Everything and nothingness

Nizovtsev Yu. M.

Everything and nothingness

(Adventures of consciousness)

Abstract

The book explains how nothingness turns into everything, remaining nothingness.

Keywords: consciousness, beingness, information, infinite, finite, matter, time, space, motion, the person.

Contents

Preface

Chapter 1

The infinite, but discrete information process, linking the active and the passive, as essence of Creation

1.1. About objectivity, relativity and absoluteness of truth

1.2. The active and the passive in the unity and a division

1.3. Information as the echelon binding the passive and the active

1.4. Truth as manifestation of essences of different levels

1.5. Manifestation of consciousness at the levels of the live

1.6. Things in beingness as a projection of the fragments identified by consciousness into Uniform

1.7. The course of development of mankind in collisions the true and the false in the conditions of compression of time

1.8. Inescapability of imperfection of the person and human communities as propulsor of development of consciousness

Chapter 2

About the condition of existence of Creation

2.1. Essence of Creation

2.2. Death and consciousness

2.3. Religion, philosophy and the true consciousness

2.4. The person as the hologram and a "worldly" being in Creation

Preface

The person is the strange creature. It seems – the mind is given to him to misquote and distort everything, spoil and punish himself.

His misfortune and happiness – this is what he can sense, and think, and comprehend himself simultaneously. All these features in total are peculiar to him alone. Perhaps sensing this, the sages of all time have recognized only the personality, and above it a kind of higher power, in part, to ensure that the person was not so lonely.

Nevertheless, on all reasonable questions about meaning of life and death you won't find intelligible answers anywhere. There are, of course, different views among philosophers, writers, in religious treatises, but they cause either yawning, or sectarian concern.

Probably, therefore the population more and more grows cold to process of knowledge, looking for only entertainments.

It is possible to live in aspirations to tasty food, harmful drinks, other pleasures, career, the power, money. Still it is possible both to do some fighting, and to plunge into mindnumbing job. But all this, at best, reduces the person to the level of an alpha male of the herd of orangutans.

Achievement of the similar purposes gives feeling of life, but doesn't allow expressing fully in vanity itself as to a being which is significantly different from animals.

Previously, it was difficult to publish a book with the answers to tricky questions, and thereby to question some foundations.

Now the Internet gives additional opportunities, though, of course, too limited: very much at once appeared "writers" – perhaps more than readers.

Be that as it may, for an example, we will raise couple of questions.

Well, let, the person is mortal, but after all and all planetary civilization too is the finite.

Whether long to some asteroid to brush away all live from the planet? Or the people themselves can destroy themselves entirely through the use of toxic substances or nuclear warheads.

So where all acquired – books, the ballet, music, science, equipment, i.e. culture and civilization – will get away? They will all perish forever?

Reasonable people will answer: everything passes – such is the nature of things.

People believers will tell – such is God's will.

However is not the answer to the posed question, but – evasion from the question.

Science only provides definitions, but does not determine anything in essence.

This impasse suggests that the world of things can only be as help for something, but it is not independent.

Accession to God, too, does not solve anything, because even in the heavenly tabernacles do nothing.

Means, some meaning is in brief human life and death only confirms this meaning.

Again, we take the issue of time. It seems there is nothing more obvious of this problem because we are in time, and it is clear – time gives us everything and, it seems, takes away everything. But where from does time come and what for it come?

If, for example, to tell banality in the form: time expresses duration and sequence of events of the world, or time is the form of current of physical processes, or time is an irreversible current in which everything occurs; these definitions don't answer the main issue – from where time undertook, who or what "produces" time, if produces, as well as – for what it is formed?

And after all still Kant fairly noticed that time isn't present outside consciousness. The science as if forgot about this, though up to Kant Aristotle stated the elementary idea – time, as number, someone has to count.

The set of other questions, on which still have not been given of definite and evidential answers, are discussed in this work, for example: Why never there will be perfection in anything? What is truth, and why it is so important – to strive for it and to liberty? What connects information process actually and how information correlated to time? Whether there is a movement as a first principle? Whether there is something external, controlling us? What is the reality given us in sensations? Than sense organs and the operating centers of any living being are occupied? Whether Creation is single or dual? Whether there is matter and if it exists, what balance of the Creation and why it is such? What is in the basis of beingness? How beingness is formed? Is there a purpose in this formation? Where from did the living beings appear, if they could not arise by self? Could things (inanimate) exist independently and whether there are they in general? What is consciousness and how it is correlated to inanimate (things)? What is time – uniform or accelerated, how time is formed and whether coincides time with beingness? What is the relationship between the infinite and the finite in Creation? What is the mechanism that keeps Creation from fall into the non-existence? What forms and how can be sustained indefinitely, i.e. – for which there are no forms of death, as well as which are transitory and why? What is the true meaning of existence the person and humanity and, in general, every appearing and disappearing planetary civilization? Why immortality for a person is not only impossible, but pointless? Why, like gumboil, materialists and idealists are one-sided?

Chapter 1

The infinite, but discrete information process, linking the active and the passive, as essence of Creation

1.1. About objectivity, relativity and absoluteness of truth.

If to assume that truth is adequate display of the reality in consciousness, or the adequate information on objects allowing the person to solve theoretical and practical problems, i.e. to developed consciously, don't stand still, to be in this regard as the free, then it is necessary to recognize by insufficient determination of truth as soon as correspondence of a thing to intelligence so as, in particular, during life the person every time after processing of information from different sources has no sufficient confidence in adequate display of the reality in own consciousness, and a lot of things he is forced to be taking on trust, and a lot of things to be testing in practice at random.

Therefore those correct solutions, which the person finds, is difficult to call as the ultimate truth, they are rather the result of his experience, experience of prior generations, its own ingenuity, its ability to produce some general, to develop new theories, to deduce regularities on the basis of which he can produce new experiments, drawing other conclusions, and etc. But all this doesn't give exhaustive and final knowledge of a subject.

Indeed, this definition can reflect only aspiration of human intelligence to cognition of things. The intelligence of the person is feeble, his life is short, and the real world is infinitely various. Some established patterns during cognition, flow of life are changed by others; new relationships, communications emerge.

At this the world of the human relations is more complex and unstable, than the physical world. All achievements of human thought don't lead to elimination of dissociation of certain individuals and different peoples.

The nature shows the force periodically, incomparable with human, easily breaking any human construction, as and the person, despite a present technical equipment of mankind.

Therefore the doubt appears in many minds: are there any comprehensive, full or absolute truths generally, time nothing can make the person happy, his life the infinite and cloudless and, at the same time, meaningful?

And indeed, we can operate by concept of absolute truth only concerning such banal statements as Volga flows into the Caspian Sea, and even then – in frames of the current life, when there are still seas and life itself.

The deepening of scientists in the microcosm, in space exploration doesn't explain the appearance of the live in this world, appearance of self-consciousness in the humanoid, more precisely, the appearance of the being which can understand itself in any way.

Therefore the definition of truth as full and exhaustive knowledge about such complex organized system of the world, believing such truth by absolute, absurdly on several reasons.

In particular, it is impossible to exhaust knowledge, inasmuch process of cognition so vast in the relations even only the Universe known to us is boundless. Besides that, process of cognition by the person is limited by five sense organs and opportunities of his cogitative apparatus.

Besides, there are also other measurements which, in principle, are unavailable to neither sensations of the person, nor his analytical skills. And generally, beingness, opened by consciousness in interaction with it, all the time changes, and these changes are irreversible. Changes of consciousness, from which depends quality of beingness, manifested by consciousness, are unpredictable and often arbitrary. If the absolute, more precisely, the fundamental truth nevertheless exists, it should be defined in another way – without binding to pansophy, which is impossible and senseless.

As for objectivity of truth, this concept is interpreted by materialists, for example, in the person of Lenin V. I. so: "… can human ideas have a content that don't depend on a subject, that doesn't depend either on a human being, or on humanity?" [1, chapter 2.4]; "For the materialist, sensations are images of the sole and ultimate objective reality, – ultimate not in the sense that it has already explored to the end, but in the sense that there is not and can't be other" [1, chapter 2.4].

Certainly, for the person and mankind objectivity of truth is manifested in existence of stars, planets, the person and his civilization; it is difficult to argue with this fact so how all this exists apart his will, and for example it is difficult "to force down" the Sun from an orbit, as well as to cancel all chemical and physical processes in a world and in an organism of the person.

However the person is only temporal expression of consciousness in the world created by consciousness. Each personal consciousness through the person creates "the present" or own time, the direct surrounding, own life which, naturally, depends on this personal consciousness, but single consciousness participates hidden in this process. It forms through the organs of sensations of the person "now" of the person, i.e. that what is manifested before him.

