第8章

Totakeabriefillustration:wehavealludedtothefactthatinthehistoryofourpresentworldthedevelopmentofmentalphenomenahasgoneonhandinhandwiththedevelopmentoforganiclife，whileatthesametimewehavefounditimpossibletoexplainmentalphenomenaasinanysensetheproductofmaterialphenomena。Nowthereisanothersidetoallthis。ThegreatlessonwhichBerkeleytaughtmankindwasthatwhatwecallmaterialphenomenaarereallytheproductsofconsciousnessco-operatingwithsomeUnknownPower(notmaterial)existingbeyondconsciousness。Wedoverywelltospeakof“matter“incommonparlance，butallthatthewordreallymeansisagroupofqualitieswhichhavenoexistenceapartfromourminds。Modernphilosophershavequitegenerallyacceptedthisconclusion，andeveryattempttooverturnBerkeley’sreasoninghashithertoresultedincompleteanddisastrousfailure。Inadmittingthis，wedonotadmittheconclusionofAbsoluteIdealism，thatnothingexistsoutsideofconsciousness。WhatweadmitasexistingindependentlyofourownconsciousnessisthePowerthatcausesinusthoseconsciousstateswhichwecalltheperceptionofmaterialqualities。WehavenoreasonforregardingthisPowerasinitselfmaterial:indeed，wecannotdoso，sincebythetheorymaterialqualitieshavenoexistenceapartfromourminds。IhaveelsewheresoughttoshowthatlessdifficultyisinvolvedinregardingthisPoweroutsideofusasquasi-psychical，orinsomemeasuresimilartothementalpartofourselves；andIhavegoneontoconcludethatthisPowermaybeidenticalwithwhatmenhave，inalltimesandbytheaidofvariousimperfectsymbols，endeavouredtoapprehendasDeity。[12]WearethusledtoaviewofthingsnotveryunliketheviewsentertainedbySpinozaandBerkeley。WeareledtotheinferencethatwhatwecallthematerialuniverseisbutthemanifestationofinfiniteDeitytoourfiniteminds。Obviously，onthisview，Matter——theonlythingtowhichmaterialistsconcederealexistence——issimplyanorderlyphantasmagoria；andGodandtheSoul——whichmaterialistsregardasmerefictionsoftheimagination——aretheonlyconceptionsthatanswertorealexistences。 SeemyOutlinesofCosmicPhilosophy，PartI。 IntheforegoingparagraphIhavebeensettingdownopinionswithwhichIampreparedtoagree，andwhicharenotinconflictwithanythingthatourstudyofthedevelopmentoftheobjectiveworldhastaughtus。Insofarasthatstudymaybesupposedtobearonthequestionofafuturelife，twoconclusionsareopentous。 Firstwemaysaythatsincethephenomenaofmindappearandruntheircoursealongwithcertainspecializedgroupsofmaterialphenomena，so，too，theymustdisappearwhenthesespecializedgroupsarebrokenup。Or，inotherwords，wemaysaythateverylivingpersonisanorganizedwhole；consciousnessissomethingwhichpertainstothisorganizedwhole，asmusicbelongstotheharpthatisentire；butwhentheharpisbrokenitissilent，andwhentheorganizedwholeofpersonalityfallstopiecesconsciousnessceasesforever。Tomanywell-disciplinedmindsthisconclusionseemsirresistible；anddoubtlessitwouldbeasoundone——agoodBaconianconclusion——ifweweretoadmit，withthematerialists，thatthepossibilitiesofexistencearelimitedbyourtinyandephemeralexperience。 Butnow，supposingsomePlatonicspeculatorweretocomealongandinsistuponourleavingroomforanalternativeconclusion； supposeheweretourgeuponusthatallthisprocessofmaterialdevelopment，withthediscoveryofwhichourpatientstudyhasbeenrewarded，maybebutthetemporarymanifestationofrelationsotherwiseunknownbetweenourselvesandtheinfiniteDeity；supposeheweretoarguethatpsychicalqualitiesmaybeinherentinaspiritualsubstancewhichundercertainconditionsbecomesincarnatedinmatter，towearitasaperishablegarmentforabriefseason，butpresentlytocastitoffandenteruponthefreedomofalargerexistence；——whatreplyshouldwebeboundtomake，bearinginmindthatthepossibilitiesofexistenceareinnowiselimitedbyourexperience？Obviouslyweshouldbeboundtoadmitthatinsoundphilosophythisconclusionisjustaslikelytobetrueastheother。