-
Главная
-
- Книги
-
- Авторы
-
- Джек Лондон
-
- Мартин Иден
-
- Стр. 183/241
Для того чтобы воспользоваться озвучкой предложений, необходимо
Войти или зарегистрироваться
Озвучка предложений доступна при наличии PRO-доступа
Купить PRO-доступ
Kreis
seemed
to
wake
up
and
flash
like
some
metallic
,
magnetic
thing
,
while
Norton
looked
at
Martin
sympathetically
,
with
a
sweet
,
girlish
smile
,
as
much
as
to
say
that
he
would
be
amply
protected
.
Kreis
began
directly
on
Martin
,
but
step
by
step
Norton
interfered
,
until
he
and
Kreis
were
off
and
away
in
a
personal
battle
.
Martin
listened
and
fain
would
have
rubbed
his
eyes
.
It
was
impossible
that
this
should
be
,
much
less
in
the
labor
ghetto
south
of
Market
.
The
books
were
alive
in
these
men
.
They
talked
with
fire
and
enthusiasm
,
the
intellectual
stimulant
stirring
them
as
he
had
seen
drink
and
anger
stir
other
men
.
What
he
heard
was
no
longer
the
philosophy
of
the
dry
,
printed
word
,
written
by
half
-
mythical
demigods
like
Kant
and
Spencer
.
It
was
living
philosophy
,
with
warm
,
red
blood
,
incarnated
in
these
two
men
till
its
very
features
worked
with
excitement
.
Now
and
again
other
men
joined
in
,
and
all
followed
the
discussion
with
cigarettes
going
out
in
their
hands
and
with
alert
,
intent
faces
.
Idealism
had
never
attracted
Martin
,
but
the
exposition
it
now
received
at
the
hands
of
Norton
was
a
revelation
.
The
logical
plausibility
of
it
,
that
made
an
appeal
to
his
intellect
,
seemed
missed
by
Kreis
and
Hamilton
,
who
sneered
at
Norton
as
a
metaphysician
,
and
who
,
in
turn
,
sneered
back
at
them
as
metaphysicians
.
Phenomenon
and
noumenon
were
bandied
back
and
forth
.
They
charged
him
with
attempting
to
explain
consciousness
by
itself
.
He
charged
them
with
word
-
jugglery
,
with
reasoning
from
words
to
theory
instead
of
from
facts
to
theory
.
At
this
they
were
aghast
.
It
was
the
cardinal
tenet
of
their
mode
of
reasoning
to
start
with
facts
and
to
give
names
to
the
facts
.
When
Norton
wandered
into
the
intricacies
of
Kant
,
Kreis
reminded
him
that
all
good
little
German
philosophies
when
they
died
went
to
Oxford
.
A
little
later
Norton
reminded
them
of
Hamilton
’
s
Law
of
Parsimony
,
the
application
of
which
they
immediately
claimed
for
every
reasoning
process
of
theirs
.
And
Martin
hugged
his
knees
and
exulted
in
it
all
.
But
Norton
was
no
Spencerian
,
and
he
,
too
,
strove
for
Martin
’
s
philosophic
soul
,
talking
as
much
at
him
as
to
his
two
opponents
.
"
You
know
Berkeley
has
never
been
answered
,
"
he
said
,
looking
directly
at
Martin
.
"
Herbert
Spencer
came
the
nearest
,
which
was
not
very
near
.
Even
the
stanchest
of
Spencer
’
s
followers
will
not
go
farther
.
I
was
reading
an
essay
of
Saleeby
’
s
the
other
day
,
and
the
best
Saleeby
could
say
was
that
Herbert
Spencer
nearly
succeeded
in
answering
Berkeley
.
"
"
You
know
what
Hume
said
?
"
Hamilton
asked
.
Norton
nodded
,
but
Hamilton
gave
it
for
the
benefit
of
the
rest
.
"
He
said
that
Berkeley
’
s
arguments
admit
of
no
answer
and
produce
no
conviction
.
"
"
In
his
,
Hume
’
s
,
mind
,
"
was
the
reply
.
"
And
Hume
’
s
mind
was
the
same
as
yours
,
with
this
difference
:
he
was
wise
enough
to
admit
there
was
no
answering
Berkeley
.
"
Norton
was
sensitive
and
excitable
,
though
he
never
lost
his
head
,
while
Kreis
and
Hamilton
were
like
a
pair
of
cold
-
blooded
savages
,
seeking
out
tender
places
to
prod
and
poke
.
As
the
evening
grew
late
,
Norton
,
smarting
under
the
repeated
charges
of
being
a
metaphysician
,
clutching
his
chair
to
keep
from
jumping
to
his
feet
,
his
gray
eyes
snapping
and
his
girlish
face
grown
harsh
and
sure
,
made
a
grand
attack
upon
their
position
.
"
All
right
,
you
Haeckelites
,
I
may
reason
like
a
medicine
man
,
but
,
pray
,
how
do
you
reason
?
You
have
nothing
to
stand
on
,
you
unscientific
dogmatists
with
your
positive
science
which
you
are
always
lugging
about
into
places
it
has
no
right
to
be
.
Long
before
the
school
of
materialistic
monism
arose
,
the
ground
was
removed
so
that
there
could
be
no
foundation
.
Locke
was
the
man
,
John
Locke
.
Two
hundred
years
ago
—
more
than
that
,
even
in
his
‘
Essay
concerning
the
Human
Understanding
,
’
he
proved
the
non
-
existence
of
innate
ideas
.
The
best
of
it
is
that
that
is
precisely
what
you
claim
.
To
-
night
,
again
and
again
,
you
have
asserted
the
non
-
existence
of
innate
ideas
.
