Philosophy, in consequence of the new relation in which it has been placed, cannot of necessity be anything but the methodological moment of historiography: a dilucidation of the categories constitutive of historical judgments7, or of the concepts that direct historical interpretation8. And since historiography has for content the concrete life of the spirit, and this life is life of imagination and of thought, of action and of morality (or of something else, if anything else can be thought of), and in this variety of its forms remains9 always one, the dilucidation moves in distinguishing between ?sthetic and logic5, between economic and ethic10, uniting and dissolving them all in the philosophy of the spirit. If a philosophical11 problem shows itself to be altogether sterile12 for the historical judgment6, we have there the proof that such problem is otiose13, badly stated, and in reality does not exist. If the solution of a problem—that is to say, of a philosophical proposition—instead[Pg 152] of making history more intelligible14, leaves it obscure or confounds it with others, or leaps over it and lightly condemns15 or negates16 it, we have there the proof that such proposition and the philosophy with which it is connected are arbitrary, though it may preserve interest in other respects, as a manifestation18 of sentiment or of imagination.
The definition of philosophy as 'methodology' is not at first exempt19 from doubts, even on the part of one ready to accept in general the tendency that it represents; because philosophy and methodology are terms often contrasted, and a philosophy that leads to a methodology is apt to be tainted20 with empiricism. But certainly the methodology of which we are here speaking is not at all empirical; indeed, it appears just for the purpose of correcting and taking the place of the empirical methodology of professional historians and of other such specialists in all that greater part of it where it is a true and proper, though defective21, attempt toward the philosophical solution of the theoretical problems raised by the study of history, or toward philosophical methodology and philosophy as methodology.
If, however, the above-mentioned dispute is settled as soon as stated, this cannot be said of another, where our position finds itself opposed to a widely diffused22 and ancient conception of philosophy as the solver of the mystery of the universe, knowledge of ultimate reality, revelation of the world of noumena, which is held to be beyond the world of phenomena23, in which we move in ordinary life and in which history also moves. This is not the place to give the history of that idea; but we must at least say this, that its origin is religious or mythological24, and that it persisted even[Pg 153] among those philosophers who were most successful in directing thought toward our earth as the sole reality, and initiated25 the new philosophy as methodology of the judgment or of historical knowledge. It persisted in Kant, who admitted it as the limit of his criticism; it persisted in Hegel, who framed his subtle researches in logic and philosophy of the spirit in a sort of mythology26 of the Idea.
Nevertheless, the diversity of the two conceptions manifested itself in an ever-increasing ratio, finding expression in various formulas of the nineteenth century, such as psychology27 against metaphysic, a philosophy of experience and immanence, aprioristic against transcendental philosophy, positivism against idealism; and although the polemic29 was as a rule ill conducted, going beyond the mark and ending by unconsciously embracing that very metaphysic, transcendency, and apriority, that very abstract idealism, which it had set out to combat, the sentiment that inspired it was legitimate30. And the philosophy of methodology has made it its own, has combated the same adversary31 with better arms, has certainly insisted upon a psychological view, but a speculative32 psychological view, immanent in history, but dialectically immanent, differing in this from positivism, that while the latter made necessary the contingent33, it made the contingent necessary, thus affirming the right of thought to the hegemony. Such a philosophy is just philosophy as history (and so history as philosophy), and the determination of the philosophical moment in the purely34 categorical and methodological moment.
The greater vigour35 of this conception in respect to the opposite, the superiority of philosophy as methodology over philosophy as metaphysic, is shown by the capacity of the former to solve the problems of the latter by[Pg 154] criticizing them and pointing out their origin. Metaphysic, on the other hand, is incapable36 of solving not only the problems of methodology, but even its own problems, without having recourse to the fantastic and arbitrary. Thus questions as to the reality of the external world, of soul-substance, of the unknowable, of dualisms and of antitheses37, and so forth38, have disappeared in gnoseological doctrines39, which have substituted better conceptions for those which we formerly41 possessed42 concerning the logic of the sciences, explaining those questions as eternally renascent43 aspects of the dialectic or phenomenology of knowledge.
