THE VII SERMONES: PLAY AND THEORY

JAMES W. HEISIG (Cambridge)

Nietzsche once wrote, "A man's maturity consists in having found again the seriousness one had as a child, at play."

C. G. Jung's struggles in entering into what he called "the second half of life", for all the torment and confusion they caused, yet main­tained a quality of such playfulness about them. It may appear unfair, or at least slightly odd, to characterize something like the Red Book of Jung's conversations with his anima as the product of "play". For despite its elaborate format, Gothic calligraphy, esoteric language and embellishment with various drawings, the Red Book grew out of a period of intense stress for Jung, bordering on psychosis. Even less appropriately does the appelation seem to apply to theSeptemSermones ad M ortuos with which we are specifically concerned here. And yet both these adventures in communication with the collective psyche stand unique among Jung's writings as the closest representation of immediate and personal contact with that world which he always held to be the dominant force in the life of the child. It is as if the prelude to a serious undertaking of the way of individuation were to re-educate oneself to let go of one's rational controls, to place one's trust in that spontaneous production which makes of children, as Giambattista Vico said, such "sublime poets". The overall result is a sort of inversion of values, wherein science is overcome by art, only

The author, an American /riest and religious of the Society of the Divine Word, is currently engage in doctoral research on •ne Notion of God in C. G. Jung". Besides several papers peripheral to that major theme already published, he has written a long essay on Kazantzakis (Nea Estia, Christmas 1971 edition).

206

JAMES HEISIG

in order that something new and higher may emerge from the ensuing dialectic.

There is a second reason for resurrecting interest in these writings. Jung describes it succinctly in his autobiography when he writes: "All my works, all my creative activity, has come from those initial fanta­sies and dreams which began in 1912, almost fifty years ago. Everything that I accomplished in later life was already contained in them, al­though at first only in the form of emotions and images. "1

Now the contents of the Red Book are not available in circulation at present. Jung left a copy of this work in the hands of his secretary, Frau Aniela Jaffe, who has quoted from them for the first time in a recent talk at the Eranos meetings of 1971 (printed elsewhere in this volume).

The VII Sermones, on the other hand, have been in print for over forty-five years, although very little attention has been given to them. As I shall attempt to show below, they portray something of a macro­cosmic vision in terms of which all of Jung's major psychological notions were later to be forged. In this sense, the VII Sermones have a critical interest not unlike Freud's well-known "Project for a Scientific Psychology" of 1895, which appeared in 1950 in connection with his correspondence with Wilhelm Fliess, and Adler's recently recovered Health Book for the Tailor Trade- both of which reveal, in retro­spect, a good deal of the respective psychological structures which appeared to emerge only very gradually in their writings.

There is an obvious hermeneutical danger attending the exami­nation of such texts, namely that we attribute, in the light of a fuller historical perspective, a precociousness to them which the author never intended. This difficulty is compounded in the case of the VII Ser­mones, because Jung chose as his medium an exotic and unconventional vocabulary which, while bearing most resemblance to certain strains of first century Gnosticism, was infused with his own particular mean­ings. Omne ignotum por magnifico est . .

The VII Sermones were published pseudonymously by Jung and at first distributed only among a small circle of friends. Later in 1925 they were translated into English by H. G. Baynes and published by John Watkins of London, thus making them accessible to the general public, though still without Jung's signature. Instead, the subtitle read:

207

VII SERMONES

"The Seven Sermons to the Dead written by Basilides 2 in Alexandria, the city where the East toucheth the West." And an additional note is added: "Translated from the original Greek text into German." In all, the work is a short tract of roughly 4,500 words, more or less evenly divided into seven sections and concluding with a four-word anagram whose meaning Jung never disclosed. Its style is totally unlike anything else Jung has ever published, and is similar to that of the Red Book, except that the whole is more structured. I will follow here the Baynes translation, which has been reprinted in the American edition of Jung's autobiography.3 Occasionally I have had to correct confusions in his orthography and amend the text where the sense of the German is inadequately rendered. I would also note here that Miguel Serrano is incorrect in reporting that the English translation is an expurgated version of the original German}

The unusual conditions under which the VII Sermones were written are already well enough known from the autobiographical account Jung himself gives. The entire tract was composed in a three-day period in 1916 when the very environment in which he lived took on the qualities of his unconscious fantasies. As he himself writes: "The whole house was filled as if there were a crowd present, crammed full of spirits. They were packed deep right up to the door, and the air was so thick it was scarcely possible to breathe. "6

