PartI
TheUnknowableChapter1ReligionandScience§1。Wetoooftenforgetthatnotonlyisthere"asoulofgoodness
inthingsevil，"butverygenerallyalso，asouloftruthinthings
erroneous。Whilemanyadmittheabstractprobabilitythatafalsityhasusually
anucleusofverity，fewbearthisabstractprobabilityinmind，whenpassing
judgmentontheoptionsofothers。Abeliefthatisprovedtobegrossly
atvariancewithfact，iscastasidewithindignationorcontempt;andin
theheatofantagonismscarcelyanyoneinquireswhattherewasinthisbelief
whichcommendedittomen'sminds。Yettheremusthavebeensomething。And
thereisreasontosuspectthatthissomethingwasitscorrespondencewith
certainoftheirexperiences:anextremelylimitedorvaguecorrespondence
perhaps，butstill，acorrespondence。Eventheabsurdestreportmayinnearly
everyinstancebetracedtoanactualoccurrence;andhadtherebeennosuch
actualoccurrence，thispreposterousmisrepresentationofitwouldnever
haveexisted。Thoughthedistortedormagnifiedimagetransmittedtousthrough
therefractingmediumofrumour，isutterlyunlikethereality;yetinthe
absenceoftherealitytherewouldhavebeennodistortedormagnifiedimage。
Andthusitiswithhumanbeliefsingeneral。Entirelywrongastheymay
appear，theimplicationisthattheyoriginallycontained，andperhapsstillcontain，somesmallamountoftruth。Definiteviewsonthismatterwouldbeveryusefultous。Itisimportant
thatweshouldformsomethinglikeageneraltheoryofcurrentoptions，so
thatwemayneitherover—estimatenorunder—estimatetheirworth。Arriving
atcorrectjudgmentsondisputedquestions，muchdependsonthementalattitude
preservedwhilelisteningto，ortakingpartin，thecontroversies;andfor
thepreservationofarightattitude，itisneedfulthatweshouldlearn
howtrue，andyethowuntrue，areaveragehumanbeliefs。Ontheonehand，
wemustkeepfreefromthatbiasinfavourofreceivedideaswhichexpresses
itselfinsuchdogmasas"Whateveryonesaysmustbetrue，"or
"ThevoiceofthepeopleisthevoiceofGod。"Ontheotherhand，
thefactdisclosedbyasurveyofthepastthatmajoritieshaveusuallybeen
wrong，mustnotblindustothecomplementaryfactthatmajoritieshaveusually
notbeenentirelywrong。Andtheavoidanceoftheseextremesbeingapre—requisite
tocatholicthinking，weshalldowelltoprovideourselveswithasafeguard
againstthem，bymakingavaluationofopinionsintheabstract。Tothis
endwemustcontemplatethekindofrelationthatordinarilysubsistsbetween
opinionsandfacts。Letusdosowithoneofthosebeliefswhichundervariousformshasprevailedamongallnationsinalltimes。§2。Earlytraditionsrepresentrulersasgodsordemigods。Bytheir
subjects，primitivekingswereregardedassuperhumaninoriginandsuperhuman
inpower。Theypossesseddivinetitles，receivedobeisanceslikethosemade
beforethealtarsofdeities，andwereinsomecasesactuallyworshipped。
Ofcoursealongwiththeimpliedbeliefsthereexistedabeliefintheunlimited
poweroftheruleroverhissubjects，extendingeventothetakingoftheir
livesatwill;asuntilrecentlyinFiji，whereavictimstoodunboundto
bekilledatthewordofhischiefhimselfdeclaring，"whateverthekingsaysmustbedone。"Inothertimesandamongotherraces，wefindthesebeliefsalittlemodified。
Themonarch，insteadofbeingthoughtgodordemigod，isconceivedtobe
amanhavingdivineauthority，withperhapsmoreorlessofdivinenature。
Heretains，however，titlesexpressinghisheavenlydescentorrelationships，
andisstillsalutedinformsandwordsashumbleasthoseaddressedtothe
Deity。Whileinsomeplacesthelivesandpropertiesofhispeople，ifnotsocompletelyathismercy，arestillintheorysupposedtobehis。Laterintheprogressofcivilization，asduringthemiddleagesinEurope，
thecurrentopinionsrespectingtherelationshipofrulersandruledare
furtherchanged。Forthetheoryofdivineoriginthereissubstitutedthat
ofdivineright。Nolongergodordemigod，orevengod—descended，theking
isnowregardedsimplyasGod'svicegerent。Theobeisancesmadetohimare
notsoextremeintheirhumility;andhissacredtitleslosemuchoftheir
meaning。Moreoverhisauthorityceasestobeunlimited。Subjectsdenyhis
righttodisposeatwilloftheirlivesandproperties，andyieldallegianceonlyintheshapeofobediencetohiscommands。Withadvancingpoliticaloptionhascomestillgreaterrestrictionof
monarchicalpower。Beliefinthesupernaturalcharacteroftheruler，long
agorepudiatedbyourselvesforexample，hasleftbehinditnothingmore
thanthepopulartendencytoascribeunusualgoodness，wisdom，andbeauty
tothemonarch。Loyalty，whichoriginallymeantimplicitsubmissiontothe
king'swill，nowmeansamerelynominalprofessionofsubordination，and
thefulfilmentofcertainformsofrespect。Bydeposingsomeandputting
othersintheirplaces，wehavenotonlydeniedthedivinerightsofcertain
mentorule，butwehavedeniedthattheyhaveanyrightsbeyondthoseoriginating
intheassentofthenation。ThoughourformsofspeechandourState—documents
stillassertthesubjectionofthecitizenstotheruler，ouractualbeliefs
andourdailyproceedingsimplicitlyassertthecontrary。Wehaveentirely
divestedthemonarchoflegislativepower，andshouldimmediatelyrebelagainsthisorherdictationeveninmattersofsmallconcern。Norhastherejectionofprimitivepoliticalbeliefsresultedonlyin
transferringthepowerofaautocrattoarepresentativebody。Theviews
heldrespectinggovernmentsingeneral，ofwhateverform，arenowwidely
differentfromthoseonceheld。Whetherpopularordespotic，governments
inancienttimesweresupposedtohaveunlimitedauthorityovertheirsubjects。
IndividualsexistedforthebenefitoftheState;nottheStateforthebenefit
ofindividuals。Inourdays，however，notonlyhasthenationalwillbeen
inmanycasessubstitutedforthewilloftheking，buttheexerciseofthis
nationalwillhasbeenrestricted。InEngland，forinstance，thoughthere
hasbeenestablishednodefinitedoctrinerespectingtheboundstogovernmental
action，yet，inpractice，sundryboundstoitaretacitlyrecognizedbyall。
Thereisnoorganiclawdeclaringthatalegislaturemaynotfreelydispose
ofcitizens'lives，askingsdidofold，butwereitpossibleforourlegislature
toattemptsuchathing，itsowndestructionwouldbetheconsequence，rather
thanthedestructionofcitizens。Howfullywehaveestablishedthepersonal
libertiesofthesubjectagainsttheinvasionsofState—power，wouldbequickly
shownwereitproposedbyActofParliamenttotakepossessionofthenation，
orofanyclass，andturnitsservicestopublicends，astheservicesof
thepeoplewereturnedbyEgyptiankings。Notonlyinourdayhavetheclaims
ofthecitizentolife，liberty，andpropertybeenthusmadegoodagainst
theState，butsundryminorclaimslikewise。Agesagolawsregulatingdress
andmodeoflivingfellintodisuse，andanyattempttorevivethemwould
provethatsuchmattersnowliebeyondthesphereoflegalcontrol。Forsome
centuriesweassertedinpractice，andhavenowestablishedintheory，the
rightofeverymantochoosehisownreligiousbeliefs，insteadofreceiving
State—authorizedbeliefs。Withinthelastfewgenerationscompleteliberty
ofspeechhasbeengained，inspiteofalllegislativeattemptstosuppress
orlimitit。Andstillmorerecentlywehaveobtainedunderafewexceptional
restrictions，freedomtotradewithwhomsoeverweplease。Thusourpolitical
beliefsarewidelydifferentfromancientones，notonlyastotheproper
depositaryofpowertobeexercisedoveranation，butalsoastotheextentofthatpower。Norevenherehasthechangeended。Besidestheaverageopinionsjust
describedascurrentamongourselves，thereexistsalesswidely—diffused
opiniongoingstillfurtherinthesamedirection。Therearetobefound
menwhocontendthatthesphereofgovernmentshouldbenarrowedevenmore
thanitisinEngland。Theyholdthatthefreedomoftheindividual，limited
onlybythelikefreedomofotherindividuals，issacred。Theyassertthat
thesolefunctionoftheStateistheprotectionofpersonsagainstoneanother，
andagainstaforeignfoe;andtheybelievethattheultimatepoliticalcondition
mustbeoneinwhichpersonalfreedomisthegreatestpossibleandgovernmentalpowertheleastpossible。Thusindifferenttimesandplaceswefind，concedingtheorigin，authority，
andfunctionsofgovernment，agreatvarietyofopinions。Whatnowmustbe
saidaboutthetruthorfalsityoftheseopinions？Mustwesaythatsome
oneiswhollyrightandalltherestwhollywrong;ormustwesaythateach
