梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ○ 賜 ★ 辛酔堀貧和鍬匈��梓囚徒貧議 Enter 囚辛指欺云慕朕村匈��梓囚徒貧圭�鮗� ● 辛指欺云匈競何��
!!!!隆堋響頼��紗秘慕禰厮宴和肝写偬堋響��
83 But even this limitation of popular sovereignty is not all。 The people can be sovereign only in the sense in which they exist and act。 The people are not God�察�whatever some theorists may pretendare not independent�察�self´existent�察�and self´sufficing。 They are as dependent collectively as individually�察�and therefore can exist and act only as second cause�察�never as first cause。 They can�察�then�察�even in the limited sphere of their sovereignty�察 �be sovereign only in a secondary sense�察�never absolute sovereign in their own independent right。 They are sovereign only to the extent to which they impart life to the individual members of society�察�and only in the sense in which she imparts it�察�or is its cause。 She is not its first cause or creator�察�and is the medial cause or medium through which they derive it from God�察�not its efficient cause or primary source。 Society derives her own life from God�察�and exists and acts only as dependent on him。 Then she is sovereign over individuals only as dependent on God。 Her dominion is then not original and absolute�察�but secondary and derivative。
This third theory does not err in assuming that the people collectively are more than the people individually�察�or in denying society to be a mere aggregation of individuals with no life�察 �84 and no rights but what it derives from them�察�nor even in asserting that the people in the sense of society are sovereign�察�but in asserting that they are sovereign in their own native or underived right and might。 Society has not in herself the absolute right to govern�察�because she has not the absolute dominion either of herself or her members。 God gave to man dominion over the irrational creation�察�for he made irrational creatures for man�察�but he never gave him either individually or collectively the dominion over the rational creation。 The theory that the people are absolutely sovereign in their own independent right and might�察�as some zealous democrats explain it�察�asserts the fundamental principle of despotism�察�and all despotism is false�察�for it identifies the creature with the Creator。 No creature is creator�察�or has the rights of creator�察�and consequently no one in his own right is or can be sovereign。 This third theory�察�therefore�察�is untenable。
IV。 A still more recent class of philosophers�察�if philosophers they may be called�察�reject the origin of government in the people individually or collectively。 Satisfied that it has never been instituted by a voluntary and deliberate act of the people�察�and confounding government as a 85 fact with government as authority�察 �maintain that government is a spontaneous development of nature。 Nature develops it as the liver secretes bile�察�as the bee constructs her cell�察�or the beaver builds his dam。 Nature�察 �working by her own laws and inherent energy�察�develops society�察 �and society develops government。 That is all the secret。 Questions as to the origin of government or its rights�察�beyond the simple positive fact�察�belong to the theological or metaphysical stage of the development of nature�察�but are left behind when the race has passed beyond that stage�察�and has reached the epoch of positive science�察�in which all�察�except the positive fact�察�is held to be unreal and non´existent。 Government�察�like every thing else in the universe�察�is simply a positive development of nature。 Science explains the laws and conditions of the development�察�but disdains to ask for its origin or ground in any order that transcends the changes of the world of space and time。
These philosophers profess to eschew all theory�察�and yet they only oppose theory to theory。 The assertion that reality for the human mind is restricted to the positive facts of the sensible order�察�is purely theoretic�察�and is any thing but a positive fact。 Principles are as really objects of science as facts�察�and it is only 86 in the light of principles that facts themselves are intelligible。 If the human mind had no science of reality that transcends the sensible order�察�or the positive fact�察�it could have no science at all。 As things exist only in their principles or causes�察�so can they be known only in their principles and causes�察�for things can be known only as they are�察�or as they really exist。 The science that pretends to deduce principles from particular facts�察�or to rise from the fact by way of reasoning to an order that transcends facts�察�and in which facts have their origin�察�is undoubtedly chimerical�察�and as against that the positivists are unquestionably right。 But to maintain that man has no intelligence of any thing beyond the fact�察�no intuition or intellectual apprehension of its principle or cause�察 �is equally chimerical。 The human mind cannot have all science�察 �but it has real science as far as it goes�察�and real science is the knowledge of things as they are�察�not as they are not。 Sensible facts are not intelligible by themselves�察�because they do not exist by themselves�察�and if the human mind could not penetrate beyond the individual fact�察�beyond the mimetic to the methexic�察�or transcendental principle�察�copied or imitated by the individual fact�察�it could never know the fact itself。 The error of modern 87 philosophers�察�or philosopherlings�察�is in supposing the principle is deduced or inferred from the fact�察�and in denying that the human mind has direct and immediate intuition of it。
Something that transcends the sensible order there must be�察�or there could be no development�察�and if we had no science of it�察�we could never assert that development is development�察�or scientifically explain the laws and conditions of development。 Development is explication�察�and supposes a germ which precedes it�察�and is not itself a development�察�and development�察�however far it may be carried�察�can never do more than realize the possibilities of the germ。 Development is not creation�察�and cannot supply its own germ。 That at least must be given by the Creator�察�for from nothing nothing can be developed。 If authority has not its germ in nature�察�it cannot be developed from nature spontaneously or otherwise。 All government has a governing will�察 �and without a will that commands�察�there is no government�察�and nature has in her spontaneous developments no will�察�for she has no personality。 Reason itself�察�as distinguished from will�察�only presents the end and the means�察�but does not govern�察�it prescribes a rule�察�but cannot ordain a law。 An imperative will�察 �the will of a superior who has the right to 88 command what reason dictates or approves�察�is essential to government�察�and that will is not developed from nature�察�because it has no germ in nature。 So something above and beyond nature must be asserted�察�or government itself cannot be asserted�察�even as a development。 Nature is no more self´sufficing than are the people�察�or than is the individual man。
No doubt there is a natural law�察�which is law in the proper sense of the word law�察�but this is a positive law under which nature is placed by a sovereign above herself�察�and is never to be confounded with those laws of nature so´called�察�according to which she is productive as second cause�察�or produces her effects�察 �which are not properly laws at all。 Fire burns�察�water flows�察 �rain falls�察�birds fly�察�fishes swim�察�food nourishes�察�poisons kill�察 �one substance has a chemical affinity for another�察�the needle points to the pole�察�by a natural law�察�it is said�察�that is�察�the effects are produced by an inherent and uniform natural force。 Laws in this sense are simply physical forces�察�and are nature herself。 The natural law�察�in an ethical sense�察�is not a physical law�察�is not a natural force�察�but a law impose by the Creator on all moral creatures�察�that is�察�all creatures endowed with reason and free´will�察�and is called natural because promul´ 89 gated in natural reason�察�or the reason common and essential to all moral creatures。 This is the moral law。 It is what the French call le droit naturell�察�natural right�察�and�察�as the theologians teach us�察 �is the transcript of the eternal law�察�the eternal will or reason of God。 It is the foundation of all law�察�and all acts of a state that contravene it are�察�as St。 Augustine maintains�察�violences rather than laws。 The moral law is no development of nature�察�for it is above nature�察�and is imposed on nature。 The only development there is about it is in our understanding of it。
There is�察�of course�察�development in nature�察�for nature considered as creation has been created in germ�察�and is completed only in successive developments。 Hence the origin of space and time。 There would have been no space if there had been no external creation�察�and no time if the creation had been completed externally at once�察�as it was in relation to the Creator。 Ideal space is simply the ability of God to externize his creative act�察 �and actual space is the relation of coexistence in the things created�察�ideal time is the ability of God to create existences with the capacity of being completed by successive d