The sermons themselves were composed in the style of a certain "Philemon" - a character he had created to portray the pagan­Egypto-Hellenic-Gnostic attributes of his fantasies. There is a certain vague and oracular tone about the work, couched as it is in a meta­physical-sounding jargon which comfortably removes it from any ques­tion of verification. The whole is visionary and romantic, so that it is not without reason that it has led a number of Jung's critics to suspect him of an unscientific mysticism. Furthermore, there is much to invite comparison with the style of Nietzsche's Zarathustra, which had had a considerable impact on Jung.

The sermons are written in the first person, Basilides-Jung addres­sing himself as a kind of second-Messias to the dead Christians who return from Jerusalem in search of wisdom. As he remarks in Sermo IV: "For redemption's sake, I teach you the rejected truth for the sake of which I was rejected." If we follow the responses of the dead Chris-

208

\ .

JAMES HEISIG

tians to Basilides' preaching, we see that they understand it as both grossly un-Christian and yet somehow implicit in the very basis of Christian thought. At first the dead were full of objections, and upon hearing his words "raised a great tumult, for they were Christians", (II) and called him "accursed one" (IV) and "fool" (V). Still they come to recognize that he is making them conscious of their own imper­fection (III) and finally admit with disdain that all he has been telling them "has long been known to us" (VI).6 1t is not until Basilides teaches them about man, in Sermo VII, that they turn silent and depart, appa­rently finding in his teachings what they had originally come to seek. This is an important touch to the text, inasmuch as it betrays Jung's conviction that his psychological project was both a great threat to Christian dogmatism and yet its one potential salvation by offering an interpretation of Christian truths in terms more consistent with human understanding.

Sermol

Basilides commences by distinguishing the realms of PLEROMA and CREATURA,each of which is possessed of an essential internal opposition. The Pleroma is the harmony of all the opposites, both nothingness and fullness at the same time. Creatura, on the other hand, is the unre­solved tension of the same opposites, which are "effective", rather than "balanced" as in the Pleroma. The Pleroma is independent of space and time, unchangeable and unthinkable, and yet pervades the Creatura thoroughly. "It is that nothingness which is everywhere whole and continuous." Creatura is, however, characteristically distinguishable in terms of the creatures which are generated from it. Its very change­ableness makes it the one thing which is able to be fixed and certain. Creatura is a quality of the Pleroma (which is itself beyond all quali­fication), made distinct and yet not equal to the Pleroma because the latter is the eternal union of both creativity and death.

Now men as creatures belong by nature to the Creatura and can never speak about the Pleroma which surrounds them "as the light of the sun everywhere pervadeth the air" - except in reference to the Creatura. The essence of the creature, therefore, is its distinctness, without which it could not exist as Creatura, but would be absorbed into the Pleroma. "Hence the natural striving of the creature goeth

209

VII SERMONES

towards distinctiveness, fighteth against primeval, perilous sameness. This is called the PRINCIPIUM INDIVIDUATIONIS." The man who strives after the rational concepts of goodness or beauty is both rejecting his status as creature and deceiving himself about the nature of the Ple­roma. For the evil and the ugly belong every bit as much to the effective tension of opposites in the Creatura as to the reconciliation of all opposites in the Pleroma. It is thought that tends to alienate man from his main purpose, to strive after his OWN BEING.

Now all of this fits with Jung's fully developed structure of the psyche. The Pleroma is an exact equivalent of the collective uncon­scious in se, which Jung characterized frequently by what he under­stood as Kant's notion of the noumenon or Ding an sich, and about which he insisted man is incapable of speaking. While he uses the word "Pleroma" several times in his later writings, it is only in historical reference and not to any personally entertained notions. I know of only one passage in the entire Jungian corpus in which the exact identification - evident in any case - is expressly corroborated, and that is in a 1930 seminar talk where he is reported as referring to "the Pleroma, or God, or the universal unconscious, or whatever you like to call it". He goes on later, speaking of the unconscious: "It is what I designate as a pleromatic condition, a very apt term which I take from an old philosophy to designate a potential condition of things, where nothing has become, yet everything is there. "7

Jung was ever insistent that the term "collective unconscious" should be broad enough to comprehend all that is unknown. Never­theless, he saw that it had an apparent functional determination in the psyche, to which the notion of Creatura would refer. Already in The Psychology of the Unconscious (1911-12) and in the article "On Psychic Energy" composed shortly afterwards, Jung had advanced his theory of "libido" as a precursor to this use of the concept of the collective unconscious. For him libido was a more narrow notion than that of the collective unconscious in se, inasmuch as it referred ex­pressly to the energy which pervades all of life and is manifested in instinct and value. Thus libido, like Creatura, is not unique to man, but is a principle extended to all creatures which need internal opposi­tion in order to exist as individuals.

