Essays in Radical Empiricism
by
William James
(1842-1910) American Philosopher & Psychologist,
Founder of Pragmatism
Here follows the (almost) complete work of William James' Essays in Radical
Empiricism, transcribed by Phillip McReynolds. [ Not included is the last
chapter, "La Notion de Conscience," since the chapter is completely in
French and I could not be bothered to type it in at present. I will
probably scan it in sooner or later and am working on a translation.
Expect updates accordingly.]
Page numbers are from the Longmans, Green and Co. edition of Essays in
Radical Empiricism and A Pluralistic Universe in one volume, published
in 1943. Underscores bewteen words indicate italics in the original.
To the best of my knowledge this work is now in the public domain as it
was copyrighted 1912 by Henry James, who died in 1916.
There are probably mistakes here. If you let me know about them, I'll
attempt to correct them. In any case, no warranty is issued
as to the correctness or completeness of this work nor
concerning its suitability to any purpose whatsoever. If you accept
these conditions you may freely use and distribute this transcription as
you like, provided that you don't try to sell it or otherwise make a
profit off of my work.
Phillip McReynolds
MCREYNPA@CTRVAX.VANDERBILT.EDU
---
[Table of Contents]
vii
VOLUME I. ESSAYS IN RADICAL EMPIRICISM
I. DOES 'CONSCIOUSNESS' EXIST? 1
II. A WORLD OF PURE EXPERIENCE 39
III. THE THING AND ITS RELATIONS 92
IV. HOW TWO MINDS CAN KNOW ONE THING 123
V. THE PLACE OF AFFECTIONAL FACTS IN A WORLD
OF PURE EXPERIENCE 137
VI. THE EXPERIENCE OF ACTIVITY 155
VII. THE ESSENCE OF HUMANISM 190
VIII. LA NOTION DE CONSCIENCE 206
1
I
DOES 'CONSCIOUSNESS' EXIST?
'THOUGHTS' and 'things' are names for two
sorts of object, which common sense will always
find contrasted and will always practically
oppose to each other. Philosophy, reflecting
on the contrast, has varied in the
past in her explanations of it, and may be
expected to vary in the future. At first,
'spirit and matter,' 'soul and body,' stood for
a pair of equipollent substances quite on a par
in weight and interest. But one day Kant undermined
the soul and brought in the transcendental
ego, and ever since then the bipolar
relation has been very much off its balance.
The transcendental ego seems nowadays in
rationalist quarters to stand for everything, in
empiricist quarters for almost nothing. In the
hands of such writers as Schuppe, Rehmke,
Natorp, Munsterberg -- at any rate in his
2
earlier writings, Schubert-Soldern and others,
the spiritual principle attenuates itself to a
thoroughly ghostly condition, being only a
name for the fact that the 'content' of experience
_is_known_. It loses personal form and activity
-- these passing over to the content --
and becomes a bare _Bewusstheit_ or _Bewusstsein_
_uberhaupt_ of which in its own right absolutely
nothing can be said.
I believe that 'consciousness,' when once it
has evaporated to this estate of pure diaphaneity,
is on the point of disappearing altogether.
It is the name of a nonentity, and has no right
=1= |