ofthemcontainstruthmoreorlessdisguisedbyerrors？Thelatteralternative
istheonewhichanalysiswillforceuponus。Everyoneofthesedoctrines
hasforitsvitalelementtherecognitionofanunquestionablefact。Directly
orbyimplication，eachinsistsonacertainsubordinationofindividual
actionstosocialdictates。Therearedifferencesrespectingthepowerto
whichthissubordinationisdue;therearedifferencesrespectingthemotive
forthissubordination;therearedifferencesrespectingitsextent;but
thattheremustbesomesubordinationallareagreed。Themostsubmissive
andthemostrecalcitrantalikeholdthattherearelimitswhichindividual
actionsmaynottransgress——limitswhichtheoneregardsasoriginating
inaruler'swill，andwhichtheotherregardsasdeduciblefromtheequalclaimsoffellow—citizens。Itmaydoubtlessbesaidthatweherereachaveryunimportantconclusion。
Thequestion，however，isnotthevalueornoveltyoftheparticulartruth
inthiscasearrivedat。Myaimhasbeentoexhibitthemoregeneraltruth，
thatbetweenthemostdiversebeliefsthereisusuallysomethingincommon，
——somethingtakenforgrantedineach;andthatthissomething，ifnotto
besetdownasanunquestionableverity，mayyetbeconsideredtohavethe
highestdegreeofprobability。Apostulatewhich，liketheoneaboveinstanced，
isnotconsciouslyassertedbutunconsciouslyinvolved，andwhichisunconsciously
involvednotbyonemanorbodyofmen，butbynumerousbodiesofmenwho
divergeincountlesswaysanddegreesintherestoftheirbeliefs，hasawarrantfartranscendinganythatcanbeusuallyshown。Dowenotthusarriveatageneralizationwhichmayhabituallyguideus
whenseekingforthesouloftruthinthingserroneous？Whiletheforegoing
illustrationbringshomethefactthatinopinionsseemingtobeabsolutely
wrongsomethingrightisyettobefound，italsoindicatesawayoffinding
thesomethingright。Thiswayistocompareallopinionsofthesamegenus;
tosetasideasmoreorlessdiscreditingoneanotherthosespecialandconcrete
elementsinwhichsuchopinionsdisagree;toobservewhatremainsafterthese
havebeeneliminated;andtofindfortheremainingconstituentthatexpressionwhichholdstruethroughoutitsvariousdisguises。§3。Aconsistentadoptionofthemethodindicatedwillgreatlyaid
usindealingwithchronicantagonismsofbelief。Byapplyingitnotonly
toideaswithwhichweareunconcerned，butalsotoourownideasandthose
ofouropponents，weshallbeenabledtoformmorecorrectjudgments。We
shallbeledtosuspectthatourconvictionsarenotwhollyright，andthat
theadverseconvictionsarenotwhollywrong。Ontheonehand，weshallnot，
incommonwiththegreatmassoftheunthinking，letourcreedbedetermined
bythemereaccidentofbirthinaparticularageonaparticularpartof
theEarth'ssurface，while，ontheotherhand，weshallbesavedfromthat
errorofentireandcontemptuousnegation，fallenintobymostwhotakeupanattitudeofindependentcriticism。Ofallantagonismsofbelieftheoldest，thewidest，themostprofound，
andthemostimportant，isthatbetweenReligionandScience。Itcommenced
whenrecognitionofthecommonestuniformitiesinsurroundingthings，set
alimittoall—pervadingsuperstitions。Itshowsitselfeverywherethroughout
thedomainofhumanknowledge;affectingmen'sinterpretationsalikeofthe
simplestmechanicalaccidentsandthemostcomplexeventsinthehistories
ofnations。Ithasitsrootsdeepdowninthediversehabitsofthoughtof
differentordersofminds。AndtheconflictingconceptionsofNatureand
Lifewhichthesediversehabitsofthoughtseverallygenerate，influenceforgoodorillthetoneoffeelingandthedailyconduct。Abattleofopinionlikethiswhichhasbeencarriedonforagesunder
thebannersofReligionandScience，hasgeneratedananimosityfatalto
ajustestimateofeitherpartybytheother。Happilythetimesdisplayan
increasingcatholicityoffeeling，whichweshalldowelltocarryasfar
asournaturespermit。Inproportionaswelovetruthmoreandvictoryless，
weshallbecomeanxioustoknowwhatitiswhichleadsouropponentstothink
astheydo。Weshallbegintosuspectthatthepertinacityofbeliefexhibited
bythemmustresultfromaperceptionofsomethingwehavenotperceived。
Andweshallaimtosupplementtheportionoftruthwehavefoundwiththe
portionfoundbythem。Makingarationalestimateofhumanauthority，we
shallavoidaliketheextremesofunduesubmissionandunduerebellion——
shallnotregardsomemen'sjudgmentsaswhollygoodandothersaswholly
bad;butshall，contrariwise，leantothemoredefensiblepositionthatnone
arecompletelyrightandnonearecompletelywrong。Preserving，asfaras
maybe，thisimpartialattitude，letusthencontemplatethetwosidesof
thisgreatcontroversy。Keepingguardagainstthebiasofeducationandshutting
outthewhisperingsofsectarianfeeling，letusconsiderwhataretheaprioriprobabilitiesinfavourofeachparty。§4。Thegeneralprincipleaboveillustratedmustleadustoanticipate
thatthediverseformsofreligiousbeliefwhichhaveexistedandwhichstill
exist，haveallabasisinsomeultimatefact。Judgingbyanalogytheimplication
is，notthatanyoneofthemisaltogetherright，butthatineachthere
issomethingrightmoreorlessdisguisedbyotherthingswrong。Itmaybe
thatthesouloftruthcontainedinerroneouscreedsisextremelyunlike
most，ifnotall，ofitsseveralembodiments;andindeedif，aswehavegood
reasontoassume，itismuchmoreabstractthananyofthem，itsunlikeness
necessarilyfollows。Butsomeessentialveritymustbelookedfor。Tosuppose
thatthesemultiformconceptionsshouldbeoneandallabsolutelygroundless，
discreditstooprofoundlythataveragehumanintelligencefromwhichallourindividualintelligencesareinherited。Tothepresumptionthatanumberofdiversebeliefsofthesameclass
havesomecommonfoundationinfact，mustinthiscasebeaddedafurther
presumptionderivedfromtheomnipresenceofthebeliefs。Religiousideas
ofonekindorotherarealmostuniversal。Grantthatamongallmenwhohave
passedacertainstageofintellectualdevelopmenttherearefoundvague
notionsconcerningtheoriginandhiddennatureofsurroundingthings，and
therearisestheinferencethatsuchnotionsarenecessarilyproductsof
progressingintelligence。Theirendlessvarietyservesbuttostrengthen
thisconclusion:showingasitdoesamoreorlessindependentgenesis——
showinghow，indifferentplacesandtimeslikeconditionshaveledtosimilar
trainsofthought，endinginanalogousresults。Acandidexaminationofthe
evidencequitenegativesthesuppositionthatcreedsarepriestlyinventions。
Evenasamerequestionofprobabilitiesitcannotrationallybeconcluded
thatineverysociety，savageandcivilized，certainmenhavecombinedto
deludetherestinwayssoanalogous。Moreover，thehypothesisofartificial
originfailstoaccountforthefacts。Itdoesnotexplainwhyunderall
changesofform，certainelementsofreligiousbeliefremainconstant。It
doesnotshowhowithappensthatwhileadversecriticismhasfromageto
agegoneondestroyingparticulartheologicaldogmas，ithasnotdestroyed
thefundamentalconceptionunderlyingthosedogmas。Thustheuniversality
ofreligiousideas，theirindependentevolutionamongdifferentprimitive
races，andtheirgreatvitalityuniteinshowingthattheirsourcemustbe
deep—seated。Inotherwords，weareobligedtoadmitthatifnotsupernaturally
derivedasthemajoritycontend，theymustbederivedoutofhumanexperiences，slowlyaccumulatedandorganized。Shoulditbeassertedthatreligiousideasareproductsofthereligious
sentimentwhich，tosatisfyitself，promptsimaginationsthatitafterwards
projectsintotheexternalworld，andby—and—bymistakesforrealities，the
problemisnotsolved，butonlyremovedfartherback。Whencecomesthesentiment？
Thatitisaconstituentinman'snatureisimpliedbythehypothesis，and
cannotindeedbedeniedbythosewhopreferotherhypotheses。Andifthe
religioussentiment，displayedconstantlybythemajorityofmankind，and
occasionallyarousedeveninthoseseeminglydevoidofit，mustbeclassed
amonghumanemotions，wecannotrationallyignoreit。Hereisanattribute
whichhasplayedaconspicuouspartthroughouttheentirepastasfarback
ashistoryrecords，andisatpresentthelifeofnumerousinstitutions，
thestimulustoperpetualcontroversies，andtheprompterofcountlessdaily
actions。Evidentlyasaquestioninphilosophywearecalledontosaywhat
