THE INTELLECTUAL1ST CRITERION 123 



formally), the criterion of thought is absolute 

 that is to say absolute or final for thought; but 

 how can one imagine that this in any way alters 

 the essential nature and value of thought? If 

 knowledge works by thought, and thought institutes 

 appearance over against reality, any further fact 

 about thought such as a statement of its criterion 

 falls wholly within the limits of this situation. 

 It is comical to suppose that a special trait of 

 thought can be employed to alter the fundamental 

 and essential nature of thought. The criterion of 

 thought must be infected by the nature of thought, 

 instead of being a redeeming angel which at a 

 critical juncture transforms the fragile creature, 

 thought, into an ambassador with power plenipo 

 tentiary to the court of the Absolute. 



There really seems to be ground for supposing 

 that the whole argument turns on an ambiguity 

 in the use of the word &quot; absolute.&quot; Keeping 

 strictly within the limits of the argument, it means 

 nothing more than that thinking has a certain 

 principle, a law of its own ; that it has an appro 

 priate mode of procedure which must not be vio 

 lated. It means, in short, whatever is finally con 

 trolling for the thought-function. But Mr. Brad 

 ley immediately takes the word to mean absolute 

 in the sense of describing a reality which by its very 

 nature is totally contradistinguished from appear 

 ance that is to say, from the realm of thought. 



