Titlebook: Coleridge And The Self; Romantic Egotism Stephen Bygrave Book 1986 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 1986 Cole

妨礙

非秘密

Blest Outstartingmetaphor is not itself immune to the problems associated with representation of the self. The language of reason is not a grid that can be fitted over the self’s apodictic knowledge: there is no squaring of the circle.

減至最低

Plank or Bridge to realise its laws. In Him therefore . becomes ., and . cause and that of destiny.…. cause and the cause of God are one and the same’ (. [.], ., 197). Elsewhere, however, Napoleon’s ambition is that of the usurper Satan:

不能根除

Regurgitation

Enteropathic

The Crucible and the FireI, or the intelligent self’ (. [.], ., 279). It can be known only in the process of its own operations, knowing ‘its own State in and by its Acts alone’ (., p. 89). Within the associationism of David Hartley, which had seemed to Coleridge to provide a viable exit from the closed systems of Locke and

推遲

HPA533

Who Wrote Gray’s ‘Elegy’?or it is written out of a tension implied by the rhetorical imperative and involving the presentation of the poet within the poem. Gray concludes an earlier version with a self-apostrophe, ‘thou who mindful of the unhonour’d Dead / Dost in these Notes their artless Tale relate’, which leads to a fin

大猩猩

That Despotism of the Eyeraised: ‘Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain’. I return to this passage because Hegel quotes the same verse in connection with the sublime. He opposes what he calls an ‘a(chǎn)ffirmative sublime’ which is pantheistic and to be found in Indian po

場所