thisattributemeans;andwecannotdeclinethetaskwithoutconfessingourphilosophytobeincompetent。Twosuppositionsonlyareopentous;theonethatthefeelingwhichresponds
toreligiousideasresulted，alongwithallotherhumanfaculties，froman
actofspecialcreation;theotherthatit，incommonwiththerest，arose
byaprocessofevolution。Ifweadoptthefirstofthesealternatives，universally
acceptedbyourancestorsandbytheimmensemajorityofourcontemporaries，
thematterisatoncesettled:manisdirectlyendowedwiththereligious
feelingbyacreator;andtothatcreatoritdesignedlyresponds。Ifweadopt
thesecondalternative，thenwearemetbythequestions——Whatarethe
circumstancestowhichthegenesisofthereligiousfeelingisdue？and——
Whatisitsoffice？Considering，aswemustonthissupposition，allfaculties
toberesultsofaccumulatedmodificationscausedbytheintercourseofthe
organismwithitsenvironment，weareobligedtoadmitthatthereexistin
theenvironmentcertainphenomenaorconditionswhichhavedeterminedthe
growthofthereligiousfeeling，andsoareobligedtoadmitthatitisas
normalasanyotherfaculty。Addtowhichthatas，onthehypothesisofa
developmentoflowerformsintohighertheendtowardswhichtheprogressive
changestend，mustbeadaptationtotherequirementsoflife，wearealso
forcedtoinferthatthisfeelingisinsomewayconducivetohumanwelfare。
Thusbothalternativescontainthesameultimateimplication。Wemustconclude
thatthereligioussentimentiseitherdirectlycreatedorisdevelopedby
theslowactionofnaturalcauses，andwhicheverconclusionweadoptrequiresustotreatthereligioussentimentwithrespect。Oneotherconsiderationshouldnotbeoverlooked——aconsiderationwhich
studentsofSciencemoreespeciallyneedtohavepointedout。Occupiedas
sucharewithestablishedtruths，andaccustomedtoregardthingsnotalready
knownasthingstobehereafterdiscovered，theyareliabletoforgetthat
information，howeverextensiveitmaybecome，canneversatisfyinquiry。
Positiveknowledgedoesnot，andnevercan，fillthewholeregionofpossible
thought。Attheuttermostreachofdiscoverytherearises，andmustever
arise，thequestion——Whatliesbeyond？Asitisimpossibletothinkof
alimittospacesoastoexcludetheideaofspacelyingoutsidethatlimit。
sowecannotconceiveofanyexplanationprofoundenoughtoexcludethequestion
——Whatistheexplanationofthatexplanation？RegardingScienceasagradually
increasingsphere，wemaysaythateveryadditiontoitssurfacedoesnot
bringitintowidercontactwithsurroundingnescience。Theremusteverremain
thereforetwoantitheticalmodesofmentalaction。Throughoutallfuture
time，asnow，thehumanmindmayoccupyitself，notonlywithascertained
phenomenaandtheirrelations，butalsowiththatunascertainedsomething
whichphenomenaandtheirrelationsimply。Henceifknowledgecannotmonopolize
consciousness——ifitmustalwayscontinuepossibleforthemindtodwell
uponthatwhichtranscendsknowledge，thentherecanneverceasetobea
placeforsomethingofthenatureofReligion;sinceReligionunderallits
formsisdistinguishedfromeverythingelseinthis，thatitssubjectmatterpassesthesphereoftheintellect。Thus，howeveruntenablemaybetheexistingreligiouscreeds，however
grosstheabsurditiesassociatedwiththem，howeverirrationalthearguments
setforthintheirdefence，wemustnotignoretheveritywhichinalllikelihood
lieshiddenwithinthem。thegeneralprobabilitythatwidely—spreadbeliefs
arenotabsolutelybaseless，isinthiscaseenforcedbyafurtherprobability
duetotheomnipresenceofthebeliefs。Intheexistenceofareligioussentiment，
whateverbeitsorigin，wehaveasecondevidenceofgreatsignificance。
Andasinthatnesciencewhichmusteverremaintheantithesistoscience，
thereisaspherefortheexerciseofthissentiment，wefindathirdgeneral
factoflikeimplication。Wemaybesure，therefore，thatreligions，eventhoughnooneofthembeactuallytrue，areyetalladumbrationsofatruth。§5。As，tothereligious，itwillseemabsurdtosetforthanyjustification
forReligion，so，tothescientific，itwillseemabsurdtodefendScience。
Yettodothelastiscertainlyasneedfulastodothefirst。Ifthereexist
somewho，incontemptforitsfolliesanddisgustatitscorruptions，have
contractedtowardsReligionarepugnancewhichmakesthemoverlookthefundamental
truthcontainedinit;so，thereareothersoffendedtosuchadegreeby
thedestructivecriticismsmenofsciencemakeonthereligioustenetsthey
holdessential，thattheyhaveacquiredastrongprejudiceagainstScience
atlarge。theyarenotpreparedwithanyreasonsfortheirdislike。they
havesimplyaremembranceoftherudeshakeswhichSciencehasgiventomany
oftheircherishedconvictions，andasuspicionthatitmayeventuallyuproot
alltheyregardassacred;andhenceitproducesinthemaninarticulatedread。###第2章WhatisScience？Toseetheabsurdityoftheprejudiceagainstit，we
needonlyremarkthatScienceissimplyahigherdevelopmentofcommonknowledge;
andthatifScienceisrepudiated，allknowledgemustberepudiatedalong
withit。Theextremestbigotwillnotsuspectanyharmintheobservation
thattheSunrisesearlierandsetslaterinsummerthaninwinter。butwill
ratherconsidersuchanobservationasausefulaidinfulfillingtheduties
oflife。Well，Astronomyisanorganizedbodyofkindredobservations，made
withgreaternicety，extendedtoalargernumberofobjects，andsoanalyzed
astodisclosetherealarrangementsoftheheavensandtodispelourfalse
conceptionsofthem。Thatironwillrustinwater，thatwoodwillburn，that
longkeptviandsbecomeputrid，themosttimidsectarianwillteachwithout
alarm，asthingsusefultobeknown。Butthesearechemicaltruths:Chemistry
isasystematizedcollectionofsuchfacts，ascertainedwithprecision，and
soclassifiedandgeneralizedastoenableustosaywithcertainty，concerning
eachsimpleorcompoundsubstance，whatchangewilloccurinitundergiven
conditions。Andthusisitwithallthesciences。Theyseverallygerminate
outoftheexperiencesofdailylife。insensiblyastheygrowtheydrawin
remoter，morenumerous，andmorecomplexexperiences;andamongthese，they
ascertainlawsofdependencelikethosewhichmakeupourknowledgeofthe
mostfamiliarobjects。Nowhereisitpossibletodrawalineandsay——here
Sciencebegins。Andasitisthefunctionofcommonobservationtoserve
fortheguidanceofconduct;so，too，istheguidanceofconducttheoffice
ofthemostreconditeandabstractresultsofScience。Throughthecountless
industrialprocessesandthevariousmodesoflocomotionithasgivento
us，Physicsregulatesmorecompletelyoursociallifethandoeshisacquaintance
withthepropertiesofsurroundingbodiesregulatethelifeofthesavage。
AllScienceisprevision;andallprevisionultimatelyhelpsusingreater
orlessdegreetoachievethegoodandavoidthebad。Thusbeingoneinorigin
andfunction，thesimplestformsofcognitionandthemostcomplexmustbe
dealtwithalike。Weareboundinconsistencytoreceivethewidestknowledge
ourfacultiescanreach，ortorejectalongwithitthatnarrowknowledgepossessedbyall。Toaskthequestionwhichmoreimmediatelyconcernsourargument——whether
Scienceissubstantiallytrue？——ismuchlikeaskingwhethertheSungives
light。Anditisbecausetheyareconscioushowundeniablyvalidaremost
ofitspropositions，thatthetheologicalpartyregardSciencewithsomuch
secretalarm。Theyknowthatduringthefivethousandyearsofitsgrowth，
someofitslargerdivisions——mathematics，physics，astronomy——havebeen
subjecttotherigorouscriticismofsuccessivegenerations，andhavenotwithstanding
becomeevermorefirmlyestablished。Theyknowthat，unlikemanyoftheir
owndoctrines，whichwereonceuniversallyreceivedbuthaveagebyagebeen
morewidelydoubted，thedoctrinesofScience，atfirstconfinedtoafew
scatteredinquirers，havebeenslowlygrowingintogeneralacceptance，and
arenowingreatpartadmittedasbeyonddispute。Theyknowthatscientific
menthroughouttheworldsubjectoneanother'sresultstosearchingexamination;
andthaterrorismercilesslyexposedandrejectedassoonasdiscovered。
And，finallytheyknowthatstillmoreconclusiveevidenceisfurnishedby
thedailyverificationofscientificpredictions，andbythenever—ceasingtriumphsofthoseartswhichScienceguides。Toregardwithalienationthatwhichhassuchhighcredentialsisafolly。
Thoughinthetonewhichmanyofthescientificadopttowardsthem，thedefenders
ofReligionmayfindsomeexcuseforthisalienation，yettheexcuseisan