We will mark also that there is nothing surprising in it so how each individual consciousness in a holographic projection is the single consciousness, and vice versa, but each individual consciousness in the form of living being, i.e. – in beingness, is personified temporarily by means of blocking of the direct connection from its side with single consciousness. Single consciousness also forms a holographic projection of the eternal and infinite Uniform, the derivative of which is beingness.

Therefore for consciousness beingness is" the creation" of own "hands" from own considerations or form-building abilities, but on the basis of the passive from Uniform.

Thus such beingness can't be independent from consciousness; at the same time it depends from Uniform and can't exist without it, but each personal consciousness in coexistence (life) with own carrier owing to a temporal alienation from single consciousness with own side "falls" in objectively existing (independent of it) the world with the objects which are moving in space and being in time, and among objects of this world there are also similar individual consciousnesses in the form of living beings which anyway are forced to contact with each other, forming communities of this or that type depending on a level of their development.

At this, for each individual consciousness the distant external world in the form of the Universe, stars, oceans and all that consciousness in own carrier doesn't see directly or it is incapable to sense of all these objects, certainly, is an objective world though it is formed by single consciousness which represents also each individual consciousness; but any individual consciousness in human life, and in any living being, "is cut off" from single consciousness and therefore even own "now" it forms by means of single consciousness on the basis of the specific sense organs the living being.

It is clear from here that the appearing close world, or a surrounding of each person, his "now" too is not dependent directly from individual consciousness; any individual consciousness "accepts" a surrounding as it is, or as this world is manifested, although "now" of each individual consciousness is formed on the basis of sensations of the person, but the individual consciousness in the person "does" the own surrounding partly subordinate of itself only in the activities. Actually, for this purpose the world is "given" to each individual consciousness in the person. Otherwise, without this base, it would be senseless to speak about development of consciousness within the available environment.

So that this difference in dependences and independence of the world from the person, communication of the world with the person through sensations should mark and not to declare unequivocally about secondariness of consciousness, about exclusivity of the objective reality which is reflected in our sensations as it has done Lenin V. I. or to declare, as it has done Mach and Avenarius, about coincidence of consciousness (sensations) and matter.

The active (consciousness) can't be as secondary in relation to lifeless objects, or to the things, which are not capable to be reproduced, to the things which are not have a genome as well as the reality can't be exclusive, sole – the reality for each living being is its own and this reality is "scooped" by consciousness of each living being by means of the sense organs, which it has, directly from boundless Uniform with the hidden help of the single consciousness, to correspond to each living being, species which there can be a set.

Nietzsche, apparently, has understood, more precisely, he intuitively has felt this difficult ratio of things and consciousness (sensations). He, in particular, disagreed that correspondence of language (the thinking tool) of external and internal reality is truth: "What such word? It is transmission by sounds of the first irritation. But to do the inference from irritation of nerves to the reason lying out of us there is already a result of false and inadmissible application of provision on the base. If only truth was a decisive condition in case of an origin of language, and collecting designations of subjects, people were satisfied only certainty, – then thus we could tell that: "the stone is solid" as though the word "solid" designates something absolute, but not our absolutely subjective sensation!" [2, p. 3].

As for Avenarius in his opposition to an objective truth (which is denied by him) of value of cognition by the principle of the smallest expenditure of forces: "If the basis of theoretical apperceptions … consists in principle of the smallest measure of forces, the influence of the latter should be affected in austerity execution of the process of apperception. It, undoubtedly, also is impacted that the amount of representations of apperceptions is brought to a minimum, necessary for apperceptions. At comparative-scientific consciousness the aspiration to be restricted in case of an apperception perhaps by smaller reproduction of representations is manifested in needs of unity and in the requirement avoiding all excessive" [3, §22], then this approach is connected to operation of the organism which is aimed to an economization of efforts, but it hasn't a direct bearing on dependence or independence from consciousness of things.

As we showed above, all things in a projection of Uniform are formed by single consciousness through a set of its own particles and in this regard depend on it, but also single consciousness depends on things, more precisely, – on the passive, inasmuch it forms not things, but their copies on the basis of Uniform – without Uniform single consciousness would have no "construction material".