The view of philosophy as metaphysic is, however, so inveterate44 and so tenacious45 that it is not surprising that it should still give some sign of life in the minds of those who have set themselves free of it in general, but have not applied46 themselves to eradicating47 it in all its particulars, nor closed all the doors by which it may return in a more or less unexpected manner. And if we rarely find it openly and directly displayed now, we may yet discern or suspect it in one or other of its aspects or attitudes, persisting like kinks of the mind, or unconscious preconceptions, which threaten to drive philosophy as methodology back into the wrong path, and to prepare the return, though but for a brief period, of the metaphysic that has been superseded48.
It seems to me opportune49 to provide here a clear statement of some of these preconceptions, tendencies, and habits, pointing out the errors which they contain and entail50.
First of all the survivals of the past that are still common comes the view of philosophy as having a fundamental problem to solve. Now the conception of a fundamental problem is intrinsically at variance51 with[Pg 155] that of philosophy as history, and with the treatment of philosophy as methodology of history, which posits52, and cannot do otherwise than posit2, the infinity53 of philosophical problems, all certainly connected with one another, but not one of which can be considered fundamental, for just the same reason that no single part of an organism is the foundation of all the others, but each one is in its turn foundation and founded. If, indeed, methodology take the substance of its problems from history, history in its most modest but concrete form of history of ourselves, of each one of us as an individual, this shows us that we pass on from one to another particular philosophical problem at the promptings of our life as it is lived, and that one or the other group or class of problems holds the field or has especial interest for us, according to the epochs of our life. And we find the same to be the case if we look at the wider but less definite spectacle afforded by the already mentioned general history of philosophy—that is to say, that according to times and peoples, philosophical problems relating sometimes to morality, sometimes to politics, to religion, or to the natural sciences and mathematics, have in turn the upper hand. Every particular philosophical problem has been a problem of the whole of philosophy, either openly or by inference, but we never meet with a general problem of philosophy, owing to the contradiction thereby55 implied. And if there does seem to be one (and it certainly does seem so), it is really a question of appearances, due to the fact that modern philosophy, which comes to us from the Middle Ages and was elaborated during the religious struggles of the Renaissance56, has preserved a strong imprint57 of theology in its didactic form, not less than in the psychological disposition58 of the greater part of those addicted59 to it.[Pg 156] Hence arises the fundamental and almost unique importance usurped60 by the problem of thought and being, which after all was nothing more than the old problem of this world and the next, of earth and heaven, in a critical and gnoseological form. But those who destroyed or who initiated the destruction of heaven and of the other world and of transcendental philosophy by immanent philosophy began at the same moment to corrode61 the conception of a fundamental problem, although they were not fully62 aware of this (for we have said above that they remained trammelled in the philosophy of the Thing in Itself or in the Mythology of the Idea). That problem was rightly fundamental for religious spirits, who held that the whole intellectual and practical dominion63 of the world was nothing, unless they had saved their own souls or their own thought in another world, in the knowledge of a world of noumena and reality. But such it was not destined64 to remain for the philosophers, henceforth restricted to the world alone or to nature, which has no skin and no kernel65 and is all of a piece. What would happen were we to resume belief in a fundamental problem, dominating all others? The other problems would either have to be considered as all dependent upon it and therefore solved with it, or as problems no longer philosophical but empirical. That is to say, all the problems appearing every day anew in science and life would lose their value, either becoming a tautology66 of the fundamental solution or being committed to empirical treatment. Thus the distinction between philosophy and methodology, between metaphysic and philosophy of the spirit, would reappear, the first transcendental as regards the second, the second aphilosophical as regards the first.