insufficientone。OnthesideofScience，asontheirownside，theymust
admitthatshort—comingsintheadvocatesdonottellessentiallyagainst
thatwhichisadvocated。Sciencemustbejudgedbyitself;andsojudged，
onlythemostpervertedintellectcanfailtoseethatitisworthyofall
reverence。Bethereorbetherenotanyotherrevelation，wehaveaveritable
revelationinScience——acontinuousdisclosureoftheestablishedorder
oftheUniverse。Thisdisclosureitisthedutyofeveryonetoverifyasfarasinhimlies;andhavingverified，toreceivewithallhumility。§6。Thustheremustberightonbothsidesofthisgreatcontroversy。
Religion，everywherepresentasawarprunningthroughtheweftofhuman
history，expressessomeeternalfact;whileScienceisanorganizedbody
oftruths，evergrowing，andeverbeingpurifiedfromerrors。Andifboth
havebasesintherealityofthings，thenbetweenthemtheremustbeafundamental
harmony。Itisimpossiblethatthereshouldbetwoordersoftruthinabsolute
andeverlastingopposition。OnlyinpursuanceofsomeManicheanhypothesis，
whichamongourselvesnoonedaresopenlyavow，issuchasuppositioneven
conceivable。ThatReligionisdivineandSciencediabolical，isaproposition
which，thoughimpliedinmanyaclericaldeclamation，notthemostvehement
fanaticcanbringhimselfdistinctlytoassert。Andwhoeverdoesnotassert
this，mustadmitthatundertheirseemingantagonismlieshiddenanentireagreement。Eachside，therefore，hastorecognizetheclaimsoftheotherasrepresenting
truthswhicharenottobeignored。Itbehoveseachtostrivetounderstand
theother，withtheconvictionthattheotherhassomethingworthytobe
understood;andwiththeconvictionthatwhenmutuallyrecognizedthissomethingwillbethebasisofareconciliation。Howtofindthissomethingthusbecomestheproblemweshouldperseveringly
trytosolve。Nottoreconciletheminanymakeshiftway，buttoestablish
arealandpermanentpeace。Thethingwehavetoseekoutisthatultimate
truthwhichbothwillavowwithabsolutesincerity——withnottheremotest
mentalreservation。Thereshallbenoconcession——noyieldingoneither
sideofsomethingthatwillby—and—bybereasserted;butthecommonground
onwhichtheymeetshallbeonewhicheachwillmaintainforitself。Wehave
todiscoversomefundamentalveritywhichReligionwillassert，withall
possibleemphasis，intheabsenceofScience;andwhichScience，withall
possibleemphasis，willassertintheabsenceofReligion。Wemustlookfor
aconceptionwhichcombinestheconclusionsofboth——mustseehowScience
andReligionexpressoppositesidesofthesamefact:theoneitsnearorvisibleside，andtheotheritsremoteorinvisibleside。Alreadyintheforegoingpagesthemethodofseekingsuchareconciliation
hasbeenvaguelyshadowedforth。Beforeproceeding，however，itwillbewell
totreatthequestionofmethodmoredefinitely。Tofindthattruthinwhich
ReligionandSciencecoalesce，wemustknowinwhatdirectiontolookforit，andwhatkindoftruthitislikelytobe。§7。OnlyinsomehighlyabstractpropositioncanReligionandScience
findacommonground。Neithersuchdogmasasthoseofthetrinitarianand
unitarian，noranysuchideaasthatofpropitiation，commonthoughitmay
betoallreligions，canserveasthedesiredbasisofagreement;forScience
cannotrecognizebeliefslikethese:theyliebeyonditssphere。Notonly，
aswehaveinferred，istheessentialtruthcontainedinReligionthatmost
abstractelementpervadingallitsforms，but，asweheresee，thismost
abstractelementistheonlyoneinwhichReligionislikelytoagreewithScience。Similarlyifwebeginattheotherend，andinquirewhatscientifictruth
canuniteSciencewithReligion。Religioncantakenocognizanceofspecial
scientificdoctrines;anymorethanSciencecantakecognizanceofspecial
religiousdoctrines。ThetruthwhichScienceassertsandReligionindorses
cannotbeonefurnishedbymathematics;norcanitbeaphysicaltruth;nor
canitbeatruthinchemistry。Nogeneralizationofthephenomenaofspace，
oftime，ofmatter，orofforce，canbecomeaReligiousconception。Such
aconception，ifitanywhereexistsinScience，mustbemoregeneralthananyofthese——mustbeoneunderlyingallofthem。Assuming，then，thatsincethesetwogreatrealitiesareconstituents
ofthesamemind，andrespondtodifferentaspectsofthesameUniverse，
theremustbeafundamentalharmonybetweenthem，weseegoodreasontoconclude
thatthemostabstracttruthcontainedinReligionandthemostabstract
truthcontainedinSciencemustbetheoneinwhichthetwocoalesce。The
largestfacttobefoundwithinourmentalrangemustbetheoneofwhich
weareinsearch。Unitingthesepositiveandnegativepolesofhumanthought，itmustbetheultimatefactinourintelligence。§8。Beforeproceedingletmebespeakalittlepatience。Thenext
threechapters，settingoutfromdifferentpointsandconvergingtothesame
conclusion，willbeunattractive。Studentsofphilosophywillfindinthem
muchthatisfamiliarandtomostofthosewhoareunacquaintedwithmodernmetaphysics，theirreasoningsmayprovedifficulttofollow。Ourargument，however，cannotdispensewiththesechapters，andthegreatness
ofthequestionatissuejustifiesevenaheaviertaxonthereader'sattention。
Thoughitaffectsuslittleinadirectway，theviewwearriveatmustindirectly
affectusallinourrelations——mustdetermineOurconceptionsoftheUniverse，
ofLife，ofHumanNature——mustinfluenceourideasofrightandwrong，
andthereforemodifyourconduct。Toreachthatpointofviewfromwhich
theseemingdiscordanceofReligionandSciencedisappears，andthetwomergeintoone，mustsurelybeworthaneffort。Hereendingpreliminariesletusnowaddressourselvestothisall—important
inquiry。
Chapter2UltimateReligiousIdeas§9。When，onthesea—shore，wenotehowthehullsofdistantvessels
arehiddenbelowthehorizon，andhow，ofstillremotervessels，onlythe
uppermostsailsarevisible，wemayconceivewithtolerableclearnessthe
slightcurvatureofthatportionofthesea'ssurfacewhichliesbeforeus。
Butwhenwetrytofollowoutinimaginationthiscurvedsurfaceasitactually
exists，slowlybendingrounduntilallitsmeridiansmeetinapointeight
thousandmilesbelowourfeet，wefindourselvesutterlybaffled。Wecannot
conceiveinitsrealformandmagnitudeeventhatsmallsegmentofourglobe
whichextendsahundredmilesoneverysideofus，muchlesstheglobeas
awhole。Thepieceofrockonwhichwestandcanbementallyrepresented
withsomethinglikecompleteness:weareabletothinkofitstop，itssides，
anditsundersurfaceatthesametime，orsonearlyatthesametimethat
theyseempresentinconsciousnesstogether;andsowecanformwhatwecall
aconceptionoftherock。ButtodothelikewiththeEarthisimpossible。
Ifeventoimaginetheantipodesasatthatdistantplaceinspacewhich
itactuallyoccupies，isbeyondourpowermuchmorebeyondourpowermust
itbeatthesametimetoimagineallotherremotepointsontheEarth's
surfaceasintheiractualplaces。Yetwecommonlyspeakasthoughwehad
anideaoftheEarth——asthoughwecouldthinkofitinthesamewaythatwethinkofminorobjects。Whatconception，then，doweformofit？thereadermayask。Thatits
namecallsupinussomestateofconsciousnessisunquestionable;andif
thisstateofconsciousnessisnotaconception，properlysocalled，what
isit？Theanswerseemstobethis:——Wehavelearntbyindirectmethods
thattheEarthisasphere;wehaveformedmodelsapproximatelyrepresenting
itsshapeandthedistributionofitsparts;usuallywhentheEarthisreferred
to，weeitherthinkofanindefinitelyextendedmassbeneathourfeet，or
else，leavingouttheactualEarth，wethinkofabodylikeaterrestrial
globe;butwhenweseektoimaginetheEarthasitreallyis，wejointhese
twoideasaswellaswecan——suchperceptionasoureyesgiveusofthe
Earth'ssurfacewecouplewiththeconceptionofasphere。AndthusweformoftheEarthnotaconceptionproperlysocalled，butonlyasymbolicconception。（*）<*Thosewhomayhavebeforemetwiththisterm，willperceivethatitishereusedinquiteadifferentsense。>Alargeproportionofourconceptions，includingallthoseofmuchgenerality，
areofthisorder。Greatmagnitudes，greatdurations，greatnumbers，are
noneofthemactuallyconceived，butareallofthemconceivedmoreorless
symbolically;andso，too，areallthoseclassesofobjectsofwhichwepredicate
somecommonfact。Whenmentionismadeofanyindividualman，atolerably
completeideaofhimisformed。Ifthefamilyhebelongstobespokenof，
probablybutapartofitwillberepresentedinthought:underthenecessity
