New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-04-14
series Of mere physical causes back to begin

series of mere physical causes back 10 Degih-
ming in an original physical cause, to thing not
person. as DR.. Fraser puts 1t; and any one can
do this for himself with the certainty that ne
will never be able to deduce God-Coieriuse
nbrase-from the nature Of things until man has
interpreted this by his own consciousness But
while from the mere nature of things the idea OF
God could not be derived, yet here the idea Is III
spi,e Of the nature of things. SO the nature Of
things cannot be the whole OF the universe
There must be somewhat else, and that can be
nothing less than the Creator. the Cause behind
all those causes that be scientifically inspect
ed Without this primary argument the ordi-
nary conceptions of design in the universe are
of no value by way Of proof But granting that
the denial of a personal cause of all things Is
untenable then all legitimate cases of adapta-
ton in nature including the processes of cvolu-
ton. add more and more probability to the ar
frmative proposition of theism Thus thought
rises from the idea Of perfect, infinite, original
personality somehow present in the mind'
through the incidents of nature which seem 10
make 1t probable that this idea corresponds to
a being actually existent to final demonstra-
ton such as satisfied the minds OF Augustine
Anselm Descartes and Leibnitz. The mere fact
that man can have the idea of a Being infinitely
perfect proves that such a Being exists, other-
wise the idea would be lacking either wholly or
in part. Plainly the value of this demonstration
lies in the fact that the proposition TO De proved
existed In all clearness beforehand IL there De
a mind to which the idea OF perfect Being Is
unattainab,e to such mind the proof is value
less. For the rest of mankind IL is valld tes'-
mony to a truth already attained. But for these
there are still other difficulties. the foremost OF
which is the presence of evil in world created
by perfect Being.
Dr. Fraser solves this problem by returning 10
his doctrine of personality Without the option
between right and wrong man would not De Il
person but thing an automaton If then Goa
created a world of persons he had to admit tne
possibility of evil. Readers will have to STUDY
| this theme in the authors own words. But II
! seems TO lead to a conclusion which Dr. Fraser
| would reject or at least to troublesome dl-
| Jenna If man as personality is responsive
for his acts, then the Creator is also RESPONSE
! BILE Being. BY the act Of creation He becomes
responsible to the universe which He has created
otherwise He is not a moral Being IN any sense
! that man can understand. Then He either con-
| templated the certainty Of evil in the world or
| He did not In either case the same ancient diff
| fculty presents itself in DIR. Frasers solution
of the problem that has always veXed Philosophy.
| The question of evil leads on TO the dispute be-
| tween optimism and pessimism. which the au-
| thor resolves into the alternative between ceas-
ing TO be- the suicide of the race, and striving FOR
| what is confessedly the best in human nature.
! Both the modern theory of evolution and the
| historical experience of mankind suggest that
| the career of personality in the world may be a
progressive struggle toward the ideal of hui
| nnanity Evolution also suggests final inevitable
| decadence but this the Theist is at liberty to
| doubt because if his argument is correct there
can be no world that is not purposive; Its order
must be based on morality. and it must exist for
| something higher than mere becoming and ceas-
| ing to be.