Appearance and Reality-F. H. BRADLEY




Second Edition (Revised), with an Appendix


Francis Herbert Bradley

Appearance and Reality

PREFACE (1893)

I HAVE described the following work as an essay in metaphysics. Neither in form nor extent does it carry out the idea of a system. Its subject indeed is central enough to justify the exhaustive treatment of every problem. But what I have done is incomplete, and what has been left undone has often been omitted arbitrarily. The book is a more or less desultory handling of perhaps the chief questions in metaphysics. There were several reasons why I did not attempt a more systematic treatise, and to carry out even what I proposed has proved enough for my powers. I began this book in the autumn of 1887, and, after writing the first two fifths of it in twelve months, then took three years with the remainder. My work has been suspended several times through long intervals of compulsory idleness, and I have been glad to finish it when and how I could. I do not say this to obviate criticism on a book now deliberately published. But, if I had attempted more, I should probably have completed nothing. And in the main I have accomplished all that lay within my compass. This volume is meant to be a critical discussion of first principles, and its object is to stimulate enquiry and doubt. To originality in any other sense it makes no claim. If the reader finds that on any points he has been led once more to reflect, I shall not have failed, so far as I can, to be original. But I should add that my book is not intended for the beginner. Its language in general I hope is not over-technical, but I have sometimes used terms intelligible only to the student.

Continue Reading

Prayer for quashing proceedings is held is nothing but abuse of process of law and devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed with costs-DHC

Now, after six years, all of a sudden petitioner has come with the present petition seeking quashing of the proceedings, taking the plea that the cheque was lost in 2001. Nowhere it has been mentioned as to whether petitioner has taken this plea before the trial court during the last six years or not. It is well-settled that the benefit of Section 482 Cr.P.C. should not be extended to persons who do not approach the Court at the earliest possible opportunity. So, on account of delays and latches, the petitioner is not entitled to relief as sought for and the benefit under this Section cannot be granted to the petitioner on this short ground alone.Continue Reading