Authors born between
200 and 800 CEClick Up For A Summary Of Each Author
Contents
Memories—Individual, Separate, Personal
Memory—Basis for Actions, Hopes
Aurelius Augustine (354-430 CE), more widely known as St Augustine, was born in 354 in Thagaste in Algeria. His mental ability was recognized by his father who had him
trained as a rhetorician, which led to an extensive acquaintance with Latin
literature. His mother, Monica, was a Christian, but Augustine was initially
drawn to Manichaeism. He ultimately found its astrological and psychological doctrines incompatible with his own knowledge gained from
scientific treatises and from introspection. He spent some time in Rome and
Milan as a teacher of grammar, where he became acquainted with Neo-Platonism,
which turned him from the dualism of Manichaeism to monism. Drawn to
Christianity after hearing Ambrose preach, he converted to this religion at
age 32. He lived in harmony with a woman whom he did not marry but by whom he
had a son. In his subsequent preaching and writing he retained an interest
in the Platonists and in the relationship between philosophy of a logical cast
and religion. It can be argued, in fact, that much of the theological aspect
of Christianity
has
come from Plato through Augustine.
In his
Confessions he produced an autobiography
of remarkable richness and originality. When we read this work we realize we
are in the presence of a powerful mind, eager to develop a logical
understanding of itself by introspection rather than by experimentation or evaluation
of the subjective experiences of others. Augustine created this work in the
form of a conversation with his god. In the following extracts, I have omitted
the various personal salutations offered by the worshipper to the worshipped
and confined the text to Augustine's ideas on memory, the mind, and time. His
account of what a marvelous thing memory is represents a major psychological advance and was unmatched for centuries. His brief thoughts on the mind extracted here (from a discussion of the Christian trinity) foreshadow Descartes.
Augustine's ideas on time also represent a major advance, providing a subjective theory that was later taken up by Kant.
2 Other memories tumble out in hordes, even though
only one thing is desired and requested; they all rush out altogether as if to
say, "Is it perchance one of these?" These I brush aside with the
hand of my heart, from the face of remembrance, until what I wished for is
unveiled, and comes into sight, out of its secret place. Other things come up
readily, in unbroken order, as they are called for; those in front making way
for those following; and as they make way, they are hidden from sight, ready
to come back when I will. All of which takes place when I repeat some lines by
heart.
7 Great is this power of memory, excessively great, contained in a vast and boundless chamber! Who ever sounded the bottom of it? Yet this is a power I have; it is part of my nature. Not only that, I do not myself comprehend all that I am. Therefore the mind is somehow too confining to contain itself. And where can one place something that does not contain itself? Is it outside of itself and not within? How then does it not comprehend itself?
8 A wonderful admiration surprises me, amazement
seizes me on these thoughts. And men go abroad to admire the heights of
mountains, the mighty waves of the sea, the broad tides of rivers, the compass
of the ocean, and the circuits of the stars, yet pass over the mystery of
themselves without a thought. They are not amazed that when I spoke of all
these things, I did not see them with my eyes, yet could not have spoken of
them unless, inwardly in my memory, I actually saw the mountains, billows,
rivers, stars, which I had once seen —and that ocean of which I've heard—with
the same vast spaces between as if I saw them abroad. Yet I did not draw these
scenes into myself when I saw
them; nor are they themselves here with me. I have their images only, and I
know by what sense of the body each was impressed upon me.
13 The memory contains also reasons and laws of innumerable
numbers and dimensions, none of which has any bodily sense impressed; since
they have neither color, nor sound, nor taste, nor smell, nor touch. I have
heard the sound of the words whereby when discussed they are denoted; but the
sounds are other than the things. For the sounds differ when expressed in
Greek rather than in Latin; but the things themselves are neither Greek, nor
Latin, nor any other language.
14 All these things I remember, and how I learnt them I remember.
Many things also most falsely objected against them have I heard, and
remember. And although these objections are false, yet is it not false that I
remember them; and I remember also that I have discerned between those truths
and these falsehoods objected to them. And I perceive that the present
discerning of these things is different from remembering I often discerned
them, at the times I thought upon them. I remember then to have often
understood these things; and what I now discern and understand, I lay up in my
memory, that later I may remember what I understood now. So then I remember
also to have remembered. Thus at some later time I shall recall that I have at
this time been able to remember these things. By the force of memory I shall
recall my recollection.