[Pg 157]
Another view, arising from the old metaphysical conception of the function of philosophy, leads to the rejection67 of distinction in favour of unity, thus conforming to the theological conception that all distinctions are unified68 by absorption in God, and to the religious point of view, which forgets the world and its necessities in the vision of God. From this ensues a disposition which may be described as something between indifferent, accommodating, or weak, in respect of particular problems, and the pernicious doctrine40 of the double faculty69 is almost tacitly renewed, that is, of intellectual intuition or other superior cognoscitive faculty, peculiar70 to the philosopher and leading to the vision of true reality, and of criticism or thought prone71 to interest itself in the contingent and thus greatly inferior in degree and free to proceed with a lack of speculative rigour not permissible72 in the other. Such a disposition led to the worst possible consequences in the philosophical treatises of the Hegelian school, where the disciples73 (differing from the master) generally gave evidence of having meditated74 but little or not at all upon the problems of the various spiritual forms, freely accepting vulgar opinions concerning them, or engaging in them with the indifference75 of men sure of the essential, and therefore cutting and mutilating them without pity, in order to force them into their pre-established schemes with all haste, thus getting rid of difficulties by means of this illusory arrangement. Hence the emptiness and tiresomeness76 of their philosophies, from which the historian, or the man whose attention is directed to the understanding of the particular and the concrete, failed to learn anything that could be of use to him in the direction of his own studies and in the clearer formulation of his own judgments. And since the mythology of the idea[Pg 158] reappeared in positivism as mythology of evolution, here too particular problems (which are indeed the only philosophical problems) received merely schematic and empty treatment and did not progress at all. Philosophy as history and methodology of history restores honour to the virtue77 of acuteness or discernment, which the theological unitarianism of metaphysic tended to depreciate78: discernment, which is prosaic79 but severe, hard and laborious80 but prolific81, which sometimes assumes the unsympathetic aspect of scholasticism and pedantry82, but is also of use in this aspect, like every discipline, and holds that the neglect of distinction for unity is also intimately opposed to the conception of philosophy as history.
A third tendency (I beg to be allowed to proceed by enumeration83 of the various sides of the same mental attitude for reasons of convenience), a third tendency also seeks the definitive84 philosophy, untaught by the historical fact that no philosophy has ever been definitive or has set a limit to thought, or has ever been thoroughly85 convinced that the perpetual changing of philosophy with the world which perpetually changes is not by any means a defect, but is the nature itself of thought and reality. Or, rather, such teaching, and the proposition that follows it, do not fail altogether of acceptance, and they are led to believe that the spirit, ever growing upon itself, produces thoughts and systems that are ever new. But since they have retained the presupposition of a fundamental problem which (as we have said) substantially consists of the ancient problem of religion alone, and each problem well determined86 implies a single solution, the solution given of the 'fundamental problem' naturally claims to be the definitive solution of the problem of philosophy itself.[Pg 159] A new solution could not appear without a new problem (owing to the logical unity of problem and solution); but that problem, which is superior to all the others, is on the contrary the only one. Thus a definitive philosophy, assumed in the conception of the fundamental problem, is at variance with historical experience, and more irreconcilably87, because in a more evidently logical manner, with philosophy as history, which, admitting infinite problems, denies the claim for and the expectation of a definitive philosophy. Every philosophy is definitive for the problem which it solves, but not for the one that appears immediately afterward88, at the foot of the first, nor for the other problems which will arise from the solution of this. To close the series would be to turn from philosophy to religion and to rest in God.