210

JAMES REISIG

The term "Creatura" is unique to the VII Sermones, but the name Jung gives to the process by means of which any living being becomes itself - Individuation - was to become the cornerstone of his entire theory of psychotherapy. While this notion only appears explicitly in the first sermon, the remaining six spell out precisely what that concept entails. At this point we are only given the negative hint that it does not involve striving after static and abstract ideals forged consciously, in isolation from the unconscious, but means · remaining true to one's libidinal base, to the tension of Creatura.

Sermones ll et Ill

When the dead Christians ask Basilides whether God has died, he responds: "God is not dead. Now, as ever, he liveth. God is Creatura ... He is distinguished from creatures, however, by the fact that he is more indefinite and indeterminable than they." But in order for God (or Creatura) to be distinguished from Pleroma, on the one hand, and creatures, on the other, (in both of which he partakes), he must become a distinct manifestation. This involves seeing god and devil as effective opposites, so that together they differentiate Creatura. "Insofar as god and devil are Creatura, they do not extinguish one another, but stand against one another as effective opposites. We need no proof of their existence ... Even if both were not, Creatura, of its own essential distinctiveness, would forever distinguish them anew out of the Ple­roma." The name given by Basilides to the manifestation of Creatura as god and devil is Abraxas,8 who is neither merely god (or HELlos}, nor merely devil, but the effective tension of the two. "Had the Ple­roma a being", he continues, "Abraxas would be its manifestation. It is the effective itself, not any particular effect, but effect in general."

Basilides then tells the dead that they are not aware of the power of Abraxas because they isolate god and devil from one another. He therefore instructs them concerning God: "From the sun he draweth the summum bonum; from the devil, the infimum malum; but from Abra­xas, LIFE, altogether indefinite, the mother of good and evil. .. What god bringeth forth out of the light, the devil sucketh· into the night. But Abraxas is the world, its becoming and its passing away." In identifying God with Creatura, Jung is clarifying a point he had left confusing in The Psychology of the Unconscious, where the God-

211

VII SERMONES

imago represented alternatively a certain libidinal complex - such as that derived from the Father-imago - and the very libido of the unconscious mind itself.9 Here, however, God is clearly identified with a manifestation of the libido itself, with the possibility being left open that gods or devils may manifest specific libidinal complexes.

Furthermore, in distinguishing God from the Pleroma, Jung is definitely disassociating any image of God from the collective uncon­scious in se, a position which flows naturally from his distinction between the collective psyche as it is in itself (Pleroma) and as it functions in the archetypal complexes of the psyche (Creatura). This is an important methodological distinction, already implicit in some earlier writings, but destined to be a constant cause of confusion to his theological critics.

Finally, the naming of God as Abraxas fulfills a double function in Jung's development. First, it enables both divine and diabolical symbols to be representative of libidinal energy, (i.e., of the function­ing unconscious in its archetypal contents}, which in itself is neither good nor bad, but the source of all values. And secondly, it shows the sense in which both god-images and devil-images are necessary to one another - an opposition not based on a belief in any ultimate metaphysical dualism in the universe, but on the manner in which the human psyche functions as viewed through the production of opposing symbols. This is a significant step for Jung, which is only hinted at in 1922 with the publication of Psychological Types, but which grows in importance in the following years (as evidenced in the seminar notes from 1925 on}, until it becomes an essential element to his under­standing of the religious function of the unconscious.10

Sermo IV

Basilides continues his re-evangelization of the dead Christians by further developing his notion of Abraxas, the god-devil (Gotteufel), which he refers to in the two images of the GROWING ONE and the BURNING ONE. Both images represent the conjunction of good and evil: the Burning One (or ERos) brings light while it consumes; the Growing One (or TREE OF LIFE) buds and grows while it amasses the living stuff around it. Together they form the burning tree, symbolizing God as the union of the opposites of life and love.

