Competing Models of Sensibility in Condillac: The Château and the Harpsichord (1996)

CompetingModelsofSensibilityin Condillac:TheChÃ¢teauandthe Harpsichord DOWNINGTHOMAS PhilosophyandLanguage ThatCondillaccomplainedaboutthemisuseoflanguageinalmostev- erytexthewroteisindicativeofwhatisatstakeforempiricisminlan- guage.1Eighteenth-centuryempiricismreliedonaphilosophyoflanguage foritstheoryofsensationandthedevelopmentofknowledge.Inwhatfol- lows,IwanttoexplorethisconnectionfurtherasanintroductiontothecomplextreatmentofsensibilityinCondillac 'sLogique.Twometaphors,thatof thechÃ¢teauandthatoftheharpsichord,providedescriptionsofsensibilityin Condillac'stext.Whileontheonehandtheyactasillustrationstothetext, ontheothertheycouldbeseenasencroachinguponthelargerargumentof theLogiquebyofferingcompetingimagesofsensibility.Myargumentcon- cernstheproductiveanddisruptiveeffectsofmetaphorwithinCondillac's text.Giventheimportanceofthelanguagequestiontoempiricism,Iwantto suggestthataclosereadingofthemetaphoricallanguageoitheLogiquecan beaparticularlycompellingwaytoframethecomplexissueofsensationin Condillac.Beforeundertakingadetailedanalysisofthetwometaphors,I willdiscusstheconnectionbetweenlanguageandempiricismgenerallyand providesomebackgroundtothemusicalaspectofmytopic. ForCondillac,"improper"languagedisruptsthenormalprocessesthat governthecombinationandgrowthofideas,sendingthoughtoffontothe 147 148/THOMAS wrongtrack.Ifwemakemistakesinourjudgementsabouttheworld,itis not,asDescartesheld,ourperceptionsandideasthatareobscureandconfused Â—thesecomedirectlyfromsensationÂ—butouruseofsignstorepre- sentthem: CequinousfaitcroirequenosidÃ©essontsusceptiblesd'obscuritÃ©,c'est quenousnelesdistinguonspasassezdesexpressionsenusage.Nous disons,parexemple,quelaneigeestblanche;etnousfaisonsmilleautres jugemenssanspenserÃÃ´terl'Ã©quivoquedesmots.Ainsiparcequenos jugemenssontexprimÃ©sd'unemaniÃ¨reobscure,nousnousimaginonsque cetteobscuritÃ©retombesurlesjugemensmÃªmes,etsurlesidÃ©esquiles composent:unedÃ©finitioncorrigeraittout.Laneigeestblanche,sil'on entendparblancheurlacausephysiquedenotreperception:ellenel'est pas,sil'onentendparblancheurquelquechosedesemblableÃlapercep- tionmÃªme.Cesjugemensnesontdoncpasobscurs;maisilssontvraisou faux,selonlesensdanslequelonprendlestermes.2 Judgementisobscureonlyinsofarastheexpressionsusedtoconveyit areimpreciseandill-defined.Theresultsoferroneouslanguagecanbedi- sastrous"[quand]onprendpourprincipesdesnotionsvagues,desmotsvides desens."3Withoutproperlanguage,Condillacasserts,metaphysicsbecomes utterlywhimsicalÂ—thephilosopherbecomesa"sorcerer"[enchanteur].*The problemcanbecorrectedonlybyestablishinganeffectivecorrespondence betweenlanguageandjudgementthroughdefinition.IntheEssaisurl'origine desconnaissanceshumaines,Condillacarguesthathehadtoaltertheexist- ingvocabularyofphilosophyinordertoreformmetaphysics:"j'aiÃ©tÃ©obligÃ© demefaire,enquelquesorteunnouveaulangage.Ilnem'Ã©toitpaspossible d'allierl'exactitudeavecdessignesaussimaldÃ©terminÃ©squ'ilslesontdans l'usageordinaire."5Afterexpressinghisfrustrationwithcommonusage, Condillacshowshisadmirationformathematicsasanexactlanguage:"les motsnedoivent-ilspasÃªtreauxidÃ©esdetouteslessciencescequesontles chiffresauxidÃ©esdel'arithmÃ©tique?"6AsSylvainAurouxhasremarked,LaLanguedescalculs,Condillac'sunfinishedworkonthelanguageofcalcula-tion,comestotheconclusionthat,as"well-formedlanguages,"thesciences aretheultimatelinguisticmodel.7 Thefocusontheempiricalconditionsofknowledgebroughtwithita reconsiderationofthelanguageofphilosophy.8Furthermore,thelanguage questionframedCondillac'sviewofhow"lessciences"shouldgoabouttheirbusiness.Ontheonehand,withregardtotheoriginanddevelopmentofknowledge,iftheconditionsofknowledgeareempirical,atwhatpointand