II, of his Evolution of Theology in the Greek Philosophers, 1904.
We have here what, if an error, is yet possible only to profoundly religious souls; indeed it would be easy to point out very similar passages in St. Catherine and St. John of the Cross.
I owe my clear apprehension of this very interesting doubleness in Kant’s outlook.
Thus, it is no contradiction to affirm and deny doubleness of the same body; both affirmation and denial may be true, if you take the comparison against different numbers or different bodies, or at different times.
Thus the Self-existent Universal Dyad is eternal: but a particular pair, which derives its essential property of doubleness from partaking in this Universal Dyad, does not at the same time partake of eternity, unless by accident.
Doubleness is apparently carried by all the pollen grains of such plants, but only by some of the ovules.
I only know myself as a human entity; the scene, so to speak, of thoughts and affections; and am sensible of a certain doubleness by which I can stand as remote from myself as from another.
This doubleness may easily make us poor neighbors and friends sometimes.
In this article I suggested the theory above given on the doubleness of flowers.
It is at the same time quite clear how the defect of the eye gives rise to a double visual apparatus, the latter to a double apprehension, and the latter again to a doubleness of the object of apprehension.
If such doubleness of form (or character) were abandoned, there could be no difference of aspects giving rise to the application of different terms, and the entire principle of co-ordination would thus be given up.
Doubleness is sometimes connected with prolification,[414] or the continued growth of the axis of the flower.
In this article I suggested the following theory on the doubleness of flowers.
Such is the result of doubleness introduced into anthropology; introduced into cosmology, it establishes Pythagorean indefinite duality as the principle opposing the unity of goodness.
Plotinos objectifies this doubleness of the soul in the myth of the two Hercules, in the next book, i.
There is a similar doubleness in the sun and the other stars, (having a soul united to their body, and a soul independent thereof).
Intelligible matter reappears[402] where we also find again the idea of doubleness of everything.
This doubleness of our primary experience, this having of objects and of antagonistic attitudes must be acknowledged wherever we speak of experience at all.
That doubleness has nothing whatever to do with the difference of physical and psychical; both the physical thing and the psychical idea are objects.
And if this doubleness does not hold for the immediate reality of pure experience, it cannot enter through that reshaping and reconstructing and connecting and interpreting of pure experience which we call our knowledge.
