________________
same end and to which it owes its existence and life? So true aprehension can only be possible if we take it in the light of not what it is only; but also what it is not as well. But this may appear parodoxical to an untrained mind because it obviously transgresses the law of contradiction. The most firm convictions which we have cherished from our cradles without the least hesitation, are backed up and supported also by the vigorous rules and canons of formal logic whose fundamental principle, as we have seen before, is the law of identity and contradiction that A is A cannot be not-A.
Vision of things,-A is not merely
A, but Not-A as well.
In the New But now we come to a new vision of things in which A appears to be not merely A but not-A as well; because A is real in so far it stands in relation with what is not A. The true life of A would then consist not only in A as formal logic teaches us but also in not-A. The ideal nature of a thing consists, therefore, not only assertion of its being but also at the same time in the denial of itin that which comprehends those antagonistic elements and yet harmonises and explains them. So if there be any knowledge in the
116
