Soykan,
A Proposal for the Classification of Objects
183
sensation that is a physiological thing is always a material thing to me
whether it comes to me from my body or from outside. For instance, I
receive a sense of touch by means of the communication via neurofibrils to
my brain of signals received by nerve endings from a pen in my hand. The
same is true for the senses of hearing, smell and taste. As for the object of
feeling that I feel in my soul, evidently there is no such physiological event.
Here, the situation is much more complicated. Not only is the cause of the
feeling a thing that
cannot clearly be determined, but there is also no thing
touching my body. Winning the lottery jackpot, receiving good news that I
have been waiting for, or a happy moment in the past that I am
remembering gives me a feeling of joy and cheerfulness. However,
sometimes I may have similar feelings for reasons I do not clearly know. In
my soul, my consciousness, I feel all the senses that I receive both from my
body and from outside; I cannot doubt whether
these sensations are present
or not. The psychological object is always one and same with a thing and an
object, whether it is an object of sense or of feeling. There can be no
intuition for a psychological thing. Intuition is the thing seen from a
perspective. The psychological object has no representation either. However,
a trace of it may remain in my soul and I can recall it in a particular manner.
This recalling is not in the form of representation or intuition. I cannot
remember directly a psychological object that has left a trace on me (my
soul), i.e. I cannot remember the trace directly. For instance, the trace of a
feeling of joy that I obtained in the past is available in my memory, but I
cannot remember that feeling. I can remember that
I had such a feeling and
the moment, but this is not the remembering of that feeling regardless of it
arousing a feeling of joy in me now. This feeling of joy is a new feeling; it is
not the previous feeling.
Communication of psychological objects is carried out in the following ways:
Communication about an object of sense experienced by both me and
another is exactly like it is for an intuition object. For instance, if a sound
comes from within or outside my body in such a way that someone near can
also hear it, I draw the attention of the person to it; I show it to him/her.
Communication is carried out assuming that the
nearby person hears what I
hear. When the object is not common i.e. when it only belongs to me, then
the communication of sense and feeling are of the same type. When I say a
word expressing a sense or a feeling that I have, for instance when I say “I
have a stomachache”, the other can understand that I have such a pain in
the following way: If he/she also had stomach pain before, he/she would
have also said “I have a stomachache”. As he knows what this utterance
means he understands what I mean, although he does not remember the
pain he once felt. If he has never had a stomachache
but had another pain,
bilig, Spring / 2009, Number 49
184
he would have expressed that pain. He puts the organ in which he felt the
pain in the place of the “stomach” and understands what I say. In both
cases, there must exist a shared use of language because the other person
has to know the use of language in order to decide that the same utterance is
used for both my and his sensation. As a third possibility, let us assume that
he has never had a pain experience. In this case, he does not understand
what I mean, but since he shares the use of the language he can use a
similar utterance appropriately. This is similar
to a person born blind using
the word “red”, despite having no colour representation. Communication of
a sense of pain as well as a feeling of joy are both connected to words; there
is nothing commonly perceptible to hand. We have said that a psychological
object is momentary in both types. My communicating to another the object
of sense or feeling that I have had before occurs by participating in the
manner of remembering the moment of feeling and also by participating in
the use of language.
5
I perceive things or events as intuition objects although I appoint them
values such as “beautiful” or “good” in an aesthetical-ethical sense. The
feeling of pleasure they give me is also a psychological object. In answer to
the question of whether they produce a third kind as
a mixture of these two
types, the answer must be no. “Beautiful” or “good” are not available in a
thing shown by an intuition object like the presence of a colour, a form etc.
nor as the presence of pain in a pain experience (a psychological object) in
those things to which I am appointing these features. This is the subject that
ascribes the thing that is not available in the object and that we call “value”.
For this reason, it does not stand as a different type of object from the
standpoint of its appointment to the subject. Though value judgments and
the things that are their subject have a great place in our life and an
important role
in determining our actions, the things they show do not
constitute an object classification. For the same reason, religious beliefs do
not have a place in our classification. As value is not a feature of the thing to
which it is appointed, there is no problem of truth here in the sense of
inquiring whether there is compatibility between the value and the thing.
All the objects we assembled under the titles of intuition objects, mental
objects and psychological objects are classified under the general title of
objects of sensibility as they are provided through sensibility. Among them,
intuition objects, objects of appearance and psychological objects are directly
objects of sensation, while mental objects are indirectly an object of
sensation since they are pictures of sensation in the mind.
Now we are moving to a new kind which we call an
object of reason. The
intellect or mind acquires representations and concepts from things outside