It is especially in Wolff's comments on
empirical psychology where his wish to show the usefulness of his
theories becomes evident. Wolff emphasizes that he has especially
found two different types of faculties in human mind: cognitive and
volitional. The study of cognitive capacities should generally help
to improve our mental capacities and particularly help us to find a
proper methodology for science. Wolff makes here some barbed strikes
against Lange's Mental medicine, which he dismisses as a useless
piece of charlatanry that wouldn't help anyone know anything.
Wolff's strategy for improving
cognitive capacities is based on his attempt to quantify all mental
capacities: capacity of memory can be quantifies by the number of new
things a person can hold in his mind at the same time etc. On this
quantitative basis Wolff can then make such useful recommendations as
that capacities of concentration are improved in the morning, when
there are still less distractive stimuli. Wolff's quantification goes in some cases further than with some previous philosophers. For
instance, while Descartes thought that all people have an equal light
of reason, Wolff states that this light varies according to natural
capacities.
The aim of the education of cognitive
capacities is to make one's ideas more distinct, that is, analysed.
Although Wolff does define sensations in terms of distinctness, this
does not mean that he would want to base science in some
non-empiricist manner, which has become increasingly clear. Indeed,
Wolff merely suggests that we should continue to analyse or conceptualize our individual sensations and so transform them into
experience. Wolff thus wants to say that experience is something more
than mere sensation: in a somewhat rasist comment Wolff even says
that Hottentots, Lapponians and Samoyeds don't really have reliable
experiences, although they undoubtedly sense things. The conceptual
analysis of sensations turns them into experiences, which then can
act as basis of scientific axioms.
Wolff appears to admit that the
cognitive capacities of human mind are in some sense unfree. This is
clear with sensations: we cannot choose that we'll see green, when we
focus our gaze on a certain piece of grass. Furthermore, in case of
conceptual reasoning there are also certain restrictions: if we are
following a line of reasoning, the conclusion isn't haphazard, but
follows from the premisses, perhaps true some psychological
necessitation.
In contrast, Wolff emphasizes that
human will is definitely free and capable of undetermined choice –
an answer to the accusation of Wolff being a determinist. As we saw
earlier, Wolff suggests that a person cannot will to do something he
is not motivated to do, but that he can emphasize some motivation
over the others. True, even the volitional part of human mind can
become unfree, if mind is slave to its own affections. Still, this
state of slavery does not prevent the possibility of a truly free
action. Indeed, it is just such a task of becoming as free as
possible that makes the study of volitional part of the mind
important for morality and ethics.
Next time I'll turn to Wolff's comments
on cosmology.
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti