GT Fechner About the causation Public meeting in celebration of Leibnitz days of death 14th November 1849 Today we celebrate

once again the memory of a man who was probably not as accustomed and able to set general philosophical interests with the interests of accurate research into new ways to connect and open up to the satisfaction of both. This may justify or excuse, if I permit today and treat in this place a subject of mine, who, precisely in the sense that common interest other than the special circle of research, which our society has set, however, would reach from one side. It is the question of a supreme law of the action in the realm of nature and spirit, herewith a supreme regulator of our conclusions in the areas of the entire experience, which I take to deal with here, one question that their general aspects to in fact purely philosophical nature, but also affects the interests of the exact researcher in deep eingreifendster manner as that which everywhere seeks experiential laws, on the one hand the question of a top general slightly from itself thrust upon, on the other hand, varied and often reproachfully forced upon the question whether he not what happens in everything and can happen at the same time comprehensive and binding legalism too much studied, more than what he should be looking for and can not find. This brings into question the freedom of self-play. But do not fear you, that I will develop all the prolixity and difficulties discussed this so many times and never completed object from here again before you. Plan to introduce such a place in the course of exact research, it is rather an attempt to eliminate it, which I would venture to perform here. Restriction under the following considerations to the laws by which something is really happening, as that may not always agree with those by which something should happen to even various laws allow both the areas of mental than physical events differ, in that, for example, the gravity, magnetic, electrical, chemical attraction, the insistence, the coexistence of small oscillations, etc., in which the association of the habituation, the combination of desire and impulse, etc. Many special laws may be subordinate to a more general, so all special attraction laws the more general that the masses aspire to in connecting them straight line sequentially move through, and all the attraction and all repulsion laws at the same time the general laws of interaction that the masses in the direction of the line joining them at all with the same motion quantities their distance Change sought. The laws of the Association, so habituation in intellectual areas are themselves already general laws, which subordinate special laws for special conditions, and to subordinate themselves still more general laws of mental action. Readily evident that the difference in the laws of the action as well with the diversity of circumstances in which they apply, as with the diversity of achievements, which

are determined by them related. The law of gravity is different from the cohesive law, provided that himself, this refers to significant distances of the particles to contact nearby; these are different circumstances with which associated a different success, and the various law precisely defines the different according to the different circumstances of success or relationship between the two. According to the laws in the spiritual. General laws of the events are not only those which are formally a wider range of laws, but also because this is associated with, those that understand real a wider range of circumstances and successes among themselves, between which they fix the relationship, and the question of whether there is a most general law of things, would therefore be hereby by itself at the same time: there is a law that all kinds of laws, and that all possible circumstances and all possible results which may occur in the areas of events, among them concerned? Now let's take on this question. In any case, can such a law thinking, and indeed one which comprises the material and the spiritual happening at the same time, yes, it can be just one thing as the allgemeinst any Act thinking, namely this: that the same everywhere and at all times, to the extent recur circumstances, also returns the same success, if not return the same circumstances, also does not return the same success. It is this fact which self-evident notion of a formally real and common law for the action. Because if somewhere and sometime could be something else in the same circumstances as the other time, just as would occur this case from the general legality, which is required, out, and they really did not exist as such. But if the same result could also have other reasons than once in the other, so stocks within this possibility lawlessness in the opposite direction, one could determine more, which would take place the various possible reasons for the given sequence by any law. To leave no doubt about the meaning of the terms I understand once and for all may all somehow provisions of specifiable material or spiritual existence in space and time, only the absolute location in space and time in time can not be a circumstance a determination of the existence be considered because it gets its certainty only by the fact that exists. The use of the word circumstance appears useful in that in our laws the nature of each event is related to the nature of that which it is standing around in time and space, in relationship. Insofar circumstances carry a success in terms of our law, we call them reasons of success. Through its unrestricted general and conceptual self-evident, our law is in any case highly suitable to assume a fundamental importance. Although one could also speak of general laws of nature, which, though included everything that happens, but not included in all relationships by still could freely within its general determination, the choice between different possibilities of successes and reasons. That very reason, however, would be less general and pervasive than the previous one, except the handles of his community so special would miss more or less than is legally indeterminate such a law. If but now hold some forced their liberty interest as to admit such an indeterminacy of the supreme law as the child at least in some areas, it will however be a function of the following yourself, to show that the most complete

certainty in terms of our general law throughout can exist without entry for our liberty interest by the bursts forth in this demanding to uncertainty about interest in a different location or from a different side of the law all the more powerful. One could raise the objection that our law is illusory from the outset, since for every event but I'm actually the totality of the circumstances in time and space as a conditioning one into consideration, therefore, of a repetition of the same reasons as in time and space of the action of the question could be. But then, could ever by any laws of the events of the question, since such repetition of cases and their circumstances requires. Law is what allows repeated use. At each of the events we have laws supponieren therefore the possibility of further lying in space and time reasons in favor of the immediate or to abstract the more, the further they are. Whether this supposition real admissible coincides with the experiential our probation law itself, which we'll talk right away, because only with reference to this condition, the probation is possible and can have meaning. In the case of its cogency but can then be under the guidance of our law itself, the success of pure imaginary isolated circumstances are. We can not really cut off from the action of the rest of the world body, but find out how they would actually behave Without this contribution against each other, as we see what takes place, the more they grow apart two world body. But the mere conceivability of our law does not preclude its still a reality or real valid unless the opposite is also possible. And in fact hinders nothing to think that the same circumstances led to different times or in different places also have a different success with it, the same success could also depend on various circumstances, for example, that two world body of determined given mass and distance so as anzgen today and tomorrow, or here anzgen, pushed off to another part of the sky, that two people or the same person may act in quite the same but different internal and external conditions. Now that the conceivability neither chooses the reality here nor there, it is important to look in the experience. Now admit that quite pure experience can not be make, because after all relationship still return success in any of these larger or smaller spatial or temporal perimeters just not the same circumstances, but they return frequently approached again and leave in the greatest variety of circumstances, always locate matching points, what can be also the Matching consult the consequences. And so we can say that as far as the experience allow to conclude, we can find just confirmed that general law. As manifested in the area of physical, as far as we can see, the law of gravity always reach the same circumstances in the same way here and in millions of miles from here, now, how in the time of the observations in our. Likewise with every other law of nature. While it may seem that, although the same arguments always follow the same success, but success may depend on the same of Various kinds of reasons. A string can be the same note, for example, it may be deleted, be beaten, plucked, ever put on the various ways in vibration; always alone we will find again that these various reasons but have something common, which shared the limited in success, and secondly, that we neglect the only dependent on the difference of the reasons different side of success. As in our case, because the same sound entrained

Community is the vibration of a string always stretched in the same way that the various successes but what we neglect is the fact that a coated and a plucked string perform their vibration but in very different ways and The Air trigger in different ways. Not to be extensive, we consider this second side of the law at all in the future only on special occasion, as the considerations that apply to the first page, always easily expand it or leave and are transferred to appropriate facts for bids. Our most general law summarizes Organic and unorganized in the same way and width, a factor which may contribute well to give his statement at the same time safety and importance, since hereby the equally confusing as confused controversy to what extent the laws of the inorganic transferred to the organic are the organic should be considered according to the laws of the inorganic, clears the simplest way and, if not done for the needs of the philosopher, but the exact researcher who requires a guiding principle for his investigations. It is in fact just a special, though very general case of our common law, which I utter in the set that as far as the organic same circumstances recur than in the inorganic world, recur the same success as far as not the same circumstances, not even the same success . But experience confirms this statement, so far as it is always present, and hereby also our law itself through one of its most general cases. The eye is visually according to the laws of the camera obscura , because so far the circumstances of its establishment, the one camera obscura is, the vocal organ's tones according to the laws of the instruments and vibrating belts, because and insofar as the circumstances of its creation are the same, the heart acts as a printing unit, because and to the extent it is set up as such, the limbs act as levers and pendulums, because and insofar as they are set up as such, and so in all cases. In contrast, the organic body produces substances that can be produced in any retort, and no pot, because the body is completely different set up than this; go in the nervous system processes vonstatten how they go anywhere else, because nowhere else are there equivalent means. Now is arguable whether such differences are due to the establishment of an essential differences of the organic and inorganic world, or what ultimate reasons they are themselves recyclable. But the exact researchers, as it may very well take care of this dispute in the philosophical interest, but can do without the hand of our law the consideration of this dispute in progress its research itself completely. It must in any case consider the organic according to the rules valid found in inorganic nature and treat, if he finds appropriate, or according to rules that have proven themselves in terms of our law, it recyclable circumstances therein, as shown by the examples given himself, he must for new, not so sure reducible circumstances as well seek new rules, as when he encounters new on Former nonrecyclable circumstances in inorganic nature itself, and then must also seek to unite the new rules with the old as much as possible under general rules, no different than he was already accustomed to do for themselves in the areas of the inorganic. The differentiation of organic from the inorganic, the arrogance, if you will, of the former over the latter, THEREFORE means nothing before the instance of our common law, which takes away even more about this distinction, and rise above this presumption. The character of the organic may require special success only in

accordance with, as he also carries special circumstances or means to cause them, and of course he does often and is even in his terms. But he does not in any relationship, and if it does not, he may require any new successes against the inorganic. But the other side of the matter is equally certain, as far as it is the case, it must also require new episodes, and the exploration of new laws for these new circumstances is therefore hereby not cut, but demanded. It really only applies these new laws again with the new circumstances to relate, not, as so often, to keep with the general concept of the organic, the question of this relationship for ever removed. Maybe you try the naturalist to wither this guiding principle through the following objection: it'll probably watch between organic and Unorganischem the equality of material conditions, but in Organic being fueled by an ideational principle, call it you call it soul, principle of life, purpose, principle, with , which is not included in the observation of the scientist and yet the success of participating, in the circumstances could be so organic and inorganic, probably appear the same externally, but not really the same in regard to the zutretenden ideological factor. Allows the transfer of rules from the inorganic to the organic to the observed apparent equality of the circumstances in each case will be inadmissible. But experience of the aforementioned kind show at any rate that, as things stood with the differences of the ideal between the two areas, as far as the material circumstances are both the same, the material success remain the same in both, so that those voraussetzliche difference of between the two areas, the idealistic conclusions may change in anything that can be drawn in regard to material success from the equality or inequality of material circumstances. The reason that this behaves as can find a variety of philosophical interpretation. One can, for example, set up the view that as far as the material circumstances coincide in both areas, the idealistic do it, but since you're a general relation of the whole, the Organic and Inorganic together enclosing nature ideas and the divine spirit recognizes, however, that as far as we are dealing with mere pursuit of material success in the organic and inorganic areas could abstract from the ideological factor in the same way, for it to pull in the subject of the ideal successes in both considered. So it really takes anywhere not into consideration the fact that a god reigns in nature, if it is only to scientific pursuit of the material side of nature, regardless of one but its existence as few will deny the existence of the soul in our body while you certainly could not just abstract of God and our soul when it comes to pursuing the ideal side of existence. This does not mean simply unrelated to put the spiritual to the material, but remove the material as the outer expression of the spirit of another approach. One may doubt whether this view is sufficient or completely feasible, it would be great Equipping require and do not belong here, trying to justify them against all objections, you may set any other view, however, but the exact researchers of nature has this dispute is not to worry if it's just to do it to ensure the safe passage of his research, the fact remains composed for him and asks him his point: if the organic to the material circumstances, the same are the same or not, as in the inorganic world, are also the material successes the same or not the same rules and from one area to the other transferable or non-transferable. Had this simple point always just held, it

