Affichage de 10 résultats

Typewritten copy of letter dated 31 January 1896. Apologises for not having written to her sooner with reference to her article in Mind on ' Significs'; explains that he has been very busy. Adds that he has delayed to write partly because he does not have any useful suggestions on the question of 'a Paper for the International Congress of Psychology'. Declares that he believes that the question 'is mainly one for logicians rather than psychologists and that it will not be very easy to find a mode of treatment which will make it an altogether appropriate topic for a Psychological Congress'. Suggests ' Interpretation as a psychological process' or some similar phrase as the title of her paper. Observes that she does not include psychology 'on p.25 - among the list of studies that has a peculiar meaning term correlated with it', and remarks that he thinks that there would be 'some interest in working out the characteristics of Interpretation as a psychological process'.

Typewritten copy of letter dated 11 August 1891. Says that her two pamphlets she sent him have greatly interested him; believes that her Great Cloud of Witnesses will be most improving to the reader, 'if it does not reduce him to a too depressing state of scepticism.' Observes that it is difficult 'to persuade a plain man to go through the process necessary to attain precision of thought': attempted to do something similar in The Principles of Political Economy, but fears that he 'bored the readers horribly'. Would much like to see Herbert Spencer's answer to her Apparent Paradox; refers to the belief in ancestral ghosts. If she wants 'to call Locke as a "witness", it would be easy to find suitable quotations in Chap. ix of Book III of the Essays on the Human Understanding, which deals with the "Imperfection of Words".' Also refers to 'Aphorism xv in [Bacon's] Novum Organum'. However, he believes modern instances to be more impressive, 'as it might be supposed that the progress of science had removed the evils pointed out by Bacon and Locke.'

Typewritten copy of letter dated 22 September 1893. Asks her to arrange for a search to be made of the room he occupied for some letters and postcards that he left behind there. Discusses Welby-Gregory's 'idea of "Significs" ', and asks what there is to be known about the relations of things beyond what is known of them already, what is the value or worth of things, and what is 'the ultimate End or Good to which all the processes of change in the world'. Says the last question is 'the fundamental question of philosophy', and discusses the likely reaction of the scientist and the logician to it.

Typewritten copy of letter dated 28 September 1893. Thanks her for sending him his postcards; explains that the latter 'belonged to a "case" in Psychical Research'. Returns an extract from the Pall Mall Gazette that she sent to him [not included]; calls it 'brightly written and instructive', and believes 'Miss Welby must have a decided talent for this sort of work'. Does not think that she has 'quite caught the salient points of Paulsen's work', but admits that this would be 'almost too much to expect in a brief notice of this kind.' Thanks her for her copies of Selections: will give one to Stout and distribute the others 'to persons who seem worthy of them'. Has read her paper and notes with much interest: thinks that he understands her view more clearly, but that the questions for which she seeks answers will really require a system of philosophy to answer them. Will have a clearer view when he learns the opinions of his 'logical friends' of the points urged 'in the other paper'.

Typewritten copy of letter dated 28 November 1893: Has received the answers [not included] of 'the four logicians', including 'Miss Jones' and Venn, to whom he had undertaken to communicate Welby-Gregory's paper. Hopes that she will find the answers 'not uninteresting', and helpful to her purpose. Adds that he is inclined to agree most with 'Miss Jones' second thoughts.'

Typewritten copy of letter dated 23 November 1893. Regrets to hear that her health has caused so long an interruption in her work, and undertakes to communicate to his 'logical correspondents' her thanks for their comments on her criticisms. Sends back 'by the same post the untravelled copy' of her criticisms' [not included]; explains that he intends to keep the travelled copy provisionally in case he has an opportunity of showing it to 'some logician of a different school', whose comments on it, 'from a Hegelian point of view', might be of interest to her.

Expresses her sympathy to Nora Sidgwick on the death of her husband. States that Mrs Benson encouraged her to send Nora his letters [98/64-66] 'which are of public interest' in case she thinks they should be included in her memoir of Henry Sidgwick. Explains that she has only the duplicates of the letters, as the originals are locked up 'in the "plate-room" at home'. Wishes that she could have told Henry of her idea, which she suggested under the name 'Significs'; 'now being practically accepted [as of educational value] both [in England] and in Germany.' Complains that until the last few months 'any work of the kind has been impossible to [her]', and that she has had to lose precious years. Refers to Henry's splendid mind, 'and the patient kindness with which, in conversation, he would criticise and rectify [her] inevitable crudeness'.

Typewritten copy of letter dated 19 January 1894. Decided not to send her paper to [Bernard] Bosanquet because he believed that there was a danger of his not understanding the exact aim of the criticism. Offers to send it, but suggests that if [Samuel] Alexander knows him and could see him it might be better to give it to Bosanquet through him. Is glad to hear that she is well enough 'to go on with this laborious task.' Sends greetings from Nora, who is in the midst of organising domestic matters, from which he says he takes refuge 'in Philosophy.'

Typewritten copy of letter dated 7 February 1894. Confesses that he has mislaid the copy of her 'indictment against Logicians'. Asks her to send him another copy of 'that part of the criticim which related to Bosanquet.' Undertakes to forward it along with the typewritten statement of her view enclosed in her last letter, and an explanatory note of his own.

Typewritten copy of letter dated 19 February 1894: Sends her Bosanquet's answer [see 105/45/8]:not included]. Adds that an Oxford friend of his once remarked to him that 'Bosanquet's Logic had the inconvenient peculiarity of not being intelligible in parts', and that one had to understand it all in order to understand any of it.