Weshould，indeed，warnhimnottocallonustohelphimtoestablishitbyscientificarguments；andweshouldremindhimthathemustnotmakeillicituseofhisextra-experientialhypothesesbybringingthemintothetreatmentofscientificquestionsthatliewithintherangeofexperience。Inscience，forexample，wemakenouseoftheconceptionofa“spiritualsubstance“(orofa“materialsubstance“either)，becausewecangetalongsufficientlywellbydealingsolelywithqualities。Butwiththisgeneralunderstandingweshouldfeelboundtoconcedetheimpregnablenessofhismainposition。 Ihavesupposedthistheoryonlyasanillustration，notasatheorywhichIampreparedtoadopt。Mypresentpurposeisnottotreatasanadvocatethequestionofafuturelife，buttoendeavourtopointoutwhatconditionsshouldbeobservedintreatingthequestionphilosophically。Itseemstomethatagreatdealisgainedwhenwehavedistinctlysetbeforeuswhatarethepeculiarconditionsofproofinthecaseofsuchtranscendentalquestions。Wehavegainedagreatdealwhenwehavelearnedhowthoroughlyimpotent，howtrulyirrelevant，isphysicalinvestigationinthepresenceofsuchaquestion。Ifwegetnotmuchpositivesatisfactionforourunquietyearnings，weoccupyatanyrateasounderphilosophicpositionwhenwerecognizethelimitswithinwhichourconclusions，whetherpositiveornegative，arevalid。 ItseemsnotimprobablethatMr。Millmayhavehadinmindsomethingliketheforegoingconsiderationswhenhesuggestedthatthereisnoreasonwhyoneshouldnotentertainthebeliefinafuturelifeifthebeliefbenecessarytoone’sspiritualcomfort。PerhapsnosuggestioninMr。Mill’srichlysuggestiveposthumousworkhasbeenmoregenerallycondemnedasunphilosophical，onthegroundthatinmattersofbeliefwemustbeguided，notbyourlikesanddislikes，butbytheevidencethatisaccessible。Theobjectioniscertainlyasoundonesofarasitrelatestoscientificquestionswhereevidenceisaccessible。Tohesitatetoadoptawell-supportedtheorybecauseofsomevaguepreferenceforadifferentviewisinscientificmatterstheoneunpardonablesin，——asinwhichhasbeenonlytoooftencommitted。Eveninmatterswhichliebeyondtherangeofexperience，whereevidenceisinaccessible，desireisnottoberegardedasbyitselfanadequatebasisforbelief。ButitseemstomethatMr。Millshowedadeeperknowledgeofthelimitationsofscientificmethodthanhiscritics，whenhethushintedatthepossibilityofentertainingabeliefnotamenabletoscientifictests。Thehypothesisofapurelyspiritualunseenworld，asabovedescribed，isentirelyremovedfromthejurisdictionofphysicalinquiry，andcanonlybejudgedongeneralconsiderationsofwhathasbeencalled“moralprobability“；andconsiderationsofthissortarelikely，inthefutureasinthepast，topossessdifferentvaluesfordifferentminds。Hewho，onsuchconsiderations，entertainsabeliefinafuturelifemaynotdemandthathisscepticalneighbourshallbeconvincedbythesameconsiderations；buthisneighbourisatthesametimeestoppedfromstigmatizinghisbeliefasunphilosophical。 Theconsiderationwhichmustinfluencemostmindsintheirattitudetowardthisquestion，isthecraving，almostuniversallyfelt，forsometeleologicalsolutiontotheproblemofexistence。 Whyweareherenowisaquestionofevenprofounderinterestthanwhetherwearetolivehereafter。Unfortunatelyitssolutioncarriesusnolesscompletelybeyondtherangeofexperience！Thebeliefthatallthingsareworkingtogetherforsomegoodendisthemostessentialexpressionofreligiousfaith:ofallintellectualpropositionsitistheonemostcloselyrelatedtothatemotionalyearningforahigherandbetterlifewhichisthesumandsubstanceofreligion。Yetallthetreatisesonnaturaltheologythathaveeverbeenwrittenhavebarelysucceededinestablishingalowdegreeofscientificprobabilityforthisbelief。InspiteoftheeightBridgewaterTreatises，andthe“Ninth“beside，dysteleologystillholdsfullhalfthefieldasagainstteleology。