would have probably spared some unnecessary dispute in places where it does not belong, and about things he should not touch. The intellectual field anlangend, which never exists without tangible or physical dowry, which therefore always requires Mitrcksicht, we find here that according as the people in the way their existing mental constitution are more equal and similar other circumstances, and their behavior is similar, so that at least in the experience is no reason to doubt that two internally, spiritually and physically, no matter constituted people would always behave in quite the same external events are exactly the same. What might find certain theories of freedom against this in some way but, of course, appears set to object, not yet touched us here, where we only pay attention to the experiential aspect. In contrast, one turns one, perhaps, that he was idle, because an absolute equality of all internal and external circumstances for two people it does not occur and the disputed nature of the case can not occur; equality always takes place only after certain relationships. But there is more or less approximations to this case, it is increasingly necessary to make him an ideal limiting case in mind, and that he never fully realized, even the basis of other considerations which we are interested indeterministic freedom will be, not in spite of our law, but by virtue of the same try to satisfy. As regards the examples by which one seeks to justify the assumption of a half sweeping legalism in the areas of action to meet the interest of freedom rather at the expense of our law, they can look closer poorly serve this purpose. The bourgeois or state laws eg rewrite the action of course, only in a general way and still be within these general definiteness free a lot of ways of doing that they do not determine between which they do not decide. Likewise, they say, it could with the laws of the events ever be. But in fact it may not be so well because those laws of action only a small part of the laws by which something is done and should be done form, the action is not merely determined by civil laws, there are also moral, psychological and laws of nature that will define it, yes determine much more than the middle, which would not be followed without those. And so will apply in all cases, that where certain laws in the areas of action can not succeed, other laws are there through which you can view the certainty in terms of our general law as completed, which sense but bemerktermaen still leaves something to be an uncertainty , which we'll talk soon. We now make some general considerations to our law. 1) By the same a reference is set between what happens in all space and all time, we can take as a reference identity. For example, when two celestial bodies millions of miles from here, to dress according to the same laws as here, and the like after millions of years, there is just something identical herewith between here and now and those distant spaces and times. It is hereby some stuff, Eternal, Omnipresent, Allwaltendes, Governing, acknowledged the world of nature and the mind-binding, and the consideration of this already to some, eternal, omnipresent, all-ruling, ruling on the side of mere nature can give us the existence a corresponding spiritual point, namely insofar as we ever recognize in nature the expression of a spiritual Waltens are inclined. It is clear the importance of this aspect can win as well as natural

philosophy in a religious relationship, but is our pursuit of this aspect of no further ob 2) If various circumstances always depend on various successes, lies in this side of our supreme law, the general principle for its particularity, and, if you statuiert forces as mediators of success, at the same time the principle of particularization of the forces, as that only through their law can be characterized. Indeed, since any particular circumstance leads or complex of circumstances when repeating always the same complex of particular success or success with it, one a special law and a particular, this kind of success can set up for mediating force whatsoever. In such a way to laws and forces can specialize to the smallest detail, and in fact has never been a limit in this respect. But unless related to continuity or be subordinate general the different specific circumstances, it is also true of the various laws and forces. Usually we do not particularly distinguish only the most special laws and not sufficiently familiar with the most common to speak of or to import it into consideration. We do not distinguish, for example, the laws of attraction for each other and each other spacing ratio of the masses, but they only consider united under the general law of gravitation, we know the general laws do not sufficiently under which the phenomena of light and magnetism combine, and therefore only consider these phenomena under the laws that apply especially. Of course, with this view, not uncommon notion does not exist, as if the various forces independently existing, real segregated from each other beings who are able to master the successes without being dominated by them self. Rather, as the circumstances change under which the forces act, the forces change, not conceptual, but in real terms by only understood always remain under the general law, which the circumstances before and after the conversion, and hereby the conversion itself comprises. For example, gravity can transform through their own action in cohesion by bringing the particles of appreciable distance to touch close, but summarizes a more general law of gravitation and cohesion as special cases among themselves, by determining all possible degrees of distance and proximity to the success , and therefore also for the transition from significant distances in close contact. If substances in the outside world still just the inorganic forces because inorganic ratios were subject, to enter the organism, not a new alien force beings is it about that the new successes that demonstrate to it, conditional, but the organic and Inorganic arrangements are themselves both just special cases of the general kinds of material arrangements, for which general laws must also apply where it is due, as the symptoms change when substances from the one entering the other arrangements. The formation of the crystal in the brine and the formation of the chick in the egg go under the influence of very different forces vonstatten, but this does not preclude that there is a law that determines how according to the different material circumstances, which in the brine, and which prevail in the embryonated egg, the physical education successes have come out differently in both, general law which characterizes a general education physical force, of which the organic and inorganic are only special cases. In such a way that they fall all partitions that you wont put so much between different

