Abstract

The difficulty with this point of view and the reason why I characterize it as false do not spring from the mere fact that thought is abstract while experience is concrete. For, on the one hand, the abstract character of thought need not be interpreted negatively, as leaving out the rich variety and profusion of the concrete world in favor of some bare common denominator. Concreteness itself can be seen as a limitation which thought overcomes.ion then becomes an enriching process, a process by which the mind, out of its own superior abundance, illumines and completes the data presented to it, so that from the welter and confusion of particular instances it is able to grasp the universal and valid-for-all, and from the fugitive contingency of the concrete to redeem the abidingly true. In this light, abstractiveness is not a vice but a virtue of thought and, far from weakening the intellectualist position, serves rather to reinforce it.