Indeed, the fourth preconception, which we now proceed to state, and which links itself with the preceding, and, together with all the preceding, to the theological nature of the old metaphysic, concerns the figure of the philosopher, as Buddha89 or the Awakened90 One, who posits himself as superior to others (and to himself in the moments when he is not a philosopher), because he holds himself to be free from human passions, illusions, and agitations91 by means of philosophy. This is the case with the believer, who fixes his mind upon God and shakes off earthly cares, like the lover, who feels himself blessed in the possession of the beloved and defies the whole world. But the world soon takes its revenge both upon the believer and the lover, and does not fail to insist upon its rights. Such an illusion is impossible for the philosophical historian, who differs from the other in feeling himself irresistibly92 involved in the course of history, as at once both subject and object, and who is[Pg 160] therefore led to negate17 felicity or beatitude, as he negates every other abstraction (because, as has been well said, le bonheur est le contraire de la sensation de vivre), and to accept life as it is, as joy that overcomes sorrow and perpetually produces new sorrows and new unstable93 joys. And history, which he thinks as the only truth, is the work of tireless thought, which conditions practical work, as practical work conditions the new work of thought. Thus the primacy formerly attributed to the contemplative life is now transferred not to active life, but to life in its integrity, which is at once thought and action. And every man is a philosopher (in his circle, however wide or narrow it may appear), and every philosopher is a man, indissolubly linked to the conditions of human life, which it is not given to anyone to transcend28. The mystical or apocalyptic94 philosopher of the Gr?co-Roman decadence95 was well able to separate himself from the world: the great thinkers, like Hegel, who inaugurated the epoch54 of modern philosophy, although they denied the primacy of the abstract contemplative life, were liable to fall back into the error of belief in this supremacy96 and to conceive a sphere of absolute spirit, a process of liberation through art, religion, and philosophy, as a means of reaching it; but the once sublime97 figure of the philosopher blessed in the absolute, when we try to revive it in this modern world of ours, becomes tinged98 with the comic. It is true that satire99 has now but little material upon which to exercise itself, and is reduced to aiming its shafts100 at the 'professors of philosophy' (according to the type of philosopher that has been created by modern universities, which is partly the heir of the 'master of theology' of the Middle Ages): against the professors, that is to say, to the extent that they continue to repeat mechanically[Pg 161] abstract general propositions, and seem to be unmoved by the passions and the problems that press upon them from all sides and vainly ask for more concrete and actual treatment. But the function and the social figure of the philosopher have profoundly changed, and we have not said that the manner of being of the 'professors of philosophy' will not also change in its turn—that is to say, that the way of teaching philosophy in the universities and schools is not on the verge101 of experiencing a crisis, which will eliminate the last remains of the medieval fashion of formalistic philosophizing. A strong advance in philosophical culture should lead to this result: that all students of human affairs, jurists, economists102, moralists, men of letters—in other words, all students of historical matters—should become conscious and disciplined philosophers, and that thus the philosopher in general, the purus philosophus, should find no place left for him among the professional specifications103 of knowledge. With the disappearance104 of the philosopher 'in general' would also disappear the last social vestige105 of the teleologist106 or metaphysician, and of the Buddha or Awakened One.
There is also a prejudice which to some extent inquinates the manner of culture of students of philosophy. They are accustomed to have recourse almost exclusively to the books of philosophers, indeed of philosophers 'in general,' of the metaphysical system-makers, in the same way as the student of theology formed himself upon the sacred texts. This method of culture, which is perfectly107 consequent when a start is made from the presupposition of a fundamental or single problem, of which it is necessary to know the different diverging108 and progressive solutions which have been attempted, is altogether inconsequent and inadequate109 in the case of[Pg 162] a historical and immanent philosophy, which draws its material from all the most varied110 impressions of life and from all intuitions and reflections upon life. That form of culture is the reason for the aridity111 of the treatment of certain particular problems, for which is necessary a continued contact with daily experience (art and art criticism for ?sthetic, politics, economy, judicial112 trials for the philosophy of rights, positive and mathematical sciences for the gnoseology of the sciences, and so on). To it is also due the aridity of treatment of those parts of philosophy themselves which are traditionally considered to constitute 'general philosophy,' for they too had their origin in life, and we must refer them back to life if we are to give a satisfactory interpretation of their propositions; we must plunge113 them into life again to develop them and to find in them new aspects. The whole of history is the foundation of philosophy as history, and to limit its foundation to the history of philosophy alone, and of 'general' or 'metaphysical' philosophy, is impossible, save by unconsciously adhering to the old idea of philosophy, not as methodology but as metaphysic, which is the fifth of the prejudices that we are enumerating114.