howdoeslanguage(gesturalorvocal)intervene?Ontheotherhand,reflect- ingbackontheproblemofrepresentationgenerally,aseparate,butrelated, CompetingModelsofSensibilityinCondillacI149 questionarose:ifsignsthemselvescanbesaidtobematerial,whatmightit meanforasystemofrepresentation(beitlanguageorsenseimpressions)to be"adequate"ortransparenttothingsintheworld,topresentorrepresent them,tocorrespondtothem?Or,whatisthejuncturebetweenthingsand theirexperientialdimension,assensation,aslanguage?9Byreconfiguring thedistinctionbetweenmindandbodyinitsreconsiderationofmateriality, empiricismledlanguagetheorytorethinkthevocabularyofresemblance, equivalence,orreferralthroughwhichtheworldispresentedtounderstand- ing.Whatthesequestionsrevealisthatanentireclusterofissues,allof whichcouldberelatedas"language"issues,isnecessarilypresentwithin theempiricistprojectitself,fromthequestionoftheprimacyofgesturesto thedebateoverwhetherornotnerveswereliketaughtstrings. IfthesciencesweretheultimatelinguisticmodelforCondillac,itisno wonderthathecriticized"literary"usesoflanguageinphilosophy.10Indeed, eloquentbutmisleadinglanguagecomesacrossasapersistentsourceofan- noyanceinhiswritings.Buffon'sattentiontostyle,forexample,issubjectto relentlesscritiqueintheTraitÃ©desanimaux.Yet,inspiteofthestiffposi- tionsCondillactakeswithregardtofigurailanguageandlooseanalogies, therearesomeintriguingusesofextendedmetaphorinhiswritings.Iwantto focusontwoofthesemetaphorsinpassagesfromthefirstpartoftheLogique, whereCondillacplacesparticularemphasisontwoimages:thefirstpassage takesupmostofchaptertwoandrevolvesaroundtheimageofachÃ¢teauand itsgrounds;thesecondoccupiesasubstantialportionofchapternineand concernsaharpsichordanditsplayer. Condillacisknownforthemodelsheusedtotestanddevelophisanaly- ses,themostprominentbeingtheanimatedstatuethatheimaginesintheTraitÃ©dessensationstodescribetheroleofsenseimpressionsinthedevel- opmentofknowledge.Inthesethoughtexperiments,Condillacrunsthrough agivenscenarioinordertotestaseriesofabstractclaimsabouttheoriginof knowledge(likethe"bodywithoutapast,"asWildaAndersonaptlyrefers tothestatueoftheTraitÃ©dessensations,orthetwochildrenoftheEssai who,lostinthedesert,mustreinventlanguage).11Theextendedmetaphors foundintheLogiquedifferfromthesethoughtexperimentsinthattheyare shorterandaredrawnfromdailyexperience:heuristics,theyhelpthereader tounderstandsensibility,memory,andsoonbyreferringtoexemplaryexpe- riencesandsituations.Adoptingtheclassicmetaphoroftheeyeandtheob- jectsofitsvision,forexample,Condillacclaimsthat"ilenestdemÃªmedela vuedel'esprit."12Consideredassupplements,however,theseextendedmeta- phorscreatedissonancewithintheLogique.,131willexaminetheeffectthat thetwoimageshaveontheargumentofthetextandontheconceptualframe- workthatCondillacembraces.Inexploringthetwometaphors,Iwantto 150/THOMAS suggestaconceptualdÃ©rapage,aslippagewhichmaybeseenasanunchar- acteristicmovementinCondillac,onethatatleastmomentarilydisplacesthe imageheoffersofsensationfromonefavoringtheinstrumentalizationofthe bodyanditssensoryorgansÂ—thechÃ¢teaumetaphorÂ—toonethatpresentsa corpssonore,orresonantbody,inthemetaphoroftheharpsichord.Iwantto arguethat,unlikethechÃ¢teaumetaphorwhichfocusesonthevisual,theharp- sichordmetaphorpresentsthebodyasaresonantstructure. Theterm,corpssonore,doesnotappearintheLogique.Iwanttousethe metaphoroftheresonantbodyinthiscontext,however,becauseitwillhelp metodevelopafullerdescriptiontheharpsichordmodelintheLogique,and becausethemusicalcorpssonorehasasignificantpresenceineighteenth- centuryphilosophy,andinCondillac'swritingsinparticular.Throughhis analysisofthecorpssonoreÂ—astring,pipe,oranyresonantobjectÂ—Jean- PhilippeRameauhadarguedthatallmusicalsoundcouldbereducedtoa singlefundamentaltone.Rameau'stheorywassingledoutasaphilosophical