forces, but without that drop the distinctions between, you can drive any further rather than one is used to doing it. 3) Experience circuits, induction and analogy, in recognition of our law win a generalization and principled determination and security, where they are usually not prepared. For induction you in the foot on repeated experience has generally necessary. According to our laws, but enough to be a single experience completely out to vouch for the return of success under the same circumstances for all time and to establish a secure law thereon, and the repetition of experience is only necessary to some of the uncertainty and distraction of our sensible to provide remedial opinion to abstract some of the general laws of individual cases. The analogy anlangend, one usually closes indefinitely: Similar reasons will give similar results, but the question is: To what extent similar? According to our laws is completely determined include: respect to the same reasons, the successes are the same, so far, the reasons are not the same, are also not the same successes. This makes the Difference of cases is the conclusion just made as subservient, as the same thing. Most experience fallacies are based on a lack of consistent separation and detention of this double point of view, and the frequency of such fallacies has been reason that the empirical conclusions usually ever only a precarious security called syllogisms against attaches, resting on the principle of contradiction. Meanwhile, the experience drawn basically have a security, which itself is of our highest law the same, which has a similar meaning for the real field, as the principle of contradiction for the conceptual, if its real area as little as the reason field is a contradiction with the once- set tolerates, except that of course can search our law as a law for the experience of his parole general principle only in the most general experience. Error in application of the principle of course experience the same conclusions can be attributed as little as a logical error which the reasonings. We notice now tell you that syllogisms without consultation of experience circuits, rather than somehow to have the validity of reality, can mean nothing for it. Because I can indeed include: All men are mortal, Socrates is a man, therefore Socrates is mortal, but that all men are mortal, is itself only a matter of induction and analogy, without which the whole circuit would be built into the void. Thereafter, it can be argued that each of the safety circuit in the field of reality depends on the security and safe use of our common law. 4) If our law applies, we can create a completely unbreakable laws through the whole of nature and spirit world dominant assume, as is also in the interest of our theoretical research, as a properly understood practical interest, nevertheless, however, and hereby we arrive at a main subject of our discussion, find any freedom or indeterminacy compatible therewith, which may cause us to take any interest. The controversy between determinism and indeterminism is also still open, but it can be traced back to a deeper root where, if you still want to continue it, more a battle of words appears to be a dispute on the matter. Readily evident from the outset that our law anyway, that it would be binding on all

space and all time, for all matter and all spirit, but by its very nature an indeterminacy still leaves something to be, even the largest, can be imagined. Because it probably says that insofar return the same circumstances also must return the same success, if not, do not, but there is nothing in his expression what the type of the first success even at any of these places for any circumstances, nor the nature of the onset of first certain circumstances themselves somehow. In this respect, it leaves everything free, and we thought ourselves a supreme being, the world according to our laws creating and grading, it would at first then can create and arrange everything as it was, without being bound by any something, yes it would find in the law initially no indication what it could be based, and it would remain pure in its indeterminate will rejected. Just what would set it once, would be binding for all subsequent. It would create above all the laws of all things with freedom. Our primary law itself might be thought of created freedom, because there is nothing in his terms, which guaranteed us its reality. However, is not necessary to go back to the beginning of things to provoke or to find now so much indeterminacy in the world compatible with our laws, as one may think necessary in the interest of freedom. In fact, the successes are coming vorbedingt but only in accordance with the existing circumstances and be predetermined, as these circumstances are even old reruns of circumstances according to our law now. They are never complete. Every other room and every other time will always anew new circumstances or new variations of the old circumstances with them, including the always require new or modified new episodes, which by the laws that are based on the previously seen before elsewhere and not predicted are expected to be determined yet, or is it only as far as the Old or the New continues to receive, but it never quite gets up continues. The world is changing from place to place and evolving continuously in time. Consider, for example, only the formation of the earth from its early days through the various creations of organic kingdoms of man and the progressive development of man through. On this circumstance the indeterminist can make his whole doctrine of freedom, without any reason to do durchgreifendsten the lawfulness of nature and spirit demolition. He can say, for example - I'll let him speak, without even so perfectly express my real opinion: The people were first created by a divine act of freedom which, without being sufficiently self-determined by previous, but now acts determining