Of the Ends, or Resolutions of Discourse
Of all “discourse,” governed by desire of knowledge, there is at last an “end,” either by attaining, or by giving over. And in the chain of discourse, wheresoever it be interrupted, there is an end for that time.
If the discourse be merely mental, it consisteth of thoughts that the thing will be, and will not be; or that it has been, and has not been, alternately. So that wheresoever you break off the chain of a man’s discourse, you leave him in a presumption of “it will be,” or, “it will not be”; or, “it has been,” or, “has not been.” All which is “opinion.” And that which is alternate appetite, in deliberating concerning good and evil; the same is alternate opinion, in the enquiry of the truth of “past,” and “future.” And as the last appetite in deliberation, is called the “will,” so the last opinion in search of the truth of past, and future, is called the “judgment,” or “resolute” and “final sentence” of him that “discourseth.” And as the whole chain of appetites alternate, in the question of good, or bad, is called “deliberation”; so the whole chain of opinions alternate, in the question of true, or false, is called “doubt.”
No discourse whatsoever can end in absolute knowledge of fact, past or to come. For, as for the knowledge of fact, it is originally sense; and ever after, memory. And for the knowledge of consequence, which I have said before is called science, it is not absolute, but conditional. No man can know by discourse, that this or that is, has been, or will be; which is to know absolutely; but only, that if this be, that is; if this has been, that has been; if this shall be, that shall be; which is to know conditionally; and that not the consequence of one thing to another, but of one name of a thing to another name of the same thing.