ofattendingtothatwhichissaidaboutthefamily，werealizeinimagination
onlyitsmostimportantorfamiliarmembers，andpassovertherestwith
anascentconsciousnesswhichweknowcould，ifrequisite，bemadecomplete。
Shouldsomethingberemarkedoftheclass，sayfarmers，towhichthisfamily
belongs，weneitherenumerateinthoughtalltheindividualscontainedin
theclass，norbelievethatwecoulddosoifrequired;butwearecontent
withtakingsomefewsamplesofit，andrememberingthatthesecouldbeindefinitely
multiplied。SupposingthesubjectofwhichsomethingispredicatedbeEnglishmen，
theansweringstateofconsciousnessisastillmoreinadequaterepresentative。
Yetmoreremoteisthelikenessofthethoughttothething，ifreference
bemadetoEuropeansortohumanbeings。Andwhenwecometopropositions
concerningthemammalia，orconcedingthewholeofthevertebrata，orconcerning
allorganicbeings，theunlikenessesofourconceptionstotherealitiesbecomeextreme。Throughoutwhichseriesofinstancesweseethatasthenumberofobjects
groupedtogetherinthoughtincreases，theconcept，formedofafewtypical
samplesjoinedwiththenotionofmultiplicity，becomesmoreandmoreamere
symbol;notonlybecauseitgraduallyceasestorepresentthesizeofthe
group，butalsobecause，asthegroupgrowsmoreheterogeneous，thetypicalsamplesthoughtofarelessliketheaverageobjectswhichthegroupcontains。Thisformationofsymbolicconceptions，whichinevitablyarisesaswe
passfromsmallandconcreteobjectstolargeandtodiscreteones，ismostly
auseful，andindeednecessary，process。When，insteadofthingswhoseattributes
canbetolerablywellunitedinasinglestateofconsciousness，wehave
todealwiththingswhoseattributesaretoovastornumeroustobesounited，
wemusteitherdropinthoughtpartoftheirattributes，orelsenotthink
ofthematall——eitherformamoreorlesssymbolicconception，ornoconception。
Wemustpredicatenothingofobjectstoogreatortoomultitudinoustobe
mentallyrepresented，orwemustmakeourpredicationsbythehelpofextremelyinadequaterepresentationsofthem。Butwhilebydoingthisweareenabledtoformgeneralpropositions，and
sotoreachgeneralconclusions，weareperpetuallyledintodanger，and
veryoftenintoerror。Wemistakeoursymbolicconceptionsforrealones;
andsoarebetrayedintocountlessfalseinferences。Notonlyisitthat
inproportionastheconceptweformofanything，orclassofthings，misrepresents
thereality，weareapttobewronginanyassertionwemakerespectingthe
reality;butitisthatweareledtosupposewehavetrulyconceivedmany
thingswhichwehaveconceivedonlyinthisfictitiousway;andthentoconfound
withthesesomethingswhichcannotbeconceivedinanyway。Howwefallintothiserroralmostunavoidablyitwillbeneedfulheretoobserve。Fromobjectsfullyrepresentable，tothoseofwhichwecannotformeven
approximaterepresentations，thereisaninsensibletransition。Betweena
pebbleandtheentireEarthaseriesofmagnitudesmightbeintroduced，severally
differingfromadjacentonessoslightlythatitwouldbeimpossibletosay
atwhatpointintheseriesourconceptionsofthembecameinadequate。Similarly，
thereisagradualprogressionfromthosegroupsofafewindividualswhich
wecanthinkofasgroupswithtolerablecompleteness，tothoselargerand
largergroupsofwhichwecanformnothingliketrueideas。Thuswepass
fromactualconceptionstosymboliconesbyinfinitesimalsteps。Notenext
thatweareledtodealwithoursymbolicconceptionsasthoughtheywere
actualones，notonlybecausewecannotclearlyseparatethetwo，butalso
because，inmostcases，thefirstserveourpurposesnearlyorquiteaswell
asthelast——aresimplytheabbreviatedsignswesubstituteforthosemore
elaboratesignswhichareourequivalentsforrealobjects。Thoseimperfect
representationsofordinarythingswhichwemakeinthinking，weknowcan
bedevelopedintoadequateonesifneedful。Thoseconceptsoflargermagnitudes
andmoreextensiveclasseswhichwecannotmakeadequate，westillfindcan
beverifiedbysomeindirectprocessofmeasurementorenumeration。Andeven
inthecaseofsuchanutterlyinconceivableobjectastheSolarSystem，
weyet，throughthefulfilmentofpredictionsfoundedonoursymbolicconception
ofit，gaintheconvictionthatthisstandsforanactualexistence，and，
inasense，trulyexpressescertainofitsconstituentrelations。Sothat
havinglearntbylongexperiencethatoursymbolicconceptionscan，ifneedful，
beverified，weareledtoacceptthemwithoutverification。Thusweopen
thedoortosomewhichprofesstostandforknownthings，butwhichreallystandforthingsthatcannotbeknowninanyway。Theimplicationisclear。Whenoursymbolicconceptionsaresuchthat
nocumulativeorindirectprocessesofthoughtcanenableustoascertain
thattherearecorrespondingactualities，noranyfulfilledpredictionsbe
assignedinjustificationofthem，thentheyarealtogetherviciousandillusive，andinnowaydistinguishablefrompurefictions。§10。Andnowtoconsiderthebearingsofthisgeneraltruthonourimmediatetopic——UltimateReligiousIdeas。Totheprimitivemansometimeshappenthingswhichareoutoftheordinary
course—diseases，storms，earth—quakes，echoes，eclipses。Fromdreamsarises
theideaofawanderingdouble;whencefollowsthebeliefthatthedouble，
departingpermanentlyatdeath，isthenaghost。Ghoststhusbecomeassignable
causesforstrangeoccurrences。Thegreaterghostsarepresentlysupposed
tohaveextendedspheresofaction。Asmengrowintelligenttheconceptions
oftheseminorinvisibleagenciesmergeintotheconceptionofauniversal
invisibleagency;andthereresulthypothesesconcerningtheorigin，notofspecialincidentsonly，butofthingsingeneral。Acriticalexamination，howeverwillprovenotonlythatnocurrenthypothesisistenable，butalsothatnotenablehypothesiscanbeframed。§11。RespectingtheoriginoftheUniversethreeverballyintelligible
suppositionsmaybemade。Wemayassertthatitisself—existent;orthat
itisself—created;orthatitiscreatedbyanexternalagency。Whichof
thesesuppositionsismostcredibleitisnotneedfulheretoinquire。The
deeperquestion，intowhichthisfinallymerges，is，whetheranyoneofthem
isevenconceivableinthetruesenseoftheword。Letussuccessivelytestthem。Whenwespeakofamanasself—supporting，ofanapparatusasself—acting，
orofatreeasself—developed，ourexpressions，howeverinexact，standfor
thingsthatcanbefiguredinthoughtwithtolerablecompleteness。Ourconception
oftheself—developmentofatreeisdoubtlesssymbolic。Butthoughwecannot
reallyrepresentinconsciousnessthe。entireseriesofcomplexchangesthrough
whichthetreepasses，yetwecanthusrepresenttheleadingtraitsofthe
series;andgeneralexperienceteachesusthatbylongcontinuedobservation
wecouldgainthepowerofmorefullyrepresentingit。Thatis，weknowthat
oursymbolicconceptionofself—developmentcanbeexpandedintosomething
likearealconception;andthatitexpresses，howeverrudely，anactual
process。Butwhenwespeakofself—existenceand，helpedbytheaboveanalogies，
formsomevaguesymbolicconceptionofit，wedeludeourselvesinsupposing
thatthissymbolicconceptionisofthesameorderastheothers。Onjoining
thewordselftothewordexistence，theforceofassociationmakesusbelieve
wehaveathoughtlikethatsuggestedbythecompoundwordself—acting。An
endeavourtoexpandthissymbolicconception，however，willundeceiveus。
Inthefirstplace，itisclearthatbyself—existenceweespeciallymean
anexistenceindependentofanyother——notproducedbyanyother:theassertion
ofself—existenceisanindirectdenialofcreation。Inthusexcludingthe
ideaofanyantecedentcause，wenecessarilyexcludetheideaofabeginning。
fortoadmitthattherewasatimewhentheexistencehadnotcommenced，
istoadmitthatitscommencementwasdeterminedbysomething，orwascaused，
whichisacontradiction。Self—existence，therefore，necessarilymeansexistence
withoutabeginning;andtoformaconceptionofself—existenceistoform
aconceptionofexistencewithoutabeginning。Nowbynomentaleffortcan
wedothis。Toconceiveexistencethroughinfinitepast—time，impliesthe
conceptionofinfinitepast—time，whichisanimpossibility。Tothislet
usaddthatevenwereself—existenceconceivable，itwouldnotbeanexplanation
oftheUniverse。Noonewillsaythattheexistenceofanobjectatthepresent
momentismadeeasiertounderstandbythediscoverythatitexistedanhour