for all subsequent . For since the creation of conditions of the people entered the first time, a precedent for the development of the people from these new circumstances there was, which only came with one of their creation. Under the same circumstances would now again in the future people need arise, but the law is precisely to be set out in their first creation and now exist as long as the world lasts. From all that had gone before the first emergence of man can not be adequately explained as a necessary, nor was it really necessary sooner, because with the new circumstances was really the only reason the new action to a conditional manner by anything pre warning to the world. Also, human freedom would be to take that. Any previous mental events has regular giving for the later, and so the human character determines the course of life more and more, if in some respects always return the old circumstances, but is in some respects but the new always on the Old addition, the old circumstances never repeat

themselves completely and ceases the freedom to still continue to determine one way or another, never fully on. In the always new entrants are always new reasons indeterministic freedom. The experience can be very well represented in this way. The character of the people really taking shape with the time ever more and stronger, as a result, and in accordance with his education and action;, you can thereafter more or less calculate what he will in future act under occurring circumstances, more or less the only reason because the future internal and external circumstances, never the past are themselves always more or less very similar, especially the internal circumstances are also often very little known to us. But what can make a whole new inward or outward circumstances of man is never to be calculated. Also, most of the followers of indeterministic freedom to fix a character without giving up the freedom, yes freedom by itself, in a similar way as we here, if not stated, but described. As each new person already has the whole previous history of the development of mankind behind him, he is of course also subject to all their already developed legalism, but he can always help yourself new moments to further develop them with freedom, which are decisive for the future. Also can view from general point of view than the determination of the individual, not so much the resolve of humanity already won again, as it retrain. This approach also can hold any accurate research so far satisfied by the same principle as the crash happens and you no new barriers are set by it. Because this is in fact been always been its principle not to make rules before given, but to seek out the given, and according as the world progresses and enter a whole new conditions, will they also have to always seek new rules and the old always extend only way to explain some of the new, as far as the Old yet received it. Meanwhile, the determinist can take the matter but also different. He can point out that in any case, much of what we are inclined to name new circumstances, only one such modification or combination of old circumstances is that the new successes occur as special cases in already recovered old rules, let the success of an innovation often calculated as a function of the general earlier gone before by a covered by old laws or composition or proportionality. And the possibility thereof is itself subject due to the generality of our law. Because virtue of the same will have to be considered not only for the individual but also the generality of cases, and if a certain space, a certain time, a certain control of the proportionality or composition proving to be valid, ask the full generality of the law, that they for all times and all rooms also remain valid. So our planetary system never returns to the subject of the arrangement of its masses in eternity all the way into the Constitution back, which had in some moments, but nevertheless, all motion is the same in eternity completely determined by rules which are founded entirely on already existed before. Least, reduce all matters to which we are here concerned with the success of sizes of dimensions, distances, speeds, directions, to compositions and conditions of all of this, and how to put together the causes, the consequences put together, the experience itself has proved that it is the case, and has taught at the same time to know the rules to calculate the composition of the causes of the composition of the consequences. For the purposes of the

determinists, it is now located, what we remark the planetary system to generalize, to say: All that we call new circumstances are such variations and compositions can be calculated according to rules which, if not from the found already seen before, but it is findable. From the beginning, all are given the basic conditions on which it depends, and so given that no new determination in the course of time, you may not see. It is not possible to decide this dispute experientially. Fact is that, for the determinist, the recycling of the new laws is to old failed by far and neither view is that, particularly in the areas of organic and spiritual, ever be able to fully succeed. Yes, it has become even more recently shown a circumstance that further advances as per this view. You probably thought otherwise, let it be everything in nature to compositions of elemental forces between one and traced another particle, and with the laws of these forces and their composition is the principle given to compute everything that happens in nature. But it has been shown that this is not so (see W. Weber in the treatises of Jablon. Society. P. 376) that in areas of the imponderable, which also intervenes everywhere but in the weighable, and especially in the organic, and perhaps as a carrier of the spiritual has a particularly high importance, not merely the particular success, but also the general law of success in the action of two particles by entry of a third, then a