The author uses the indefinite pronoun something in the first sentence because:
a. he wants to hook the reader with the ambiguity
b. he's imprecise in his thinking
c. his style is academic and purposefully obscure
d. he does not know yet what the "something" is
e. he wants to argue that the "something" he speaks of can't be defined.
Refer to the passage from Benedict de Spinoza's On the Improvement of the Understanding, translated by R.H.M. Elwes.
I believe the answer is D or E.
[6] (1) When I saw that all these ordinary objects of desire would be obstacles in the way of a search for something different and new. nay, that they were so opposed thereto, that either they or it would have to be abandoned, I was forced to inquire which would prove the most useful to me: for, as I say, I seemed to be willingly losing hold on a sure good for the sake of something uncertain. (6:2) However, after I had reflected on the matter, I came in the first place to the conclusion that by abandoning the ordinary objects of pursuit, and betaking myself to a new quest, I should be leaving a good, uncertain by reason of its own nature, as may be gathered from what has been said, for the sake of a good not uncertain in its nature (for I sought for a fixed good), but only in the possibility of its attainment.
[7] (1) Further reflection convinced me that if I could really get to the root of the matter I should be leaving certain evils for a certain good. (2) I thus perceived that I was in a state of great peril, and I compelled myself to seek with all my strength for a remedy, however uncertain it might be; as a sick man struggling with a deadly disease, when he sees that death will surely be upon him unless a remedy be found, is compelled to seek a remedy with all his strength, inasmuch as his whole hope lies therein. (7:3) All the objects pursued by the multitude not only bring no remedy that tends to preserve our being, but even act as hindrances, causing the death not seldom of those who possess them, [b] and always of those who are possessed by them.
I absolutely despise the human being above
Based on the passage from Benedict de Spinoza's "On the Improvement of the Understanding," the author uses the indefinite pronoun "something" in the first sentence because he does not know yet what the "something" is. The passage states, "When I saw that all these ordinary objects of desire would be obstacles in the way of a search for something different and new..." This suggests that the author is still in the process of searching for or defining this "something" and has not yet identified it. Therefore, the correct answer is D.
In order to determine why the author uses the indefinite pronoun "something" in the first sentence, let's analyze the passage:
Firstly, the author mentions that ordinary objects of desire would be obstacles in the search for "something different and new." This suggests that the author is seeking a specific goal or outcome that is not aligned with the ordinary desires of most people.
Next, the author highlights the uncertainty associated with this "something" by stating that it would require abandoning the ordinary objects of pursuit for the sake of the uncertain. This implies that the author does not yet know what this "something" is, but recognizes its potential value and is willing to explore it.
Based on this analysis, Option D could be a possible answer because the author does not know yet what the "something" is. Alternatively, Option E could also be valid as the author may argue that the "something" he speaks of cannot be easily defined.
It is important to note that the passage does not provide explicit evidence for other options, such as the author wanting to hook the reader with ambiguity (Option A), being imprecise in his thinking (Option B), or having a purposely obscure academic style (Option C).