ago，oradayago，orayearago;andifitsexistencenowisnotmademore
comprehensiblebyknowledgeofitsexistenceduringsomepreviousfinite
period，thennoknowledgeofitduringmanysuchfiniteperiods，evencould
weextendthemtoaninfiniteperiod，wouldmakeitmorecomprehensible。
ThustheAtheistictheoryisnotonlyabsolutelyunthinkable，but，evenwere
itthinkable，wouldnotbeasolution。TheassertionthattheUniverseis
self—existentdoesnotreallycarryusastepbeyondthecognitionofitspresentexistence;andsoleavesuswithamerere—statementofthemystery。Thehypothesisofself—creation，whichpracticallyamountstowhatis
calledPantheism，issimilarlyincapableofbeingrepresentedinthought。
Certainphenomena，suchastheprecipitationofinvisiblevapourintocloud，
aidusinformingasymbolicconceptionofaself—evolvedUniverse;andthere
arenotwantingindicationsintheHeavens，andontheEarth，whichhelp
usingivingtothisconceptionsomedistinctness。Butwhilethesuccession
ofphasesthroughwhichthevisibleUniversehaspassedinreachingitspresent
form，mayperhapsbecomprehendedasinasenseself—determined;yetthe
impossibilityofexpandingoursymbolicconceptionofself—creationinto
arealconception，remainsascompleteasever。Reallytoconceiveself—creation，
istoconceivepotentialexistencepassingintoactualexistencebysome
inherentnecessity，whichwecannot。Wecannotformanyideaofapotential
existenceoftheUniverse，asdistinguishedfromitsactualexistence。If
representedinthoughtatall，potentialexistencemustberepresentedas
something，thatis，asanactualexistence:tosupposethatitcanberepresented
asnothinginvolvestwoabsurdities——thatnothingismorethananegation，
andcanbepositivelyrepresentedinthought，andthatonenothingisdistinguished
fromallothernothingsbyitspowertodevelopintosomething。Noristhis
all。Wehavenostateofconsciousnessansweringtothewordsaninherent
necessitybywhichpotentialexistencebecameactualexistence。Torender
themintothought，existence，havingforanindefiniteperiodremainedin
oneform，mustbeconceivedaspassingwithoutanyexternalimpulseinto
anotherform;andthisinvolvestheideaofachangewithoutacause——a
thingofwhichnoideaispossible。Thusthetermsofthishypothesisdo
notstandforrealthoughts，butmerelysuggestthevaguestsymbolsnotadmitting
ofanyinterpretation。Moreover，evenwerepotentialexistenceconceivable
asadifferentthingfromactualexistence，andcouldthetransitionfrom
theonetotheotherbementallyrealizedasself—determined，weshouldstill
benoforwarder:theproblemwouldsimplyberemovedastepback。Forwhence
thepotentialexistence？Thiswouldjustasmuchrequireaccountingforas
actualexistence，andjustthesamedifficultieswouldmeetus。Theself—existence
ofapotentialUniverseisnomoreconceivablethantheself—existenceof
theactualUniverse。Theself—creationofapotentialUniversewouldinvolve
overagainthedifficultiesjuststated——wouldimplybehindthispotential
universeamoreremotepotentiality，andsooninaninfiniteseries，leaving
usatlastnoforwarderthanatfirst。Whiletoassignanexterna1agency
asitsorigin，wouldbetointroducethenotionofapotentialUniversefornopurposewhatever。###第3章Thereremainsthecommonly——receivedortheistichypothesis——creation
byexternalagency。Alikeintherudestcreedsandinthecosmogonylong
currentamongourselves，itisassumedthattheHeavensandtheEarthwere
madesomewhatafterthemannerinwhichaworkmanmakesapieceoffurniture。
Andthisistheassumptionnotonlyoftheologiansbutofmostphilosophers。
EquallyinthewritingsofPlatoandinthoseofnotafewlivingmenof
science，wefinditassumedthatthereisananalogybetweentheprocess
ofcreationandtheprocessofmanufacture。Nownotonlyisthisconception
onewhichcannotbyanycumulativeprocessofthought，orthefulfilment
ofpredictionsbasedonit，beshowntoanswertoanythingactual;butit
cannotbementallyrealized，evenwhenallitsassumptionsaregranted。Though
theproceedingsofahumanartificermayvaguelysymbolizeamethodafter
whichtheUniversemightbeshaped，yetimaginationofthismethoddoesnot
helpustosolvetheultimateproblem;namely，theoriginofthematerials
ofwhichtheUniverseconsists。Theartizandoesnotmaketheiron，wood，
orstone，heuses，butmerelyfashionsandcombinesthem。Ifwesupposesuns，
andplanets，andsatellites，andalltheycontaintohavebeensimilarly
formedbya"GreatArtificer，"wesupposemerelythatcertainpre—existing
elementswerethusputintotheirpresentarrangement。Butwhencethepre—existing
elements？Theproductionofmatteroutofnothingistherealmysterywhich
neitherthissimilenoranyotherenablesustoconceive;andasimilewhich
doesnotenableustoconceivethismayaswellbedispensedwith。Still
moremanifestbecomestheinsufficiencyofthistheoryofthings，whenwe
turnfrommaterialobjectstothatwhichcontainsthem——wheninsteadof
matterwecontemplatespace。Didthereexistnothingbutanimmeasurable
void，explanationwouldbeneededasmuchasitisnow。Therewouldstill
arisethequestion——howcameitso？Ifthetheoryofcreationbyexternal
agencywereanadequateone，itwouldsupplyananswer;anditsanswerwould
be——spacewasmadeinthesamemannerthatmatterwasmade。Buttheimpossibility
ofconceivingthisissomanifestthatnoonedarestoassertit。Forif
spacewascreateditmusthavebeenpreviouslynon—existent。Thenon—existence
ofspacecannot，however，byanymentaleffortbeimagined。Andifthenon—existence
ofspaceisabsolutelyinconceivable，then，necessarily，itscreationis
absolutelyinconceivable。Lastly，evensupposingthatthegenesisofthe
Universecouldreallyberepresentedinthoughtasduetoanexternalagency，
themysterywouldbeasgreatasever;fortherewouldstillarisethequestion
——howcametheretobeanexternalagency？Toaccountforthisonlythe
samethreehypothesesarepossible——self—existence，self—creation，and
creationbyexternalagency。Ofthesethelastisuseless:itcommitsus
toaninfiniteseriesofsuchagencies，andeventhenleavesuswherewe
were。Bythesecondweareledintothesamepredicament;since，asalready
shown，self—creationimpliesaninfiniteseriesofpotentialexistences。
Weareobliged，therefore，tofallbackonthefirst，whichistheonecommonly
acceptedandcommonlysupposedtobesatisfactory。Thosewhocannotconceive
aself—existentUniverse，andthereforeassumeacreatorasthesourceof
theUniverse，takeforgrantedthattheycanconceiveaself—existentCreator。
Themysterywhichtheyrecognizeinthisgreatfactsurroundingthemonevery
side，theytransfertoanallegedsourceofthisgreatfact，andthensuppose
thattheyhavesolvedthemystery。Buttheydeludethemselves。Aswasproved
attheoutsetoftheargument，self—existenceisinconceivable;andthis
holdstruewhateverbethenatureoftheobjectofwhichitispredicated。
Whoeveragreesthattheatheistichypothesisisuntenablebecauseitinvolves
theimpossibleideaofself—existence，mustperforceadmitthatthetheistichypothesisisuntenableifitcontainsthesameimpossibleidea。Thusthesethreedifferentsuppositions，verballyintelligiblethough
theyare，andseverallyseemingtotheirrespectiveadherentsquiterational，
turnout，whencriticallyexamined，tobeliterallyunthinkable。Itisnot
aquestionofprobability，orcredibility，butofconceivability。Experiment
provesthattheelementsofthesehypothesescannotevenbeputtogether
inconsciousness;andwecanentertainthemonlyasweentertainsuchpseud—ideas
asasquarefluidandamoralsubstance——onlybyabstainingfromtheendeavour
torenderthemintoactualthoughts。Or，revertingtoouroriginalmodeof
statement，wemaysaythattheyseverallyinvolvesymbolicconceptionsof
theillegitimateandillusivekind。Differingsowidelyastheyseemtodo，
theatheistic，thepantheistic，andthetheistichypothesescontainthesame
ultimateelement。Itisimpossibletoavoidmakingtheassumptionofself—existence
somewhere;andwhetherthatassumptionbemadenakedlyorundercomplicated
disguises，itisequallyvicious，equallyunthinkable。Beitafragmentof
matter，orsomefanciedpotentialformofmatter，orsomemoreremoteand
stilllessimaginablemodeofbeing，ourconceptionofitsself—existence
canbeframedonlybyjoiningwithitthenotionofunlimiteddurationthrough
pasttime。Andasunlimiteddurationisinconceivable，allthoseformalideas