This enumeration can be both lengthened115 and ended with the mention of a sixth preconception, relating to philosophical exposition. Owing to this, philosophy is expected to have either an architectural form, as though it were a temple consecrated116 to the Eternal, or a warm poetical117 form, as though it were a hymn118 to the Eternal. But these forms were part of the old content, and that form is now changed. Philosophy shows itself to be a dilucidation of the categories of historical interpretation rather than the grandiose119 architecture of a temple or a sacred hymn running on conventional lines.[Pg 163] Philosophy is discussion, polemic, rigorous didactic exposition, which is certainly coloured with the sentiments of the writer, like every other literary form, able also at times to raise its voice (or on the other hand to become slight and playful, according to circumstances), but not constrained120 to observe rules which appear to be proper to a theological or religious content. Philosophy treated as methodology has, so to speak, caused philosophical exposition to descend121 from poetry to prose.
All the preconceptions, habits, and tendencies which I have briefly122 described should in my opinion be carefully sought out and eliminated, for it is they that impede123 philosophy from taking the form and proceeding124 in the mode suitable and adequate to the consciousness of the unity with history which it has reached. If we look merely at the enormous amount of psychological observations and moral doubts accumulated in the course of the nineteenth century by poetry, fiction, and drama, those voices of our society, and consider that in great part it remains without critical treatment, some idea can be formed of the immense amount of work that falls to philosophy to accomplish. And if on the other hand we observe the multitude of anxious questions that the great European War has everywhere raised—as to the state, as to history, as to rights, as to the functions of the different peoples, as to civilization, culture, and barbarism, as to science, art, religion, as to the end and ideal of life, and so on—we realize the duty of philosophers to issue forth from the theologico-metaphysical circle in which they remain confined even when they refuse to hear of theology and metaphysic. For notwithstanding their protests, and notwithstanding the new conception accepted and professed125 by them,[Pg 164] they really remain intellectually and spiritually attached to the old ideas.
Even the history itself of philosophy has hitherto been renewed only to a small extent, in conformity126 with the new conception of philosophy. This new conception invites us to direct our attention to thoughts and thinkers, long neglected or placed in the second rank and not considered to be truly philosophers because they did not treat directly the 'fundamental problem' of philosophy or the great peut-être, but were occupied with 'particular problems.' These particular problems, how-ever, were destined to produce eventually a change of view as regards the 'general problem,' which emerged itself reduced to the rank of a 'particular' problem. It is simply the result of prejudice to look upon a Machiavelli, who posited127 the conception of the modern state, a Baltasar Gracian, who examined the question of acuteness in practical matters, a Pascal, who criticized the spirit of Jesuitry, a Vico, who renewed all the sciences of the spirit, or a Hamann, with his keen sense of the value of tradition, as minor128 philosophers, I do not say in comparison with some metaphysician of little originality129, but even when compared with a Descartes or a Spinoza, who dealt with other but not superior problems. A schematic and bloodless history of philosophy corresponded, in fact, with the philosophy of the 'fundamental problem.' A far richer, more varied and pliant130 philosophy should correspond with philosophy as methodology, which holds to be philosophy not only what appertains to the problems of immanency, of transcendency, of this world and the next, but everything that has been of avail in increasing the patrimony131 of guiding conceptions, the understanding of actual history, and the formation of the reality of thought in which we live.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
posit
|
|
| v.假定，认为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
treatises
|
|
| n.专题著作，专题论文，专著( treatise的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
philosophic
|
|
| adj.哲学的，贤明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
logic
|
|
| n.逻辑(学)；逻辑性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
judgments
|
|
| 判断( judgment的名词复数 )； 鉴定； 评价； 审判 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
interpretation
|
|
| n.解释，说明，描述；艺术处理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
ethic
|
|