Mostofthisdifficulty，however，resultsfromthecrudeanthropomorphicviewswhichtheologianshaveheldconcerningGod。OnceadmittingthattheDivineattributesmaybe(astheymustbe)incommensurablygreaterthanhumanattributes，ourfaiththatallthingsareworkingtogetherforgoodmayremainunimpugned。 Tomanymindssuchafaithwillseemincompatiblewithbeliefintheultimatedestructionofsentiencyamidthegeneraldoomofthematerialuniverse。Agoodendcanhavenomeaningtoussaveinrelationtoconsciousnessthatdistinguishesandknowsthegoodfromtheevil。Therecouldbenobetterillustrationofhowwearehemmedinthantheveryinadequacyofthewordswithwhichwetrytodiscussthissubject。Suchwordshaveallgainedtheirmeaningsfromhumanexperience，andhenceofnecessitycarryanthropomorphicimplications。Butwecannothelpthis。Wemustthinkwiththesymbolswithwhichexperiencehasfurnishedus； andwhenwesothink，theredoesseemtobelittlethatisevenintellectuallysatisfyingintheawfulpicturewhichscienceshowsus，ofgiantworldsconcentratingoutofnebulousvapour，developingwithprodigiouswasteofenergyintotheatresofallthatisgrandandsacredinspiritualendeavour，clashingandexplodingagainintodeadvapour-balls，onlytorenewthesametoilfulprocesswithoutend，——asenselessbubble-playofTitanforces，withlife，love，andaspirationbroughtforthonlytobeextinguished。Thehumanmind，however“scientific“itstraining，mustoftenrecoilfromtheconclusionthatthisisall；andtherearemomentswhenonepassionatelyfeelsthatthiscannotbeall。 OnwarmJunemorningsingreencountrylanes，withsweetpine-odourswaftedinthebreezewhichsighsthroughthebranches，andcloud-shadowsflittingoverfar-offbluemountains，whilelittlebirdssingtheirlove-songs，andgolden-hairedchildrenweavegarlandsofwildroses；orwheninthesolemntwilightwelistentowondrousharmoniesofBeethovenandChopinthatstirtheheartlikevoicesfromanunseenworld；atsuchtimesonefeelsthattheprofoundestanswerwhichsciencecangivetoourquestioningsisbutasuperficialanswerafterall。 Atthesemoments，whentheworldseemsfullestofbeauty，onefeelsmoststronglythatitisbuttheharbingerofsomethingelse，——thattheceaselessplayofphenomenaisnomeresportofTitans，butanorderlyscene，withitsreasonforexisting，its“Onedivinefar-offeventTowhichthewholecreationmoves。“ Difficultasitistodisentangletheelementsofreasoningthatenterintothesecomplexgroupsoffeeling，onemaystillsee，I think，thatitisspeculativeinterestintheworld，ratherthananxiousinterestinself，thatpredominates。Thedesireforimmortalityinitslowestphaseismerelytheoutcomeoftherepugnancewefeeltowardthinkingofthefinalcessationofvigorousvitalactivity。Suchafeelingisnaturallystrongwithhealthypeople。ButinthemoodwhichIhaveabovetriedtodepict，thisfeeling，oranyotherwhichismerelyself-regarding，islostsightofinthefeelingwhichassociatesafuturelifewithsomesolutionoftheburdensomeproblemofexistence。Hadwebutfaithenoughtolightentheburdenofthisproblem，theinferiorquestionwouldperhapsbelessabsorbing。 Couldwebutknowthatourpresentlivesareworkingtogethertowardsomegoodend，evenanendinnowiseanthropomorphic，itwouldbeoflessconsequencewhetherwewereindividuallytoendure。Tothedogundertheknifeoftheexperimenter，theworldisaworldofpureevil；yetcouldthepoorbeastbutunderstandthealleviationofhumansufferingtowhichheiscontributing，hewouldbeforcedtoownthatthisisnotquitetrue；andifhewerealsoaheroicorChristiandog，thethoughtwouldperhapstakeawayfromdeathitssting。Theanalogymaybeacrudeone； butthereasonablenessoftheuniverseisatleastasfaraboveourcomprehensionasthepurposesofmansurpasstheunderstandingofthedog。Believing，however，thoughasasimpleactoftrust，thattheendwillcrownthework，wemayrisesuperiortothequestionwhichhashereconcernedus，andexclaim，inthesupremelanguageoffaith，“ThoughHeslayme，yetwillItrustinHim！“