POSITIVE PHILOSOPHY

THE most difficult thing is to know what we do know, and what we do not know.

Therefore, desiring to know anything, we shall before all else determine WHAT we accept as given, and WHAT as demanding definition and proof.

That is, determine WHAT we know already, and WHAT we wish to know.

In relation to the knowledge of the world and of ourselves, the conditions would be ideal could we

venture to accept nothing as given, and count all as demanding definition and proof.

In other words, If we wish to know an unknown thing, it would be best to assume that we know nothing about the unknown, and make this our point of departure.

But unfortunately such conditions are impossible to create. Knowledge must   start from some foundation, something must be recognized as known.

Otherwise we shall be obliged always to de-fine one unknown by means of another.

Looking at the matter from another point of view, we shall hesitate to accept as the known things--as the given ones--those in the main completely unknown, only presupposed, and therefore the things sought for.

Should we do this, we are likely to fall into such a dilemma as that in which positive philosophy now finds itself--and by positive philosophy I mean a general trend of thought based on the data of those sciences which are now accepted as experimental and positive.

This philosophy is founded on the existence of matter (materialism) or energy: that is, of a force, or motion, (energeticism); though in reality matter and  motion were always the unknown x and y, and were defined by means of one another.

It must be perfectly clear to everyone that it is impossible to accept the thing sought as the given; and impossible to define one unknown by means of another.

The result is nothing but the identity of the unknown: x=y, y=x.