Knowledge of sensible realities thus
comes to life inside the tissue of experience. It
is _made_; and made by relations that unroll
themselves in time. Whenever certain intermediaries
are given, such that, as they develop
towards their terminus, there is experience
from point to point of one direction followed,
and finally of one process fulfilled, the result
is that _their_starting-point_thereby_becomes_a_
_knower_and_their_terminus_an_object_meant_or_
_known_. That is all that knowing (in the simple
case considered) can be known-as, that is
the whole of its nature, put into experiential
terms. Whenever such is the sequence of our
experiences we may freely say that we had the
terminal object 'in mind' from the outset, even
although _at_ the outset nothing was there in us
but a flat piece of substantive experience like
any other, with no self-transcendency about it,
and ny mystery save the mystery of coming
into existence and of being gradually followed
by other pieces of substantive experience, with
58
conjunctively transitional experiences between.
That is what we _mean_ here by the object's
being 'in mind.' Of any deeper more real way
of being in mind we have no positive conception,
and we have no right to discredit our
actual experience by talking of such a way
at all.
Pages:
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61