Home
CP 1.265 Every fact has a physical side; perhaps every fact has a psychical side. Its physical aspect -- as a mere motion -- is due exclusively to physical causes; its psychical aspect -- as a deed -- is due exclusively to psychical causes. This remains true, though you accept every doctrine of telepathy, table-turning, or what you will. If I can turn a table by the force of my will, this will simply establish the fact that something between me and the table acts just as a stick with which I should poke the table would act. It would be a physical connection purely and simply, however interesting it might be to a psychologist. But on the other hand, as my hand obeys, in a general way, my commands, clutching what I tell it to clutch, though I leave to its better judgment all the menu of just how my general order is to be carried out (and so I do with my rapier, directing its point to move so and so, but how it is done I never know), so the table-turning experiment would, I suppose, show that I could give similar general orders to the untouched table. That would be purely psychical, or final, causation, in which particulars are disregarded. Meantime, one may note that the table certainly will turn, if I really and truly will that it shall without being too meticulous about ways and means.END
Here is Peirce in the 19th century telling science that it is lacking on the causal side. So too is Peirce. So too am I. It is part of the human condition to be lacking when it comes to explaining causes of an infinite variety.
I think the total body of Peirce's considerable work makes it clear that as a scientist he would cede the causal aspect of things to a Force or Creative Force that would correspond in many but not all respects to the Biblical God.
I do not believe he believes God could be charged with either causing or advocating evil.
We are only at the beginning of uncovering what Peirce thinks about psychism. But we know enough to sense that he wants to give it as large a place as science gives to the physical. And to regard the physical in itself as a causal agent seems off of his drawing board.
We cannot, as he says, be too meticulous about things we may not know or understand.
Werewith: fallibility and vagueness become essential to a finished philosophy.
Here is Peirce in the 19th century telling science that it is lacking on the causal side. So too is Peirce. So too am I. It is part of the human condition to be lacking when it comes to explaining causes of an infinite variety.
I think the total body of Peirce's considerable work makes it clear that as a scientist he would cede the causal aspect of things to a Force or Creative Force that would correspond in many but not all respects to the Biblical God.
I do not believe he believes God could be charged with either causing or advocating evil.
We are only at the beginning of uncovering what Peirce thinks about psychism. But we know enough to sense that he wants to give it as large a place as science gives to the physical. And to regard the physical in itself as a causal agent seems off of his drawing board.
We cannot, as he says, be too meticulous about things we may not know or understand.
Werewith: fallibility and vagueness become essential to a finished philosophy.
