THE WILL IN NATURE.
to the effect intended and a causal nexus between them was impossible. But here it was assumed, that apart from the outer connection between the phenomena of this world on which the nexus physicus [physical connection] is founded, there must exist another besides, passing through the very essence in itself of all things: a subterranean connection, as it were, by means of which immediate action was possible from one point of the phenomenon on to every other point, through a nexus metaphysicus [metaphysical conection];
that accordingly, it must be possible to act upon things from inside, instead of from outside, as is usual;
that it must be possible for phenomenon to act upon phenomenon by means of that being–in–itself, which is one and the same in all phenomena;
that, just as we act causally as natura naturata [created nature], we might probably be able to act also as natura naturans [creating nature, a term used by Baruch Spinoza], and momentarily to enable the microcosm to play the part of the macrocosm;
that, however firm the partition walls of individuation and separation might be, they might nevertheless occasionally permit a communication to take place, as it were, behind the scenes, or like a secret game under the table; and
that, just as a neutralisation of individual isolation takes place in somnambulistic clairvoyance, so likewise might a neutralisation of the will in the individual be possible. Such a thought as this cannot have arisen empirically, nor can it have been confirmation through experience that has preserved it throughout all ages and in all countries: for in the majority of cases experience must result downright unfavourably to it. I opine therefore, that the origin of this thought, which has universally held its ground with the whole of mankind and, in spite of so much conflicting experience, in defiance of common sense, has never been eradicated, must be sought at great depth: namely in the inward feeling of the omnipotence of the will–in–itself
ANIMAL