15 The same memory contains also the feelings and emotions of my mind—not in the same manner that my mind itself contains them, when it feels them but far otherwise, according to an ability of its own. For without rejoicing I remember myself to have been joyful; and without sorrow I recollect my past sorrow. And that I once feared, I review without fear; and without desire call to mind a past desire. Sometimes, on the contrary, with joy I remember my past sorrow, and with sorrow, joy. Which is not so remarkable when the body is involved, for mind is one thing, body another. If therefore I remember with joy some past pain of my body, this is not remarkable. But it is so when we consider that memory itself is mind, (for when we give a thing in charge, to be kept in memory, we say, "See that you keep it in mind"; and when we forget, we say, "It did not come to my mind" or, "It slipped out of my mind," calling the memory itself the mind). This being so, how is it, that when with joy I remember my past sorrow, the mind has joy, the memory has sorrow; how is it the mind, upon the joyfulness which is in it, is joyful, yet the memory upon the sadness which is in it, is not sad? Does the memory perhaps not belong to the mind? Who will say so? The memory then is, as it were, the belly of the mind, and joy and sadness, are like sweet and bitter food which when committed to the memory are, as it were, passed into the belly, where they may be stowed but not tasted. It is ridiculous to imagine these two parts of us to be alike; and yet are they not utterly unlike.
18 What about when I name forgetfulness and in addition recognize what I name? How should I recognize it, if I did not remember it? I speak not of the sound of the name, but of the thing which it signifies; which if I had forgotten, I could not recognize what that sound signifies. When then I remember memory, memory itself is, through itself, present with itself; but when I remember forgetfulness, there are present both memory and forgetfulness; memory whereby I remember, forgetfulness which I remember. But what is forgetfulness, but the deprivation of memory? How then is it present that I remember it, since when present I cannot remember? But if what we remember we hold in memory, yet, unless we did remember forgetfulness, we could never at the hearing of the name, recognize the thing thereby signified. Then forgetfulness is retained by memory. It is present that we do not forget; and being so, we forget. It is to be understood from this, that forgetfulness, when we remember it, is not present to the memory by itself, but by its image: because if it were present by itself, it would not cause us to remember, but to forget. Who will resolve this? Who can comprehend what is going on here?
20 Great is the power of memory, a fearful thing, a deep and
boundless manifoldness; and this thing is the mind, and this I am myself. What
am I then? What is my nature? A life various and manifold, and exceeding
immense. Look, the plains and caves and caverns of my memory are innumerable
and innumerably full of innumerable kinds of things, either through images, as
all bodies; or by actual presence, as in knowledge of the arts; or by certain
notions or impressions, as the emotions and feelings of the mind which—even
when the mind does not feel—the memory retains. And whatever is in the
memory is also in the mind—over all these different memories I run or I fly:
I dive into memories on this side and on that, reaching as far as I can, and
there is no end to them. So great is the force of memory, so great the force
of life, even in the mortal life of man.
21 But what if memory itself loses any thing, as falls out when we
forget and seek that we may recollect? Where in the end do we search, but in
memory itself? And there, if one thing is perhaps offered instead of another,
we can reject it, until what we seek meets us; and when it does we say to
ourselves, "this is what I
sought". We would not say this unless we recognized it, nor recognize it
unless we remembered it.. Certainly, then, we had forgotten it. Or, the whole
having escaped us except for a part we had hold of, we then sought the lost
part. Did memory—feeling that what we recalled was not complete but was made
defective, as it were, by the curtailment of memory's proper functioning—demand
the restoration of what was missed? For instance, suppose we see or think of
some one known to us, and having forgotten his name, try to recall it.
Whatever else comes to mind—because it might be thought of as joined with
that man—is rejected as not being the name, until the name presents itself,
whereupon this knowledge reposes as equally available as the image of the man
himself. And from where does the name present itself, except out of the memory
itself? For even when we recognize it, on being reminded by another, it comes
from there. For we do not conceive it as something new but, upon recollection,
allow the name to be right. For we had not as yet utterly forgotten that which
we remembered ourselves to have forgotten. But were it utterly blotted out of
the mind, we would not remember it, even when reminded. What we have utterly
forgotten, thoroughly lost, we cannot
even seek after.