fourth and so also is modified in a way to comply with the must always be difficult, the more increases the involvement and the connection to the whole, has an influence, which can not be calculated from the composition of any details. Accordingly, it is also in the spiritual. The simplest laws which apply to the simplest conditions, ranging nowhere, also to be covered by the composition, which belongs to the involvement of these relations as a whole. On the other hand, is just as certain that nothing prevents, always, continue to progress in the knowledge of the laws that apply to greater and greater complexities, and that really continues gehends progress is being made in this respect to which the determinist can invoke the it will be clear heavy that any law then or so would change except conditionality with others through an act of free arbitrariness may arise. He feels a need, a binding relationship with all laws equally, as all that is bound by the law to assume. To discuss and fight all the philosophical dispute between determinism and indeterminism here is now avowedly not our intention. However, regardless of the previously led coalition, is our version of the object itself, a transmission route between determinism and indeterminism, which seems suitable to me to battle, not to decide but to settle, and I suppose this your attention even for a short time. It is in fact grasped, also recognized in the newly discussions held, that increase according as entangle the conditions or to a higher order, as is in accordance with the progressive development of the world at large, the calculation of the success of these intricate relationships more and more difficult, requiring an ever-increasing degree of development of the mind, it may be, that it is always possible to be. And common ground can no being calculated successes that arise for reasons that are complicated or of a higher order than the internal conditions of the being itself, but only lower, we

like this way relate to the spiritual or corporeal, which always goes together, since a more highly developed spiritual always associated with a highly developed bodily. A worm can never predict how a monkey, a monkey never how a man, a man never how God will behave, except for relationships, for which they are the higher self adequately, because unless inspection of each being related to its level of development, it can not exploit the assets beyond this something only in a higher stage of development has space. Thus, a person who is still on a low level of education can never calculate how he will behave when he himself gets to a higher, except for relationships in which he now agrees with the higher, the reverse is probably more likely that the person who gets to higher education level, the motives of his actions on the previous lower overlooked, even though it never completely. If now in fact the world is undergoing a progressive development, can believe that there is an impossibility simply in the nature of things, to calculate all the success in the world ahead, so far as the calculation of what is covered in the later higher development, a would require an even higher degree of development of nature already, which contradicts itself. So in fact remain a indetermination for the realization of the future are at all time, but it would be possible for the higher degree of knowledge gained to calculate the need for more or less what happened earlier. Yes everything that happens with the feeling of freedom in the world, possibly might just be such a thing was to completely predict the nature of any existing beings by just so that only one such development actually came into the world, which for the future the possibility of distant foresight related. There can be no question that an indeterminacy really is on this principle in the calculation of all finite beings, not merely an apparent, but a real, that is founded in the nature of things and of knowledge, but you can, and perhaps rightly, doubt, if any application thereof is to make the divine spirit and his foresight. If you think this spirit is developing as a child's mind, which in its stupidity can not predict what it will do as an adult? While there is concern us here to delve into issues that dissipate from the area of knowledge in the faith, however, since humans everywhere must seek meaning that does not understand the first principles of his knowledge with those he hold the interest of his faith must come into contradiction, but appears to be such a force upon right here, as a few words on this subject were included, with the restriction and the support that befit the occasion. We must never forget that despite all similarities, we may have with God, but also a huge difference to our side of the faith remains lie in the fact that he wears all the causes of action in it from the beginning, we did not. We grow and develop in mind and body under the influence of what comes to us from the outside, like kind of development can not take place for God. We may therefore undoubtedly, if we want to speak of such a the evolution of God, not as a foolish from the beginning child think this is getting smarter by learning are increasingly aware of what is the whole of God, a idea that would not be appropriate to the dignity of our views of God.But there is another worthy idea to bids that corresponds to the facts, as far as we are able to judge him according to the working of God, and yet again introduces another side of the indeterminacy in the knowledge of the future that we in some way in the