intowhichitentersareinconceivable;andindeed，ifsuchanexpression
isallowable，arethemoreinconceivableinproportionastheotherelements
oftheideasareindefinite。Sothatinfact，impossibleasitistothink
oftheactualUniverseasself—existing，wedobutmultiplyimpossibilitiesofthoughtbyeveryattemptwemaketoexplainitsexistence。§12。IffromtheoriginoftheUniverseweturntoitsnature，the
likeinsurmountabledifficultiesriseupbeforeusonallsides——orrather，
thesamedifficultiesundernewaspects。Wefindourselvesobligedtomake
certainassumptions;andyetwefindtheseassumptionscannotberepresentedinthought。Whenweinquirewhatisthemeaningoftheeffectsproducedonoursenses
——whenweaskhowtherecometobeinourconsciousnessimpressionsofsounds，
ofcolours，oftastes，andofthosevariousattributesweascribetobodies，
wearecompelledtoregardthemastheeffectsofsomecause。Wemaystop
shortinthebeliefthatthiscauseiswhatwecallmatter。Orwemayconclude，
assomedo，thatmatterisonlyacertainmodeofmanifestationofspirit，
whichisthereforethetruecause。Or，regardingmatterandspiritasproximate
agencies，wemayascribethechangeswroughtinourconsciousnesstoimmediate
divinepower。Butbethecauseweassignwhatitmay，weareobligedtosuppose
somecause。Andweareobligednotonlytosupposesomecause，butalsoa
firstcause。Thematter，orspiritorotheragentproducingtheseimpressions
onus，musteitherbethefirstcauseofthemornot。Ifitisthefirst
causetheconclusionisreached。Ifitisnotthefirstcause，thenbyimplication
theremustbeacausebehindit，whichthusbecomestherealcauseofthe
effect。Manifestlyhowevercomplicatedtheassumptions，thesameconclusion
mustbereached。Wecannotaskhowthechangesinourconsciousnessarecaused，withoutinevitablycommittingourselvestothehypothesisofaFirstCause。ButnowifweaskwhatisthenatureofthisFirstCause，wearedriven
byaninexorablelogictocertainfurtherconclusions。IstheFirstCause
finiteorinfinite？Ifwesayfiniteweinvolveourselvesinadilemma。To
thinkoftheFirstCauseasfinite，istothinkofitaslimited。Tothink
ofitaslimitedimpliesaconsciousnessofsomethingbeyonditslimits:
itisimpossibletoconceiveathingasboundedwithoutassumingaregion
surroundingitsboundaries。Whatnowmustwesayofthisregion？IftheFirst
Causeislimited，andthereconsequentlyliessomethingoutsideofit，this
somethingmusthavenoFirstCause——mustbeuncaused。Butifweadmitthat
therecanbesomethinguncaused，thereisnoreasontoassumeacausefor
anything。IfbeyondthatfiniteregionoverwhichtheFirstCauseextends，
thereliesaregion，whichwearecompelledtoregardasinfinite，overwhich
itdoesnotextend——ifweadmitthatthereisaninfiniteuncausedsurrounding
thefinitecaused;wetacitlyabandonthehypothesisofcausationaltogether。
ThusitisimpossibletoconsidertheFirstCauseasfinite。Butifitcannotbefiniteitmustbeinfinite。AnotherinferenceconcedingtheFirstCauseisequallynecessary。Itmust
beindependent。IfitisdependentitcannotbetheFirstCause;forthat
mustbetheFirstCauseonwhichitdepends。Itisnotenoughtosaythat
itispartiallyindependent;sincethisimpliessomenecessitywhichdetermines
itspartialdependence，andthisnecessity，beitwhatitmay，mustbea
highercause，orthetrueFirstCause，whichisacontradiction。Buttothink
oftheFirstCauseastotallyindependent，istothinkofitasthatwhich
existsintheabsenceofallotherexistence;seeingthatifthepresence
ofanyotherexistenceisnecessary，itmustbepartiallydependentonthat
otherexistence，andsocannotbetheFirstCause。Notonlyhowevermust
theFirstCausebeaformofbeingwhichhasnonecessaryrelationtoany
otherformofbeing，butitcanhavenonecessaryrelationwithinitself。
Therecanbenothinginitwhichdetermineschange，andyetnothingwhich
preventschange。Forifitcontainssomethingwhichimposessuchnecessities
orrestraints，thissomethingmustbeacausehigherthantheFirstCause，
whichisabsurd。ThustheFirstCausemustbeineverysenseperfect，complete，
total:includingwithinitselfallpowerandtranscendingalllaw。Ortousetheestablishedword，itmustbeAbsolute。CertainconclusionsrespectingthenatureoftheUniverse，thusseemunavoidable。
Inoursearchaftercauses，wediscovernorestingplaceuntilwearrive
ataFirstCause;andwehavenoalternativebuttoregardthisFirstCause
asInfiniteandAbsolute。Theseareinferencesforcedonusbyarguments
fromwhichthereappearsnoescape。Neverthelessneitherargumentsnorinferences
havemorethannominalvalues。Itmighteasilybeshownthatthematerials
ofwhichtheargumentsarebuilt，equallywiththeconclusionsbasedonthem，
aremerelysymbolicconceptionsoftheillegitimateorder。Instead，however，
ofrepeatingthedisproofusedabove，itwillbewelltopursueanothermethod;showingthefallacyoftheseconclusionsbydisclosingtheirmutualcontradictions。HereIcannotdobetterthanavailmyselfofthedemonstrationwhichMr。
Mansel，carryingoutindetailthedoctrineofSirWilliamHamilton，has
giveninhisLimitsofReligiousThought。AndIgladlydothis，notonly
becausehismodeofpresentationcannotbeimproved，butalsobecause，writing
ashedoesindefenceofthecurrentTheology，hisreasoningswillbethemoreacceptabletothemajorityofreaders。§13。HavinggivenpreliminarydefinitionsoftheFirstCause，oftheInfinite，andoftheAbsolute，Mr。Manselsays:——"Butthesethreeconceptions，theCause，theAbsolute，theInfinite，
allequallyindispensable，dotheynotimplycontradictiontoeachother，
whenviewedinconjunction，asattributesofoneandthesameBeing？ACause
cannot，assuch，beabsolute:theAbsolutecannot，assuch，beacause。The
cause，assuch，existsonlyinrelationtoitseffect:thecauseisacause
oftheeffect;theeffectisaneffectofthecause。Ontheotherhand，the
conceptionoftheAbsoluteimpliesapossibleexistenceoutofallrelation。
Weattempttoescapefromthisapparentcontradiction，byintroducingthe
ideaofsuccessionintime。TheAbsoluteexistsfirstbyitself，andafterwards
becomesaCause。Butherewearecheckedbythethirdconception，thatof
theInfinite。HowcantheInfinitebecomethatwhichitwasnotfromthe
first？IfCausationisapossiblemodeofexistence，thatwhichexistswithout
causingisnotinfinite;thatwhichbecomesacausehaspassedbeyonditsformerlimits。***"SupposingtheAbsolutetobecomeacause，itwillfollowthatit
operatesbymeansoffreewillandconsciousness。Foranecessarycausecannot
beconceivedasabsoluteandinfinite。Ifnecessitatedbysomethingbeyond
itself，itistherebylimitedbyasuperiorpower;andifnecessitatedby
itself，ithasinitsownnatureanecessaryrelationtoitseffect。The
actofcausationmustthereforebevoluntary;andvolitionisonlypossible
inaconsciousbeing。Butconsciousnessagainisonlyconceivableasarelation。
Theremustbeaconscioussubject，andanobjectofwhichheisconscious。
Thesubjectisasubjecttotheobject;theobjectisanobjecttothesubject;
andneithercanexistbyitselfastheabsolute。Thisdifficulty，again，
maybeforthemomentevaded，bydistinguishingbetweentheabsoluteasrelated
toanotherandtheabsoluteasrelatedtoitself。TheAbsolute，itmaybe
said，maypossiblybeconscious，provideditisonlyconsciousofitself。
Butthisalternativeis，inultimateanalysis，nolessself—destructivethan
theother。Fortheobjectofconsciousness，whetheramodeoftheSubject's
existenceornot，iseithercreatedinandbytheactofconsciousness，or
hasanexistenceindependentofit。Intheformercase，theobjectdepends
uponthesubject，andthesubjectaloneisthetrueabsolute。Inthelatter
case，thesubjectdependsupontheobject，andtheobjectaloneisthetrue
absolute。Orifweattemptathirdhypothesis，andmaintainthateachexists
independentlyoftheother，wehavenoabsoluteatall，butonlyapairof
relatives;forcoexistence，whetherinconsciousnessornot，isitselfarelation。"Thecorollaryfromthisreasoningisobvious。NotonlyistheAbsolute，
asconceived，incapableofanecessaryrelationtoanythingelsebutitis
alsoincapableofcontaining，bytheconstitutionofitsownnature，anessential
relationwithinitself;asawhole，forinstance，composedofparts，oras
asubstanceconsistingofattributes，orasaconscioussubjectinantithesis
toanobject。Forifthereisintheabsoluteanyprincipleofunity，distinct
fromthemereaccumulationofpartsorattributes，thisprinciplealoneis
thetrueabsolute。If，ontheotherhand，thereisnosuchprinciple，then