| n.道德标准，行为准则 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
philosophical
|
|
| adj.哲学家的，哲学上的，达观的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
sterile
|
|
| adj.不毛的，不孕的，无菌的，枯燥的，贫瘠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
otiose
|
|
| adj.无效的，没有用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
intelligible
|
|
| adj.可理解的，明白易懂的，清楚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
condemns
|
|
| v.（通常因道义上的原因而）谴责( condemn的第三人称单数 )；宣判；宣布…不能使用；迫使…陷于不幸的境地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
negates
|
|
| v.取消( negate的第三人称单数 )；使无效；否定；否认 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
negate
|
|
| vt.否定，否认；取消，使无效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
manifestation
|
|
| n.表现形式；表明；现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
exempt
|
|
| adj.免除的；v.使免除；n.免税者，被免除义务者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
tainted
|
|
| adj.腐坏的；污染的；沾污的；感染的v.使变质( taint的过去式和过去分词 )；使污染；败坏；被污染，腐坏，败坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
defective
|
|
| adj.有毛病的，有问题的，有瑕疵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
diffused
|
|
| 散布的，普及的，扩散的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
phenomena
|
|
| n.现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
mythological
|
|
| adj.神话的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
initiated
|
|
| n. 创始人 adj. 新加入的 vt. 开始，创始，启蒙，介绍加入 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
mythology
|
|
| n.神话，神话学，神话集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
psychology
|
|
| n.心理，心理学，心理状态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
transcend
|
|
| vt.超出，超越(理性等)的范围 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
polemic
|
|
| n.争论，论战 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
adversary
|
|
| adj.敌手，对手 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
speculative
|
|
| adj.思索性的，暝想性的，推理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
contingent
|
|
| adj.视条件而定的；n.一组，代表团，分遣队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
vigour
|
|
| （=vigor）n.智力，体力，精力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
incapable
|
|
| adj.无能力的，不能做某事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
antitheses
|
|
| n.对照，对立的，对比法；对立( antithesis的名词复数 )；对立面；对照；对偶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
doctrines
|
|
| n.教条( doctrine的名词复数 )；教义；学说；（政府政策的）正式声明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
formerly
|
|
| adv.从前，以前 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
renascent
|
|
| adj.新生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
inveterate
|
|
| adj.积习已深的，根深蒂固的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
tenacious
|
|
| adj.顽强的，固执的，记忆力强的，粘的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
eradicating
|
|
| 摧毁，完全根除( eradicate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
superseded
|
|
| [医]被代替的，废弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
opportune
|
|
| adj.合适的，适当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
entail
|
|
| vt.使承担，使成为必要，需要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
variance
|
|
| n.矛盾，不同 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
posits
|
|
| v.假定，设想，假设( posit的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
infinity
|
|
| n.无限，无穷，大量 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
epoch
|
|
| n.(新)时代；历元 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
renaissance
|
|
| n.复活，复兴，文艺复兴 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
imprint
|
|
| n.印痕，痕迹；深刻的印象；vt.压印，牢记 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
disposition
|
|
| n.性情，性格；意向，倾向；排列，部署 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
addicted
|
|
| adj.沉溺于....的，对...上瘾的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
usurped
|
|
| 篡夺，霸占( usurp的过去式和过去分词 )； 盗用； 篡夺，篡权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
corrode
|
|
| v.使腐蚀，侵蚀，破害；v.腐蚀，被侵蚀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
dominion
|
|
| n.统治，管辖，支配权；领土，版图 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
destined
|
|
| adj.命中注定的；(for)以…为目的地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
kernel
|
|
| n.(果实的)核，仁；(问题)的中心，核心 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
tautology
|
|
| n.无谓的重复；恒真命题 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
rejection
|
|
| n.拒绝，被拒，抛弃，被弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
unified
|
|
| (unify 的过去式和过去分词)； 统一的； 统一标准的； 一元化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
faculty
|
|
| n.才能；学院，系；(学院或系的)全体教学人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
prone
|
|
| adj.(to)易于…的，很可能…的；俯卧的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
permissible
|
|
| adj.可允许的，许可的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
disciples
|
|
| n.信徒( disciple的名词复数 )；门徒；耶稣的信徒；（尤指）耶稣十二门徒之一 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
meditated
|
|