Each individual consciousness also forms own direct surrounding, i.e. the surrounding, which falls within the scope of his sensations, but with the hidden help of single consciousness and certain change by it of the mechanism of perception of things by the living being so how the pause between impulses from sense organs to the processing centers of the living being in the form of packets of information in force of physiological features of each live organism – because of need of the refractive interval, or the interval recovering nerve fibers between impulses – drops out for consciousness: the human brain doesn't manage to fix it due to the short duration of each pause.

Therefore before each living being (consciousness) after processing of information packets by the appropriate centers arise moving objects and they, thanks to the inertial mechanism of perception of these objects, in particularly, by the person, when separate impulses merge into a continuous stream, are considered by him as the objective reality which is given to him in sensations although each copy is manifested originally as motionless.

Thus, reality as the "short-range layer", as if "shrouding" the person in the form of space, time and moving things, is "produced" by each individual consciousness through sensations of the person covertly from human consciousness, i.e. as if automatically thanks to unity of each individual consciousness and the cumulative (single) consciousness.

Otherwise, i.e. without time, space and moving things in so convenient and even a colourful type of the natural phenomena, any life, or events couldn't be for the person although a "primordial" holographic projection has absolutely other structure in which goes the process of high-frequency updating of copies of all objects of holography projection on the basis of Uniform with further formation, except measurement known to us, absolutely other measurements and patterns of beingness which are unavailable to the person from his three-dimensional measurement but at which also time, space and moving things are available inasmuch information process of formation of time by single consciousness through personal consciousnesses, more precisely, the living beings, means formation of space together with it with copies of things in it which for each individual consciousness in the carrier corresponding to him, acquire motion owing to dropping out in the human consciousness of a pause between positions of copying of things.

It is also necessary to mark that inasmuch copying of things in case of each updating of a holographic projection of Uniform is carried out sequentially based on what is available in a projection, but with high frequency in so far as the changes of copies of things in case of each impulse are insignificant and bound to previous forms in a holographic projection. As a result, in each individual consciousness (the living beings) high-frequency updating is reflected eventually not by the chaotic, but orderly processes of change and motion of beingness with compliance of the principle of causality.

The term "existence" together with the prefix "co" (co-existence) each person intuitively understands as events and if to think further, "event" is happening to someone and to something in some space and in some time, i.e. in routine (this we call beingness). But division of beingness on time, space and movement of things in it happens only in consciousness of the person, and we watch this partitioned beingness personally.

However we know nothing about something, being situated outside our sensations, i.e. what we feel. Therefore is reasonable to ask: is there anything outside of consciousness (sensations)? After all beingness is "enlivened" only by the presence of the live and the term "beingness" means the being of someone in something. Thus, meaning of beingness as receptacles of things, apparently, consists in "a service" of the live, which watches, acts, i.e. not necessarily of the person, but surely – consciousness which in the highest expression possesses not only ability to feel in own carrier, but – also ability to understand, and including itself.

If mentally to exclude consciousness, "having left" beingness as a repository of things alone in the residue, it becomes as a non-existence. What's the difference, there is something there or not? All the same anybody isn't present there. If, on the contrary, to exclude things, having left consciousness in loneliness, it at once loses life – there are no things, time, space, motion, – there are no and the existence as such, so as consciousness loses a support and at the same time – resistance of something, and without a thing it isn't present a subject neither for sensations, nor for speculations, nor for actions. In other words, beingness doesn't exist out of consciousness, and consciousness is incapable to exist without things, what means the indissolubility of beingness and consciousness in the basis, i.e. – their unity. Means, in the basis – out of time, or in infinity, they make organic whole, and they can be designated as Uniform. It is necessary only to learn a method of their "output" from eternal and infinite Uniform, i.e. to try to come nearer to the truth which is secret of Creation.

But it is already clear that consciousness in beingness, which is the derivative from projection of Uniform, is certain changes of the passive by consciousness; Uniform is steady, containing in itself everything, to which consciousness can address for maintenance of functioning of the projection; from this it follows that one is connected with another.

Heidegger tried to understand it in application to the person. He declared the following: "… Dasein itself has a "Being-in-space" of its own$ but this in turn is possible only on the basis of Being-in-the-world in general" [4, p. 82].

