Abstract
Some years ago, in an essay on Pope and the Great Chain of Being, I discussed the ideas in the Essay on Man, and particularly in the first Epistle, in relation to the question of whether Pope is rightly to be classed with the Great Chain philosophers. I argued that he was not so to be classed, but that he rejected the whole ontological a priori argument on which King and Leibniz base their systems, ridiculing the presumptuousness which professes to a knowledge of the nature of infinite Being, and of the conditions constraining the infinite and omnipotent Deity to a particular mode of creation. Man, being finite, cannot know – in the sense of fully comprehend – the infinite; being but a part, and a small part, of a 'stupendous Whole,' he cannot know the total pattern, function, and purpose of that whole. He can only reason within the limits of the range of his survey, piecing together by a posteriori reasoning tentative conclusions that seem probable.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