thereisnoabsoluteatall，butonlyapluralityofrelatives。Thealmost
unanimousvoiceofphilosophy，inpronouncingthattheabsoluteisbothone
andsimple，mustbeacceptedasthevoiceofreasonalso，sofarasreason
hasanyvoiceinthematter。Butthisabsoluteunity，asindifferentand
containingnoattributes，canneitherbedistinguishedfromthemultiplicity
offinitebeingsbyanycharacteristicfeature，norbeidentifiedwiththem
intheirmultiplicity。Thuswearelandedinaninextricabledilemma。The
Absolutecannotbeconceivedasconscious，neithercanitbeconceivedas
unconscious;itcannotbeconceivedascomplex，neithercanitbeconceived
assimple:itcannotbeconceivedbydifference，neithercanitbeconceived
bytheabsenceofdifference:itcannotbeidentifiedwiththeuniverse，
neithercanitbedistinguishedfromit。TheOneandtheMany，regardedasthebeginningofexistence，arethusalikeincomprehensible。"ThefundamentalconceptionsofRationalTheologybeingthusself—destructive，
wemaynaturallyexpecttofindthesameantagonismmanifestedintheirspecial
applications。***How，forexample。CanInfinitePowerbeabletodoall
things，andyetInfiniteGoodnessbeunabletodoevil？HowcanInfinite
Justiceexacttheutmostpenaltyforeverysin，andyetInfiniteMercypardon
thesinner？HowcanInfiniteWisdomknowallthatistocome，andyetInfinite
Freedombeatlibertytodoortoforbear？HowistheexistenceofEvilcompatible
withthatofaninfinitelyperfectBeing;forifhewillsit，heisnotinfinitely
good;andifhewillitnot，hiswillisthwartedandhissphereofactionlimited？***"Letus，however，supposeforaninstantthatthesedifficulties
aresurmounted，andtheexistenceoftheAbsolutesecurelyestablishedon
thetestimonyofreason。Stillwehavenotsucceededinreconcilingthis
ideawiththatofaCause:wehavedonenothingtowardsexplaininghowthe
absolutecangiverisetotherelative，theinfinitetothefinite。Ifthe
conditionofcausalactivityisahigherstatethanthatofquiescence，the
Absolute，whetheractingvoluntarilyorinvoluntarily，haspassedfroma
conditionofcomparativeimperfectiontooneofcomparativeperfection;and
thereforewasnotoriginallyperfect。Ifthestateofactivityisaninferior
statetothatofquiescence，theAbsolute，inbecomingacause，haslost
itsoriginalperfection。Thereremainsonlythesuppositionthatthetwo
statesareequal，andtheactofcreationoneofcompleteindifference。But
thissuppositionannihilatestheunityoftheabsolute，oritannihilates
itself。Iftheactofcreationisreal，andyetindifferent，wemustadmit
thepossibilityoftwoconceptionsoftheabsolute，theoneasproductive，
theotherasnon—productive。Iftheactisnotreal，thesuppositionitselfvanishes。***"Again，howcantherelativebeconceivedascomingintobeing？If
itisadistinctrealityfromtheabsolute，itmustbeconceivedaspassing
fromnon—existenceintoexistence。Buttoconceiveanobjectasnon—existent，
isagainaself—contradiction;forthatwhichisconceivedexists，asan
objectofthought，inandbythatconception。Wemayabstainfromthinking
ofanobjectatall;but，ifwethinkofit，wecannotbutthinkofitas
existing。Itispossibleatonetimenottothinkofanobjectatall，and
atanothertothinkofitasalreadyinbeing;buttothinkofitinthe
actofbecoming，intheprogressfromnotbeingintobeing，istothinkthatwhich，intheverythought，annihilatesitself。***"Tosumupbrieflythisportionofmyargument。Theconceptionof
theAbsoluteandInfinite，fromwhateversideweviewit，appearsencompassed
withcontradictions。Thereisacontradictioninsupposingsuchanobject
toexist，whetheraloneorinconjunctionwithothers;andthereisacontradiction
insupposingitnottoexist。Thereisacontradictioninconceivingitas
one;andthereisacontradictioninconceivingitasmany。Thereisacontradiction
inconceivingitaspersonal;andthereisacontradictioninconceiving
itasimpersonal。Itcannot，withoutcontradiction，berepresentedasactive;
nor，withoutequalcontradiction，berepresentedasinactive。Itcannotbe
conceivedasthesumofallexistence;noryetcanitbeconceivedasapartonlyofthatsum。"§14。Andnowwhatisthebearingoftheseresultsonthequestion
beforeus？OurexaminationofUltimateReligiousIdeashasbeencarriedon
withtheviewofmakingmanifestsomefundamentalveritycontainedinthem。
Thusfar，however，wehavearrivedatnegativeconclusionsonly。Passing
overtheconsiderationofcredibility，andconfiningourselvestothatof
conceivabilitywehaveseenthatAtheism，Pantheism，andTheism，whenrigorously
analyzed，severallyprovetobewhollyunthinkable。Insteadofdisclosing
afundamentalverityexistingineach，ourinquiryseemsrathertohaveshown
thatthereisnofundamentalveritycontainedinany。Tocarryawaythisconclusion，however，wouldbeafatalerror，asweshallshortlysee。Leavingouttheaccompanyingcodeofconduct，whichisasupplementary
growth，areligiouscreedisdefinableasatheoryoforiginalcausation。
Bythelowestsavagesthegenesisofthingsisnotinquiredabout:onlystrange
appearancesandactionsraisethequestionofagency。Butbeitintheprimitive
Ghost—theory，whichassumesahumanpersonalitybehindeachunusualphenomenon;
beitinPolytheism，inwhichsuchpersonalitiesarepartiallygeneralized;
beitinMonotheism，inwhichtheyarewhollygeneralized;orbeitinPantheism，
inwhichthegeneralizedpersonalitybecomesonewiththephenomena;weequally
findanhypothesiswhichissupposedtorendertheUniversecomprehensible。
Nay，eventhatwhichisregardedasthenegationofallReligion——even
positiveAtheism——comeswithinthedefinition;forit，too，inasserting
theself—existenceofSpace，MatterandMotion，propoundsatheoryfromwhich
itholdsthefactstobededucible。Noweverytheorytacitlyassertstwo
things:first，thatthereissomethingtobeexplained;second，thatsuch
andsuchistheexplanation。Hence，howeverwidelydifferentspeculators
disagreeinthesolutionstheygiveofthesameproblem，yetbyimplication
theyagreethatthereisaproblemtobesolved。Herethenisanelement
whichallcreedshaveincommon。Religionsdiametricallyopposedintheir
overtdogmas，areperfectlyatoneinthetacitconvictionthattheexistence
oftheworldwithallitcontainsandallwhichsurroundsit，isamysterycallingforinterpretation。Thuswecomewithinsightofthatwhichweseek。Inthelastchapter，
reasonsweregivenforinferringthathumanbeliefsingeneral，andespecially
theperennialones，contain，underwhateverdisguisesoferror，somesoul
oftruth;andherewehavearrivedatatruthunderlyingeventherudest
beliefs。Wesaw，further，thatthissouloftruthismostlikelysomeconstituent
commontoconflictingopinionsofthesameorder;andherewehaveaconstituent
containedbyallreligions。Itwaspointedoutthatthissouloftruthwould
almostcertainlybemoreabstractthananyofthecreedsinvolvingit;and
thetruthabovereachedisoneexceedinginabstractnessthemostabstract
religiousdoctrines。Ineveryrespect，therefore，ourconclusionanswerstotherequirements。Thatthisisthevitalelementinallreligionsisfurthershownbythe
factthatitistheelementwhichnotonlysurviveseverychangebutgrows
moredistinctthemorehighlythereligionisdeveloped。Aboriginalcreeds，
pervadedbythoughtsofpersonalagencieswhichareusuallyunseen，conceive
theseagenciesunderperfectlyconcreteandordinaryforms—classthemwith
thevisibleagenciesofmenandanimals;andsohideavagueperceptionof
mysteryindisguisesasunmysteriousaspossible。Polytheisticconceptions
intheiradvancedphases，representthepresidingpersonalitiesinidealized
shapes，workinginsubtleways，andcommunicatingwithmenbyomensorthrough
inspiredpersons;thatis，theultimatecausesofthingsareregardedas
lessfamiliarandcomprehensible。ThegrowthofaMonotheisticfaith，accompanied
asitisbylapseofthosebeliefsinwhichthedivinenatureisassimilated
tothehumaninallitslowerpropensities，showsusafurtherstepinthe
samedirection;andhoweverimperfectlythishigherfaithisatfirstheld，
weyetseeinaltars"totheunknownandunknowableGod，"andin
theworshipofaGodwhocannotbyanysearchingbefoundout，thatthere
isaclearerrecognitionoftheinscrutablenessofcreation。Furtherdevelopments
oftheology，endinginsuchassertionsasthat"aGodunderstoodwould
benoGodatall，"and"tothinkthatGodis，aswecanthinkhim
tobe，isblasphemy，"exhibitthisrecognitionstillmoredistinctly。
返回顶部