β
If someone hides a thing behind a bush, looks for it and finds it again there, then there is not much to be boasted about in this search and finding: but this is how it is with the search and finding of the "truth" within the area of reason. If I make the definition of the mammal and then, after seeing a camel, declare: See, a mammal, then indeed a truth is brought to light, but it is of limited value, I mean, it is through and through anthropomorphic and contains not a single point that is βtrue in itselfβ, really and universally valid, apart from the person. The researcher for such truths is basically only looking for the metamorphosis of the world in man; he struggles to understand the world as a human-like thing and, at best, fights for the feeling of assimilation. Just as the astrologer regards the stars in the service of men and in connection with their happiness and suffering, such a researcher regards the whole world as linked to man, as the infinitely broken echo of a primordial sound, man, as the multiplied image of the an archetype, of man. His procedure is: to hold man as a measure of all things, but he proceeds from the error of believing that he has these things immediately before him as pure objects. So he forgets the original visual metaphors as metaphors and takes them as the things themselves.
β
β