of its validity, but not supported by any scientific means of demonstration.126 The principle of reality, as a logicistic concept, according to Logren’s analysis, is something that is impossible to derive from any empirical analysis or from any comparative abstraction. The principle is in fact a non-empirical content directly given to us in our empirical experience, and yet separated from everything sensible, and the principle of reality must therefore itself be a derivative from a logical analysis of reality.127 Logren’s conclusions are questionable.There are several reasons for questioning his analysis.To begin, Hägerström’s own theory is based upon the ontological assumption that reality has a very certain characteristic, namely that reality itself is identical with itself.This assumption is obviously impossible to derive from a prior principle, but it is equally impossible to disprove. Hägerström’s ontological assumption thus demonstrates all the characteristics of an axiom, which is the specific function it serves in his philosophical system. Consequently, the logical status which Hägerström’s axiomatization of the nature of reality provides his ontological assumption makes Logren correct when he defines Hägerström’s principle of reality as one lacking purely empirical content.However, the nature of Hägerström’s ontological assumption refutes Logren’s description of Hägerström’s idea as an expression of classical metaphysics. This is because Hägerström’s theory regarding the self-identical character of reality does not place reality per se on a level above or parallel to physical reality. On the contrary, Hägerström’s theory depends upon physical reality for its own intelligibility and validity. If his theory expressed a description of reality incompatible with physical reality, then the theory itself would be unintelligible and devoid of sensible meaning, since it would imply that there existed a nona ca l l f o r s c i e n t i f i c p u r i t y 209 126 Ibid. See (rightly) Hägerström’s critique of this view amounting to the conclusion that personal certainty alone cannot constitute a foundation solid enough for the determination of objectivity or objective knowledge. Hägerström, “Filosofien som vetenskap.” 127 Cf. Logren, Huvuddragen, pp. 362-363.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=