Heidegger could also represent that without motion, more precisely, in our interpretation – without the conversion of process of updating of copies of things in holographic projection in motion in human consciousness, – the world would remain hidden for the person: "If being-in-a world is a basic state of Dasein, and one which Dasein operates not only in general but pre-eminently in the mode of everydayness, then it must also be something which has always been experienced ontically. It would be unintelligible for Being-in-the-world to remain totally veiled from view especially since Dasein has at its disposal an understanding of its own Being, no matter how indefinitely this understanding may function. But no sooner was the “phenomenon of knowing the world” grasped than it got interpreted in a “superficial” formal manner. The evidence for this is the procedure (still customary today) of setting up knowing as a “relation between subject and Object” – a procedure in which there lurks as much “truth” as vacuity. But subject and Object do not coincide with Dasein in the world.” [4, p. 86-87].

Without the internal, i.e. without consciousness in the person, beingness for the person, as cognition, is absent – about this Heidegger also ponders: “If one reflects upon this relationship of Being, an entity called “Nature” is given proximally as that which becomes known. Knowing, as such, is not to be met in this entity. If knowing “is” at all, it belongs solely to those entities which know. But in those entities, human-Things knowing is not present-at-hand. In any case, it is not externally ascertainable as, let us say, bodily properties are. Now in as-much as knowing belongs to these entities and is not some external characteristic, it must be “inside”” [4, p. 87].

Any living being senses the world in own way, according to the sense organs which it possesses. This fact is realized by Heidegger and he raises a question about the possible subjectivity of the world: “Is “world” perhaps a characteristic of Dasein's Being? And in this case, does every Dasein “proximally” have its world? Does not “world” thus become something “subjective”. How, then, can there be a “common” world “in” which, nevertheless, we are? And if we raise the question of the “world”, what world do we have in view? Neither the common world nor the subjective world but the world-hood of the world as such. But what avenue do we meet this phenomenon?” [4, p. 92].

Without knowing about the true structure of Creation, about "mechanism" of its functioning, Heidegger can't answer the last question, apart statements about a polysemy of the world, its diversity that in itself is banality.

Knowledge of any subject can't be gained in full so as it is possible to go deep into it infinitely. So the truth for the person can have only essence character on the appropriate thresholds of knowing.

However truth depends, but not on the person, as such, truth depends by his consciousness, that not same, so as consciousness can exist and without human body, inasmuch consciousness too is the material formation receiving nevertheless the organs of senses into the person. Exactly single consciousness forms through the organs of senses of each person his "now", i.e. – all human world.

Therefore all representing (being) originally is for the person at all not accordance of knowledge of the reality, so as knowledge, as such, still isn't present, but it is compliance to sensations after their processing by consciousness with the advent of the spatial-temporal changing picture of life, or the current "now", formed by consciousness by means of sensations of the carrier of consciousness with direct support of single consciousness on the basis of the passive in irreversible sequence. This process is characteristic not only for the person, but also for any living being, and it occurs automatically, more precisely, outside the comprehension of this process by the person.

Only this process of formation of "now" of any living being can be considered by fundamental truth of existing for all living entities, more precisely, – its essence. But the person doesn't stop, unlike others living beings, on this "picture". He, as the being, which understands himself, with unmeasurable needs and the infinite, more precisely, intransient aspirations, wishes to learn the world and to improve the life, for what he willy-nilly should penetrate into essence of things, "extracting" from them at each level this or that truths, naturally, – the relative, or adequate only for this level. Passing different levels in cognition the being, understanding himself, broadens thereby own horizons, defines stability in things and in their order under different conditions and anyway changes the own life, and, so, changes the own consciousness.

Partially Husserl understood this, but he didn't find the best solution as soon as to ascribe full truth to the timeless: “Any truth is not a fact, i.e. aught as determinate into time. Truth, however, may have meaning that a thing exists, that there is available some state, some change occurs, etc., but truth itself is above any temporary, i.e. not meaningful to ascribe to it the temporary being, occurrence or destruction” [5, p. 55].

However the timeless is the infinite, eternal Uniform which contains everything potentially, but Uniform can manifested only in time, and not by itself. Therefore this consideration of Husserl characterizes him as the idealist believing in existence of the intelligible, the ideal, the incorporeal, but all it is possible to carry only to a non-existence or imaginations of religious consciousness.

Truth belongs to concepts by means of which human consciousness tries to estimate authenticity of the events in order to not to wallow in illusions, the false, different distortions of information that inevitably leads to the death. In fact, therefore the aspiration to truth, doing possible existence of human communities is characteristic for human consciousness. And all events can happen only in time, even, apparently, the mathematical outputs and proofs, distracted from beingness.