milestonebyd'Alembertinthe"DiscourseprÃ©liminaire"totheEncyclopÃ©die, andbyCondillacinboththeTraitÃ©dessystÃ¨mesandtheEssaisurl'origine desconnaissanceshumaines.14IntheEssai,Condillacmodelledhisepiste- mologicalundertakingonJean-PhilippeRameau'sadvancesinmusictheory. MimickingRameau'sbassefondamentale,orthechordrootsunderlyinga givenmusicalprogressionwhichRameauheldtobethepracticalderivative ofthecorpssonore,Condillacdescribed"unesuited'idÃ©esfondamentales" servingasthebasisforallknowledge.15 WithRameau'sdiscoveries,then,thephilosophicalprestigeofmusicin- creaseddramatically.Thisinfluencemighthelpexplainthemanyreferences totheharpsichordÂ—perhapsthemostfamiliardomesticinstrumentofthe periodÂ—ineighteenth-centuryempiricistandmaterialisttreatises.Diderot's LeRÃªveded'Alembertisthemostwell-knownexample,whereheusesthe imageoftheharpsichordtodescribetherelationshipbetweensensationand memory.16Moregenerallyspeaking,musicwasalsopresentinCondillac'sepistemologyfromtheverybeginning.IntheEssaisurl'originedes connaissanceshumainesCondillacdescribedthehumanorganismaspar- ticularlyaffectedbyvocalsonorities;andthenaturalcryofpassionÂ—the firstsignifierÂ—wasdepictedasamusicalsound:"diffÃ©renssentimensont poursignelemÃªmesonvariÃ©surdiffÃ©renstons."17TheLogique'sharpsi- chordmetaphorthuscannotbeseenasanisolatedincident,asan"innocent" orinsignificantmetaphorgiventheplaceofmusicandmusictheoryinCondillac'swritings.ThepresenceoftheharpsichordmetaphorintheLogique pointstoaspecificmodelofsensibility,whichIcallthecorpssonore.Isee theissueofsensibilityasrelatedtothelanguagequestionnotonlybecause ofthefiguraistatusoftheharpsichordasametaphorforsensibilityinthe CompetingModelsofSensibilityinCondillacI151 Logique,butmoreimportantlybecauseitsuggeststhatsensoryrepresenta- tionismaterial,opaque,andproductiveofmeaningforCondillacÂ—some- thinglikeHeidegger'sconceptoÃ-Stimmung,asIwillarguebelowÂ—asug- gestionthatrunscountertothegeneralclaim,underlyingthechÃ¢teaumeta- phor,ofavehicular,transparentlanguage. D'unchÃ¢teaul'autre IntheTraitÃ©dessensations,CondillacshowshowalivingstatueÂ—amodel forthehumanbodyÂ—comestoknowledgethroughitssensualexperienceof theworld.Oncethestatueisabletodistinguishbetweentheselfandthe otherthroughtouch,itisenvelopedbyanxiety(inquiÃ©tude)anddesire.The statuecaneaseitsanxietybyseekingoutanddiscoveringobjectsthatgive pleasurablesensations.Theplaybetweendesireandsatisfactionleadsthe statuetorefineitsmovementssoastobettercontrolitsabilitytoprocure objectsthatgivethesesensations.Likewise,theexperienceofpainmoves thestatuetodevelop"unesorted'industrie,c'est-Ã-dire,l'artderÃ©glerses mouvemensavecprÃ©caution."18Later,thestatuecantakeamoreactiverole. Onceithastheuseofitshandsandeyes,thestatuecansightobjectsandthen graborholdthem:"ellen'attendpasqu'ilsagissentsurelle,ellevaau- devantdeleuraction."19Controloverbodilyfunctionisthusalsoastepto- wardsarationalmasteryoftheenvironmentthroughobservationandinter- vention.Theontologicalobsessionofpreviousphilosophyisreplacedbyan interestintheobservationandmanagementofobjectsthroughaproto-scien- tificunderstandingofmovementandforce.20 MovingfromtheTraitÃ©dessensationstothelaterLogique,themetaphor ofthechÃ¢teaureenactstheinterplaybetweensubjectandworlddescribedin theearlierTraitÃ©.Arguingthatanalysisistheonlymethodforarrivingat knowledge,andthatwelearnanalysisfromnatureitselfÂ—theprÃ©cishegivesforchapter2Â—Condillacbeginshischapterthus:"JesupposeunchÃ¢teauquidominesurunecampagnevaste,abondante,oÃ¹lanatures'estpluÃrÃ©pandre lavariÃ©tÃ©,&oÃ¹l'artasÃ§uprofiterdessituations,pourlesvarier&embellir encore.NousarrivonsdanscechÃ¢teaupendantlanuit.Lelendemainles fenÃªtress'ouvrentaumomentoÃ¹lesoleilcommenceÃdorerl'horizon,& ellesserefermentaussi-tÃ´t."21"QuoiquecettecampagnenesesoitmontrÃ©eÃ nousqu'uninstant,"Condillacobserves,"ilestcertainquenousavonsvutoutcequ'ellerenferme."22Condillacnotes,however,thatitwouldbeim- possibleforanyofhiscompanionstogiveanaccountofwhathehadseen; thefactofmomentary,yettotal,exposuretotheviewcanresultonlyinthe vaguestofimpressions,onethatcannotberecountedorrepresentedinany way.Condillacconcludesthatsightisnotenough;otheroperationsmust 152 / THOMAS interveneforunderstandingtooccur.Condillacnowpermitstheshuttersto bereopened.Itisonlywithtimethattheeyesbecomeawareofwhatthey haveseen.Seeingcanonlyoccurthroughthesuccessivesightingofsingular objects.Followingthevisualorderoftheobjectsthemselvesinrelationto eachother,ourgazerecomposesthescenefromthesingularelementswe observe.Thisrecompositionfollowsthenaturalorderofthecountrysideit- self:lessconspicuousobjectsaresubordinatedtomoreprominentones.In hisprÃ©cis,Condillacarguedthatanalysisisnatural.Notonlydowe"natu- rally"analyze,buttheanalyticmethodisalsoinnature.Howdowelearnthe orderofobjects?:"Ianaturel'indiqueelle-mÃªme;c'estceluidanslequelelle offrelesobjets."23Atthispoint,"ondÃ©mÃªletouslesobjetsdontonasaisila formeetlasituation,etonlesembrassed'unseulregard."24Theoriginal simultaneityofthelandscapereturns,theresultofthemind'sabilityfirstto decomposethetotality,thentobringthediscreteelementstogetheragain. Knowledge,then,isanartificialprocessofre-compositionderivingfroma directed,analyticalgaze.Thesimultaneityofthelandscapecannotbecap- turedintheinstantaneousglancebutmustbereconstructedinmethodthrough aprocessofdirectedanalysis.Oncethislandscapehasbeengrasped,Condillac argues,itcanbecomparedtoothers:"Nouspouvons,ennoustransportant dechÃ¢teauenchÃ¢teau,Ã©tudierdenouvellescampagnes,etnouslesretracer commelapremiÃ¨re.AlorsilnousarriveraoudedonnerlaprÃ©fÃ©renceÃ quelqu'une,oudetrouverqu'ellesontchacuneleuragrÃ©ment.Maisnous n'enjugeonsqueparcequenouslescomparons."25TheimageofthechÃ¢teau leadstoanarrativeofobservation,discovery,andconceptualmastery.This processcanthenberepeated,leadingtomorecomplexknowledgethrough comparison.Thepassagefromthelandscapeasawholethroughitsdecom- positionandontoitsfinal,re-composedformrevealsananalyticprocess dependentontheinstrumentalizationofsensation.Thedirectedeyebecomes theinstrumentofknowledge,mediatingbetweenthesubjectandtheworld.26 Itisimportanttonotethatthisprocessofanalysisrespectstherealinsofar as,likelanguageinCondillac'sview,itistransparenttothereal.Itisforthis reasonthathecanassertthatalllanguagesareanalyticmethodsasallmeth- odsarelanguages:bothrendertherealpresenttosubjectivityandallowusto processit.27Theclaimtotransparencyshouldnotbeconfusedwiththeno- tionofauniversallanguagewhosegrammarandsyntaxwouldfullyconform totheorderoftheworld.Condillac'sassumptionofthetransparencyoflan- guagedoesnotmeanthathebelievesinamimeticrelationbetweenwordand world.Representationsoftherealarealwaysinsomemeasureindependent oftherealforCondillac:"eneffet,nousnoustromperionsgrossiÃ¨rement,sinousnousimaginonsqu'ilyadanslanaturedesespÃ¨ces&desgenres,parce qu'ilyadesespÃ¨ces&desgenresdansnotremaniÃ¨redeconcevoir."28What isatstakeforCondillacisthatourlanguage(ourrepresentations)should CompetingModelsofSensibilityinCondillacI153 conformtoagenealogyofideasabouttheworld.AsSylvainAurouxhas remarkedaboutLaLanguedescalculs,"ilnes'agitpaspourluideconstruire l'instrumentdel'universalitÃ©,maisdedÃ©gagerlespropriÃ©tÃ©sgÃ©nÃ©rales susceptiblesd'ÃªtreretrouvÃ©esdansleslanguesempiriques."29Statedanother way,Condillac'sprojectisareflectiononmethod,notonessence. IntheLogique,Condillacclaimsthatthehumanorganismisequippedby wayofitsrepresentationalandanalyticabilitiestoactupontheworldin certainways;hemakesnoclaimaboutwhatthingsareinandofthemselves...