CONTENTS.
ix
| 10. | It embodies an inadvertency of natural thinking, | 113 |
| 11. | The psychological position more false and ambiguous than the natural inadvertency, | 114 |
| 12. | The psychological error accounted for, | 115 |
| 13. | Distinction of science of mind and science of matter characterised, | 115 |
| 14. | Invalidity of counter-proposition III. Its origin, §§ 14, 15, 16, 17, | 116 |
| 15. | Many things are distinguishable, which are not separable, in cognition, | 117 |
| 16. | Illustrations applied to subject and object., | 118 |
| 17. | Further illustration, | 118 |
| 18. | Short statement of what this proposition contends for, | 119 |
| 19. | No opinion offered as to existence, | 120 |
| PROPOSITION IV. | ||
| Matter per se, | 121 | |
| Demonstration, | 121 | |
| Observations and Explanations, | 122 | |
| 1. | Idealism and materialism have their roots here, | 122 |
| 2. | Fourth Counter-proposition, | 122 |
| 3. | It expresses common opinion as to our knowledge of matter per se, | 122 |
| 4. | Oversight of self only apparent—not real and total, | 123 |
| 5. | Psychological opinion as to our knowledge of matter per se, | 123 |
| 6. | Psychological materialism as founded on the four counter-propositions, | 124 |
| 7. | Fallacy of materialism. Possibility of idealism as founded on the four propositions, | 125 |
| 8. | A preliminary question prejudged by materialist and by idealist, | 126 |
| 9. | Cause of this precipitate judgment. Its evil consequences, | 127 |
| 10. | How Prop. IV. decides this preliminary question. How Counter-proposition IV. decides it, | 128 |
| 11. | Symbols illustrative of the position maintained by the Institutes, | 128 |
| 12. | The same symbols as illustrative of the psychological position, | 129 |
| 13. | Different conclusions from the two positions, | 130 |
| 14. | Difference farther explained, | 131 |
| 15. | Another point of difference between this system and psychology, | 132 |
| 16. | Matter per se reduced to the contradictory, | 134 |
| 17. | This contradiction attaches not only to our knowledge of matter per se, | 136 |
| 18. | But to matter per se itself, | 137 |
| 19. | Advantage of this reduction. New light on the problem of philosophy, | 139 |
| 20. | Importance of finding the contradictory, | 140 |
| 21. | In what sense the contradictory is conceivable, | 141 |
| 22. | Matter per se is not a nonentity, | 142 |
| PROPOSITION V. | ||
| Matter and its Qualities per se, | 144 | |
| Demonstration, | 144 | |
| Observations and Explanations, | 144 | |
| 1. | Why Proposition V. is introduced, | 144
|
