思维具有两个目的,一个是内蕴的,另一个是超越的。一方面它所寻求的是实现一种特殊的满足,即满足有系统的识见。另方面它又要在它的对象之中寻求实现与完成。而这两个目的,实际上是一个目的。这是形而上学的基础,在这个基础上找到一贯性的信仰。真理就是思维接近于实在,也即思维返乡的过程。它的尺度就是在它内在的方向之下所走过的旅程,这个旅程响往着一个可以理解的体系,把它的终极对象和终极目的结合起来。我们整个经验里真理的程度取决于其所达到的体系的程度,而一个特殊命题的真理程度则首先要由它和整个经验一贯性程度来判断,最后还要由它和思维所系的那个包罗万象而条理分明的整体的一贯性程度来判断。完金一贯的知识是要其中每一个判断,都规定整个体系其余的部分,同时也为其余的部分所规定。一个完全满意的体系是要没有一个命题是任意制定的,每一个命题都要为所有其它命题的总和或另一单独命题所引推出来,没有一个命题可以独立于整个体系之外。如果我们承认一贯性是真理的考验准则,也就是承认一贯性即真理的性质。有些哲学家对“什么是真理的考验?”这一问题所作的回答是“一贯性”,而对“什么是真理的性质?”这一问题所作的回答则是“符合”。但是假如我们主张真理就是与客观事物符合,我们便不可能言之成理地说,真理以一贯性为准则,或有任何可靠的考验准则。因为我们决不可能从经验内部高度的一贯性,来论证它跟外界任何东西也具有同样程度的相符性。并且因为要想知道我们的经验与事实相符合,必须先要能够把握事实本身,不允许与观念相混杂,再把两方面加以对比。然而这样的事实是不可能达到的。 Thinking has two purposes, one is intrinsic, the other is beyond. What it seeks on the one hand is the fulfillment of a special kind of satisfaction, that is, satisfying systematic knowledge. On the other hand, it seeks fulfillment and fulfillment among its objects. These two purposes are actually one purpose. This is the basis of metaphysics, on this basis to find consistent beliefs. Truth is thinking close to reality, that is, the process of thinking back home. Its measure is the journey that has taken place under its inner direction, a journey that leads to an understandable system that combines its ultimate object with its ultimate purpose. The degree of truth in our whole experience depends on the degree of the system it reaches, and the degree of truth of a particular proposition is first and foremost determined by it and the degree of consistency of experience as a whole, and finally by the all-encompassing line of thought and thought The well-structured overall consistency to judge. It is the consistent knowledge that each of these judgments prescribes the rest of the system and the rest of the system. A completely satisfied system is that no proposition is formulated at will. Each proposition must be deduced from the sum of all other propositions or another separate proposition. No proposition can be independent of the entire system. If we acknowledge that consistency is the test of truth, that is, the nature of consistency, the truth. Some philosophers’ answers to the question “What is the test of truth?” Are “consistent” and the answer to the question “what is the nature of truth?” Is “coincidence.” But if we hold that truth is in accordance with objective things, we can not make it plain to say that the truth is based on consistency or that there is any credible test of reason. Because we can never prove that it has the same degree of conformity with anything in the world from the high degree of consistency within the experience. And because you want to know that our experience is in conformity with facts, we must first grasp the fact itself, not allow confusion with the concept, and then compare the two. However, such a fact is impossible to achieve.