When a
dispute arises, that method consists in auguring
what practical consequences would be
different if one side rather than the other were
true. If no difference can be thought of, the
dispute is a quarrel over words. What then
would the self-transcendency affirmed to exist
in advance of all experiential mediation or
terminations, be _known-as?_ What would it
practically result in for _us_, were it true?
It could only result in our orientation, in the
turning of our expectations and practical tendencies
73
into the right path; and the right path
here, so long as we and the object are not yet
face to face (or can never get face to face, as in
the case of ejects), would be the path that led
us into the object's nearest neighborhood.
Where direct acquaintance is lacking, 'knowledge
about' is the next best thing, and an
acquaintance with what actually lies about the
object, and is most closely related to it, puts
such knowledge within our gasp. Ether-waves
and your anger, for example, are things in
which my thoughts will never _perceptually_ terminate,
but my concepts of them lead me to
their very brink, to the chromatic fringes and
to the hurtful words and deeds which are their
really next effects.
Pages:
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74