212

-·

JAMES HEISIG

This then leads to the enumeration of four principal gods: the sun-god, Eros, the Tree of Life, and the devil. But, Basilides tells the dead, the gods and devils are as innumerable as the stars. He goes on: "It is good for me that I have come to recognize the multiplicity and diversity of the gods. But woe unto you for replacing these incom­patible many by a single god ... How can ye be true to your own nature when ye want to change the many into one? What ye do unto the gods is done likewise unto you. Ye all become equal and thus is your nature maimed." The multiplicity of the gods is a direct reflection of the multiplicity of men. This is so because of a paradox: on the one hand, the gods were once men; and on the other, men were once gods, and will someday return to God. In other words men and gods share the same nature. Basilides therefore counsels the dead to worship neither the multitude of celestial gods nor any one such god, lest they ignore the earth-gods or devils. Better to see the two forces locked in eternal combat, i.e., as Abraxas.

In this sermon Jung adapts a number of biblical allusions in the service of his own vision: the appearance of Yahweh to Moses in the bush which burned but was not consumed, the Tree of Life in Eden which gave knowledge of good and evil, God's promise to Abraham to make his descendants as numerous as the stars, the commandment to worship only one God; and the lex talionis. The choice of such language provides a kind of revaluation by shock effect. "You have heard it said of old, but I say unto you ... ".

In referring to the multitude of gods and devils within the Crea­tura, it seems evident that a step has been taken here to define them as libidinal complexes -a question so far left open, as we have already pointed out, by the identification of God with Creatura. It also seems likely that there is some significance to the distinction of the four principal gods from the gods who are as numerous as men, corre­sponding to that between archetypal and personal-unconscious com­plexes. Furthermore, Jung's later theory of the quaternity is intimated in the designation of the four gods, for in addition to the traditional Trinity of Father (Helios), Son (Eros) and Spirit (Life), the devil is added to the Godhead. This is not to assert that at this early date Jung attached any archetypal significance to the number four, both

213

VII SE}I.MONES

because the archetypal theory itself was still in its primitive stages, and also because he was not yet aware of the symbolism of the quater­nity as being of any special pre-eminence. Rather, the pattern of the four, in the context of the VII Sermones, seems to be the outcome of contrasting two pure symbolic opposites - god and devil - with two pairs of symbolic opposites in effective tension within man - life and love. Jung would already have met this dialectic in the differ­entiation of the instincts of self-increase and self-preservation so pre­valent in Nietzsche's writings.

The apparently contradictory suggestions that the gods were once men and men once gods, reveals a subtlety on Jung's part. The identi­fication of the gods with libidinal complexes, as indicated above, would imply the psychogenesis of the gods as unconscious projections. But the text goes a step further in defining the individuation process whereby one originates as an individual by distinguishing the powers of one's ego-consciousness from the powers which transcend it, i.e., gods and demons.

Sermones Vet VI

In the next two sermons, Basilides continues his instructions to the dead by developing the polarity of Creatura (or God or Abraxas) in terms of human qualities, seeing the gods as manifested in spirituality and the devils in sexuality. "Spirituality conceiveth and embraceth. It is womanlike and therefore we call it MATER COELESTIS, the celestial mother. Sexuality engendereth and createth. It is manlike, and there­fore we call it PHALLOS, the earthly father." It is important not only that man and woman recognize their differences from one another, but also that they distinguish themselves from Mother and Phallos, which are "superhuman demons that reveal the world of the gods" and are yet "closely akin to our own nature". As qualities of the Ple­roma set into tension in the Creatura, sexuality and spirituality must be seen as at once our greatest task and our greatest danger. Together they involve us in the struggle between isolation and absorption into the whole. "Communion is depth. Singleness is height ... Communion giveth warmth, singleness giveth us light."

Sermo VI carries on the theme by contrasting the roles of sexuality and spirituality within the soul by means of the images of the serpent

214

-!

JAMES HEISIG

and the white bird. The serpent is the whore who consorts with the devil and tempts man with intemperate desires; the white bird is effective thought, chaste and solitary, a constant threat to the phallic demon. Both recognize each other and compensate each other, as is seen from the reversal of qualities whereby the celestial Mother be­comes earthly and the earthly Phallos celestial.