Truth – not a determinacy of beingness and not a condition of beingness as Husserl supposes shifting "center of gravity" on beingness. On the contrary, the beingness, surrounding us, or existing entities in general is defined by single consciousness, but " beingness" surrounding any individual consciousness, or its "now" is determined by individual consciousness by the steps of own development, each of which leads consciousness to comprehension of essences at this level of beingness; in other words, – leads consciousness to understanding by him of not many steady positions, regularities, connecting the being objects at that level, which consciousness reached – that means the comprehension by him of truths of this level of beingness.

Truth is equivalent of beingness to consciousness in experience, confirmed in every case by successes of consciousness in the use of beingness, exactly by this condition truth is determined and goes to the existence. Therefore truth corresponds to a level of development of consciousness and in this sense it is relative and truth can actually be equated to essence of a certain level and conditions of beingness in which it is comprehended.

Numerous definitions of concept of truth affects only its separate sides, but doesn't penetrate into its sense. inasmuch classical definition of truth, in which the main criterion of truth is identity of thinking and beingness, rests against the fuzzy concepts "thinking" and "beingness" which yet should be brought into accord somehow.

Nevertheless, to truth anyway only consciousness can come, "having looked" at itself, at the surrounding and, further selecting subjects, to try to bring into accord with own intentions these subjects, most likely, changing them in own highest expression, than adapting of yourself under them.

Therefore truth in the course of cognition is always specific and depends on the level of knowledge and ability to put them, i.e. it is checked by practice, as a rule, and only limited is checked by favor so how seeming pragmatically superfluous and even unwanted for this moment of knowledge and skills can "flip" the world in the sequel, whereas the aspiration to benefit, to satisfaction of the desires, determined only by conviction (belief) is downfall of the person up to level of "consumption" only the useful that is similar to the animal adaptation to the environment instead of its conversion, and it leads eventually to degradation of the person. So that Pierce too narrows concept of truth: "A true proposition is a proposition belief in which would never lead to such disappointment so long as the proposition is not understood otherwise than it was intended” [6, p.242-257].

Another definition of "the father" of pragmatism Peirce pertaining to truth: “Consider what effects that might conceivably have practical bearings you conceive the object of your conception to have. Then your conception of those effects is the WHOLE of your conception of the object” [7, p. 331-346] proposes to take into account all "conceivably practical”.

Here, too, it appears a insufficiency of two types: the practical today may seem by one circle of things, tomorrow – another, that introduces uncertainty in the concept of the object, which also can be seen from an unexpected quarter – so appear inventions; besides, the practical is nevertheless mostly the useful, the utilitarian, excluding imagination, flight of thought, "mad" ideas, which are capable to change radically our life, and really changed it, especially for the last decades.

Truth in accordance with the growth of knowledge and practical application changes its appearance so how human consciousness goes from essences of one level to essences which are deeper. And in this sense truth corresponds to essences revealed.

Here it is possible to agree with Lenin V. I., which declared: “For the materialist the “success” of human practice proves the correspondence between our ideas and the objective nature of the things we perceive” [1, chapter 1.2]; with the amendment that "the objective nature of things," initially no, because things, which are independent of consciousness, are not exist – all of them, or rather their copies are formed by consciousness in accordance with its form-building capabilities and these copies are "given" to a person for his life and development, in the course of which evolves and changes his consciousness itself, which acquires a "transient" independence in each life of individual consciousness. Therefore, only for a individual consciousness in the person, which is "clipped" one-sided from the single consciousness, all things become independent of him during his lifetime, acquiring still and motion, change precisely in order that he could overcome the resistance of the medium out of things and other people with their own individual consciousnesses competing with him and could "compel" things to "obey" to him.

Except of the practice the stability can be criterion of truth. The stability is expressed in a number of logical deductions, virtually no checking, but based on known laws.

One cannot deny touch to truth of and by means of intuition, i.e. as the process of finding truth without the intermediate steps from the first principle to whom may be just aught appearing, inasmuch human consciousness cannot penetrate into "space" from where is taken all, that appear.

Hobbes and Berkeley till Husserl have understood this situation with the relation of sensations (consciousness) and things.

Hobbes detaches sensations with all their derivatives from objects, generating in us sensations: “And though at some certain distance, the real and very object seem invested with the fancy it begets in us; yet still the object is one thing, the image or fancy is another” [8, p. 1-2].