| 深思，沉思，冥想( meditate的过去式和过去分词 )； 内心策划，考虑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
indifference
|
|
| n.不感兴趣，不关心，冷淡，不在乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
tiresomeness
|
|
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
virtue
|
|
| n.德行，美德；贞操；优点；功效，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
depreciate
|
|
| v.降价，贬值，折旧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
prosaic
|
|
| adj.单调的，无趣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
laborious
|
|
| adj.吃力的，努力的，不流畅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
prolific
|
|
| adj.丰富的，大量的；多产的，富有创造力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
pedantry
|
|
| n.迂腐，卖弄学问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
enumeration
|
|
| n.计数，列举；细目；详表；点查 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
definitive
|
|
| adj.确切的，权威性的；最后的，决定性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
determined
|
|
| adj.坚定的；有决心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
irreconcilably
|
|
| （观点、目标或争议）不可调和的，不相容的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
afterward
|
|
| adv.后来；以后 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
Buddha
|
|
| n.佛；佛像；佛陀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
awakened
|
|
| v.（使）醒( awaken的过去式和过去分词 )；（使）觉醒；弄醒；（使）意识到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
agitations
|
|
| （液体等的）摇动( agitation的名词复数 )； 鼓动； 激烈争论； （情绪等的）纷乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
irresistibly
|
|
| adv.无法抵抗地，不能自持地；极为诱惑人地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
unstable
|
|
| adj.不稳定的，易变的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
apocalyptic
|
|
| adj.预示灾祸的，启示的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
decadence
|
|
| n.衰落，颓废 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
supremacy
|
|
| n.至上；至高权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
sublime
|
|
| adj.崇高的，伟大的；极度的，不顾后果的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
tinged
|
|
| v.（使）发丁丁声( ting的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
satire
|
|
| n.讽刺，讽刺文学，讽刺作品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
shafts
|
|
| n.轴( shaft的名词复数 )；（箭、高尔夫球棒等的）杆；通风井；一阵（疼痛、害怕等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
verge
|
|
| n.边，边缘；v.接近，濒临 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
economists
|
|
| n.经济学家，经济专家( economist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
specifications
|
|
| n.规格；载明；详述；（产品等的）说明书；说明书( specification的名词复数 )；详细的计划书；载明；详述 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
disappearance
|
|
| n.消失，消散，失踪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
vestige
|
|
| n.痕迹，遗迹，残余 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
teleologist
|
|
| n.目的论者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
107
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
diverging
|
|
| 分开( diverge的现在分词 )； 偏离； 分歧； 分道扬镳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
inadequate
|
|
| adj.(for,to)不充足的，不适当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
varied
|
|
| adj.多样的，多变化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
aridity
|
|
| n.干旱，乏味；干燥性；荒芜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
judicial
|
|
| adj.司法的，法庭的，审判的，明断的，公正的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
plunge
|
|
| v.跳入，(使)投入，(使)陷入；猛冲 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
enumerating
|
|
| v.列举，枚举，数( enumerate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
lengthened
|
|
| （时间或空间）延长，伸长( lengthen的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
consecrated
|
|
| adj.神圣的，被视为神圣的v.把…奉为神圣，给…祝圣( consecrate的过去式和过去分词 )；奉献 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
poetical
|
|
| adj.似诗人的；诗一般的；韵文的；富有诗意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
hymn
|
|
| n.赞美诗，圣歌，颂歌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
grandiose
|
|
| adj.宏伟的，宏大的，堂皇的，铺张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
constrained
|
|
| adj.束缚的,节制的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
descend
|
|
| vt./vi.传下来，下来，下降 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
briefly
|
|
| adv.简单地，简短地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
impede
|
|
| v.妨碍，阻碍，阻止 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
proceeding
|
|
| n.行动，进行，(pl.)会议录，学报 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
professed
|
|
| 公开声称的，伪称的，已立誓信教的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
conformity
|
|
| n.一致，遵从，顺从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
posited
|
|
| v.假定，设想，假设( posit的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
originality
|
|
| n.创造力，独创性；新颖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
pliant
|
|
| adj.顺从的；可弯曲的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
patrimony
|
|
| n.世袭财产，继承物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |