.
Imagination includes the range of sensation, and yet rises above it by separating the appearance. Reason includes the ranges of sensation and imagination, but rises above them by separating the universal from the particular. Intelligence includes the range of all the others, but rises above them even further by grasping everything as an absolute and immediate whole.
I have little difficulty comprehending sensation and imagination through my own reason, and yet I will drive myself mad trying to comprehend the higher level of intelligence through my own reason. I can consider it only indirectly, by means of a likeness to what I do know, much like a man born blind can only conceive of colors from the context of hearing, taste, touch, or smell.
I was fascinated to once see a teacher explaining music to deaf children by replacing notes with visual images, and then having them perform a piece by rhythmically moving colored cards. He was using reason to fill in a gap in sensation, a higher power to define a lower power, yet when a philosopher tries to define the Divine Mind, he is vainly attempting to work from the bottom up.
I suppose all he can really say is that “This consciousness must be something like my own, but in a complete and self-sufficient way that is entirely beyond my limited range of experience.”
How does a goldfish see the world outside his bowl? What awareness does he have of me standing over him? I may think his reality is so terribly limited, but that divide comes nowhere close to the infinite expanse between my thoughts and God’s thoughts.
Written in 1/2016
No comments:
Post a Comment