22 If we consider an instant of time that cannot be divided further into the smallest particles of moments, it alone is that which may be called present. Yet it flies with such speed from future to past, as not to be lengthened out with the least stay. For if it is lengthened, it is divided into past and future. Thus the present has no space. . .
23 If times past and future exist, I would like know where they are. Even if I cannot know this, yet I know, wherever they are, they are not there as future, or past, but as present. Yet if they are in the present and also of the future, they are not yet there in the present. On the other hand, if they are also in the present as the past, they are also no longer there. Thus whatever exists, it is only as being in the present. When past facts are related, we draw out of the memory not the things themselves, which are past, but words that are stimulated by the images of the things that in passing have through the senses have been left as traces in the mind. Thus my childhood, which no longer exists, is in time past, which now no loner exists. But when I now recall its image and talk about it, I can see it in the present, because it is still in my memory. . .
24 Thus when things in the future (that is, which are to be) are said to be seen, it is not the things in themselves that are seen, which as yet do not exist, but their causes, perhaps, or their signs, which already exist. Therefore they are not in the future but in the present to those who now see that from which the future is foretold, being conceived ahead of time in the mind. These conceptions, again, are in the present. And those who forecast such things see the concept of what they forecast present before them.
25 Now, let the abundant variety of things furnish me some examples. I behold the dawn, I expect that the sun is about to rise. What I see, is present; what I expect, is yet to come—not the sun, which already is, but the sun-rising, which is not yet. . . Future things then are not yet: and if they are not yet, they are not: and if they are not, they cannot be seen; yet they may be forecast from things present, which already exist and can be seen. . .
What now is clear and plain is, that neither future things to nor past things exist. Nor is it properly said, "there are three times: past, present, and future". Yet it might possibly be properly said, "there are three times: a present of things past, a present of things present, and a present of things future." For these three do exist in some way in the mind, but I do not find them elsewhere. The present of things past is memory. The present of things present, sight. The present of things future, expectation. . .
26 I say then, in spite of all this, we measure time as it passes so that we can say, this time is twice as much as that one; or, this time is just as much as that; and so on for any other parts of time that may be measurable. Therefore, as I said, we measure times as they pass. And if anyone should ask me, "How do you know?" I might answer, "I know that we do measure, but I know that we cannot measure things that do not exist; and things past and future do not exist." But how can we measure time present, seeing it has no extent? Time is measured while passing, but when it has passed, it is not measured, for there will be nothing to measure. But where does it come from, and by what route, and where does it go to while we are measuring it? From where but the future? Which way, but through the present? To where, but into the past?
From that therefore, which is not yet, through that which has no extent, into that which now is not. Yet what do we measure, if not time as of some extent? For we do not say, single, and double, and triple, and equal, or any other similar thing when we speak of time, except of extent of time. In what space then do we measure time passing? In the future, from which it passes out? But we can not measure what is not yet. Or in the present, through which it passes? But this has no extent that we can measure. Or in the past, to which it passes? But neither can we measure that which no longer exists.
My mind is on fire to know this most intricate enigma.
27 To comprehend the Christian Trinity and how far we are removed from it, I would ask men to consider three things they find in themselves. These three are indeed far removed, but I am suggesting how we may look into ourselves and discover how we are related to it. Now the three things I speak of are To Be, To Know, and To Will, because I am, I know, and I will. I am knowing and willing: and I know myself to be and to will. Furthermore, I will to be, and to know. In these three then, it is possible to discern how inseparable a life they form—yes one life, one mind, and one essence. Lastly, regard how inseparable a distinction exists between them, and yet a distinction exists. Surely a man has this example before him; let him look into himself, perceive it, and agree.
Adapted from The Confessions
of St. Augustine translated by E. B. Pusey. J. M. Dents & Sons,
London, 1907
For a philosophical assessment of Augustine: A History of Western Philosophy, by Bertrand Russell. Simon and Schuster, New York, 1945
Web Sites: Augustine of Hippo
Augustine resources section of Online Bachelor's Degree in Religion
Adaptation and Selection
Copyright © Rex Pay 2000