freedom of interest will always demand. Imagine a poet before, conceived the idea of a poem, until only very generally. While he initially all his spiritual power used in finding and order of the general principles of the idea is impossible that it already can hover as well as the specificity of the future version. Are general basics sorted right, so he goes to the special and growing into something special, but by writing at any time all his spiritual power under detention of the former general idea on the development of a certain new level of features, it float future not yet available as well. He will never have foreseen the most special thing he will take in the future in pursuit of the development of ideas. A human poet indeed often has been digging into the individual before he probably thinks with the general idea already to a single train, he will once attached in execution and applies the idea afterwards. But this is not a train of perfection, but the imperfection in the way of human development works. And so we can think that God in this way its working out in the whole world, so that the world gear is just only the external appearance of this divine thought process, for which one has already explained it to us so often because even. But then lay in the nature of things that, for the prediction of each new development level no way in the nature of things existed. If God thinks of it occurs already a and may be generated by the deepest thinking of the wisest idea out, but it's just not possible therefore, that he, with all his wisdom as it will result vorausshe because in the moments when he sees it for the first time, it is also the first time there. It is no different with the creations of the human inner poet, only that they do not have the same reality as the divine. Which does not foresee God can predict, will be able to predict the less one of its finite nature. According to this view, the deterministic view of the world now appears indeterministic moved so close that you can be trying to find it both reconciled. Because you can say: What anticipated by any being, by God not himself, after no knowledge accessible rule, at the time of its creation can be derived from nothing more than it can adequately is always as something in reality, was in itself indeterminable, and if the Admission of everything like enters into relationship with a sense of free will in man or God, the freedom of arbitrariness is a determined by anything pre warning. On the other hand, their deterministic viewpoint maintains this view but the fact that it leaves open the possibility of the mind could the necessity of what he was looking ahead calculate in any way as coming to learn about see in retrospect, having only to greater insight or development is reached. But herein also can, indeed the determinist must admit factual lying in the nature of things restrictions. A finite mind can by its nature, never overlook the totality of the reasons for the totality of the consequences, but pursue only more or less One in detail, the necessity of this and that for this and that relationships among these and recognize those conditions, and first indeterminacy remains even through our common law is always in the background last. Hereafter remain as the main difference of our, the deterministic and indeterministic

viewpoint linking view of the ordinary indeterministic freedom view only remains that it granted in our an indefinite and unlimited possibility is indeed asserted in advance of our knowledge of the causes of what we arisen with respect freedom, and everything that free will itself backwards always on, always special to track the hidden motives into it that no boundary lies in the nature of things, but only the boundlessness of the object itself, we get a barrier. If you say this and thus free will would still be something to be completely deterministic, he could only wholly as a result as it is just arisen since the trackable to indefinitely reasons thereof to be prosecuted, but also must be so because , so first and foremost it would be questionable whether it is cogent to speak of a complete determination, a Vorausbestimniung in itself, if it is for no finite nor infinite knowledge, and secondly, whether, if the name of the determinism still here wanted to apply carried forward view, not the bad sides that you complains to the usual determinism are lifted, for the old name, it's not, before we have to fear, but the same old thing: but this is not more here . I believe in fact that the bad aspects of determinism disappear, and that the equally bad sides that you can blame the one-sided determinism as well, both vanish, if one is only here attempted mediation between the two with the view in relation that the law of the divine world order as a whole was good, the evil which necessarily finite determiniere itself through the consequences of evil here or there for good. And the view of the world order speaks for such a supreme law of nature, the more so the more we expand and deepen the same, although a depletion not possible for us as finite beings in this respect. But further elaboration, is not the place. The exact researchers might in any case, in this view, we give here the test price, find the advantage that it, without actually indeterminable in what he can call his freedom to abandon the belief in something, but no bounds on the put braces looks to trace the motives of free action indefinitely, that he should never get in the furthest progress of his research to encounter lawlessness, can never caused such presupposed, but the further he researches, allowed the more hope to to deepen the knowledge of a functional and well leading the whole Law all, only that as of infinite depth will never be quite exhausting, so never quite exhausted themselves in knowledge and action. And so, after all, our supreme law is in no way may appear to conflict with the interest of freedom, if it shows that it is just both a strictly indeterministic conception of the concept of freedom, the same can serve as an exchange with the deterministic view. If, therefore, the assumption of a half sweeping legalism in the areas of action in that stated earlier, our laws contrary to the meaning in experience can be completely refuted never, because the experience at all has barriers, it is but for what we can learn unlikely , after what we must demand seem unnecessary. To show this, was a major intention of this paper.