Jung is here continuing one of the central themes of the "Miss Miller" fantasies by showing the struggle in the soul between sexuality and spirituality as he had first set it out in The Psychology of the Unconscious. This represents the polarity fundamental to human na­ture, and indeed to all libido, between "preservation" and "increase", as Basilides specifically states. Moreover, by inference one can point to the positing of the necessary feminine element in the Godhead, since woman is here associated with the devil who is, as we have already seen, an essential aspect of Abraxas. This is a notion, as is well known, which was of major interest to Jung in all his later work.

We cannot overlook one very significant passage in Sermo V which deserves special note as a preparatory version of Jung's later theory of the anima/animus, which was not published until its first vague inti­mations in the closing pages of Psychological Types. Basilides speaks:

"The sexuality of man is more of the earth; the sexuality of woman is more of the spirit.

"The spirituality of man is more of heaven; it goeth to the greater. "The spirituality of woman is more of the earth; it goeth to the

smaller."

Translated in terms of later theory, these words reveal how man and woman bear their distinctive genders in the earthly (conscious) world, while the celestial (unconscious) aspect of their personalities takes on the qualities of the opposite sex for each. Indeed, all of Sermo VI is an attempt to deal with the dynamics of this process through its contrast of the white bird and the serpent - symbols undoubtedly borrowed from "Zarathustra's Prologue" .11

Sermo VII

Finally, Basilides teaches the dead Christians about man in the seventh and shortest sermon. -"Man", he says, "is a gateway through

215

VII SERMONES

which, from the outer world of gods, daemons and souls, ye pass into the inner world." He is a microcosm which mirrors the macrocosm. Now the goal which guides him both during life and after death is the "Star" which rests at its zenith on the horizon at an immeasurable distance. While Basilides had previously warned the dead not to pray to their gods or any particular god, here he says of the Star: "To this one God man shall pray. Prayer increases the light of the Star."

In the Star man and God are united, and yet stand as opposites to one another. "Man here, God there ... Weakness and nothingness here, there eternally creative power." This sermon silences the dead who disappear, ascending "like the smoke above the herdsman's fire".

In this final sermon Jung completes the notion of individuation in the image of the Star - an obvious equivalent for what he was later to call the self. In order to understand this from the text, we must see that he is using "man" in the sense of a totum pro parte- that is, as the equivalent of ego-consciousness where man is "the creator and destroyer of his own world". The opposition of man to God, there­fore, is intended as parallel to the weakness of the ego when divorced from the power of the unconscious. When the two unite in effective tension their goal is higher entity, the self, which represents the com­pletion of a process that began with the separation of consciousness from the Creatura.

We saw previously, in Sermo IV, how there is an increase in con­sciousness when man becomes aware of how all the gods, as numerous as the stars, converge, into one God, the unconscious. Now in identifying the Star as the one God of man, the same point is reiterated, but in a fuller sense. It is no longer merely a statement of the fact that uncon­scious libido is the origin of all our divine and diabolical projections, but that the coming-to-be of the self is the very raison d'etre of man.

We may observe, last of all, that the image of the Star-God bears too much resemblance to the Bethlehem myth to have been uninten­tional. And this for two reasons. First, as the union of God and man, Christ (i.e., the archetypal Christ, not the dogmatic version) is the symbol of the self for Western man. In time Jung was to make this explicit in his writings. Secondly, it is likely that at the time of the composition of the VI/ Sermones Jung was familiar enough with Gnostic texts to realize that the birth of Christ had been associated

216

..

JAMES HEISIG

with the dawn of the age of the Pisces and the conjunctio maxima of Jupiter and Saturn, which was held to account for the appearance of the star. In this sense, the union of goodness and evil, Christ and Antichrist, in God is symbolized in the Star. Whatever the precise process of reasoning behind Jung's choice of imagery, there seems to be an implicit identification of individuation and progressive incar­nation, which he was later to term the "Christification of many. "12

* However many questions the VII Sermones leave unanswered,

it is certainly surprising to find at this relatively early date such a concentration of ideas which we are accustomed to associate with Jung's later work. Nevertheless, as Frau Jaffe tells us, he considered it a "sin of his youth" - partly, no doubt, because of the charges of Gnosticism levelled against him by such men as C. B. Strauss, Hans Prinzhorn and Martin Buber, which this booklet only helped to sub­stantiate.13

At the same time, the sermons of Basilides appear to set Jung within the camp of "metaphysics" which he so passionately rebelled against. On his own terms, of course, such a judgment is simply not true, inasmuch as Jung had always associated metaphysics with specu­lations about the noumenal realm, the Pleroma, while anything having to do with the reflection on actual experience of the psyche was open to science. This distinction is clear enough in the VII Sermones, as we indicated above.

It is futile to argue over Jung's choice of vocabulary, since a more important set of methodological questions lie at the base of his distinc­tions. It would be interesting to ask whether the complex of hypotheses constituting the Jungian approach- stripped of its data and modes of verification - might not very well read like certain sections of the VII Sermones, with no offense to their meaning. Such a process of translation - proceeding in the opposite direction from the journey we have travelled here - might serve to make us more aware · of the salient part which intuition, deduction and imagination have had even in Jung's most concerted efforts to do strictly empirical science. Not only in the practice of psychotherapy, but also in its theory, there is always a healthy flavoring of art. The work depends on play.

217

VII SERMONES

1 Memories, Dreams, Reflections, New York: Pantheon, 1961, p. 192. 2 Basilides was an early second century Syrian, the most celebrated of the Gnostics,

and had probably studied at Alexandria. We have conflicting reports on his philosophy from Irenaeus and Hippolytus. In either account, however, the differences from Jung's approach are too significant to suppose any dependence.

3 Memories ... , Appendix V, pp. 378-90. There is a short introductory note by Frau Jaffe which I have made use of at severalfoints in this essay.

4 C. G. jung and Herman Hesse: A Record o Two Friendships, New York: Schocken Books, 4th edition, 1970, p. 94. Presumably, Serrano has confused the fact that the English edition of the autobiography- in which the VII Ser­mones is contained - was abbreviated somewhat from the German original.

5 Memories ... p. 190. . 6 It is likely that Jung intends to repeat here a pattern which he would have found

in William James, whose writings he knew. Speaking of the "classic stages of a theory's career", James wrote: "First, you know, a new theory is attacked as absurd; then it is admitted to be true, but obvious and insignificant; finally it is seen to be so important that its adversaries claim that they themselves discovered it." Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking N.Y.: Longmans, Green, 1949, p. 198.

7 DreamAnalysis,Ziirich, 1958, privately printed, 3rd edition, Vol. 2, pp. 218, 220. cf. also the comments recorded in Margaret Ostrowski-Sachs, From Conver­sations with C. G. jung, Ziirich, 1971, privately printed, pp. 9, 22.

8 The original Basilides had also made use of this notion of the God Abraxas, which is quite common throughout Gnostic literature. For some reason or other, Jung did not draw much attention to this symbol in his later writings, except for occasional passing references in the seminar notes. The longest is in the " Interpretation of Visions", Ziirich, 1932, Vol. 7, pp. 32-5.

9 cf. The Psychology of the Unconscious, London: Kegan Paul, 1915, pp. 55-6 71, 505-6 n.69.

10 Jung refers to the godliness of Abraxas by means of the image of the sun (or Helios), "the highest good" (IV). While this is his usual notion of the sun-god, it is interesting to observe that in The Psychology of the Unconscious he refers to the sun as an ideal image for the libido as a whole since its powers are both evil and good, destructive and beneficient (op. cit;, p. 128). This rassage remains unchanged in the 1950 revision of the book (Coil. Works, 5).

11 Zarathustra is pictured by Nietzsche as having an eagle and a serpent as his companions. In his analysis of this section, Jung himself equates the eagle with the spirit and the serpent with the body. "Psychological Analysis of Nietzsche's Zarathustra", Ziirich, 1934, Vol. 1, Lecture One.

12 Although the idea appears considerably earlier, this particular phrase comes from Answer to job, Coil. Works, 112, p. 470.

13 For a recent "discussion of Gnosticism in the Septem Sermones see G. Quispel, "C. G. Jung und die Gnosis", Eranos jahrbuch XXXVII/1968, Ziirich, pp. 227-298 and Judith Hubback's article "VII Sermones ad mortuos", j. Analyt. Psycho/. 11, 1966, pp. 98 f., 109f.

14 v. Karl Popper, The Logic o.f Scientific Discovery, Hutchinson, London, revised edition, 1968, especially Ch. 1.

218

-

,• ..

~ i . ' J , ,,