Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1900-07-28
vVVV@@411es8v8se9(e v1vHv&1
FOR SUNADY READING.
All sorts OF Opinions.
IA.
THE RELATION OF ETHICS TO
RE.TXr1T1N

sLWalter Goodnow Everett in the July
International Journal OF Ethics, Phila.
idelphia. Condensed for Public Oplnion.l
Religion in Its development takes no
no ethical elements. The conception OF
the deity which any religion offers
represents the ethical standards Of Its
sadherents. The history Of religion
makes 1t clear that the moral attributes
of deity are in every case drawn from
the ethical ideals prevailing among the
chief worshipers, and that they have
been first constructed in human rela-
tions before being ascribed to the gods.
The essential truth upon which l am
insisting is that the entire history of re.
ligion bears clear and emphatic testi-
mony to the fact that all the ethical
elements which it contains have been
transferred from the human sphere to
the divine; they are of earthly warp
and wool; they contain mans imper-
feet but ever growing ideal of what he.
ought himself to do and to be. In
other words, the ethical elements in re-.
liglon are due to an imminent, not a
lftranscendent, process Of development.
Almost every religion has developed
some more or less detailed code of NOR
herents as an element in religious OBJ
! legation. Morality is therefore often re-
garded almost exclusively from q res
\ ligious point OF view and it Is import
ant to distinguish between thaologi-
cal or religious and a scientific treat
ment of the problem of ethics. "A theo-
1 logical system of cthics involves certain
pre-suppositons concerning super
| human order and mans relation to 1t.
In such system the accepted ethical
/ principles appear as commands or laws
4 of the deity or deities. But scien-
tific treatment OF ethics seeks to dis
cover and explain the facts OF human
4 conduct as facts Of the existing order
without regard to their ultimate philo-
| tsophical Interpretations. 1t seeks to
4 find the sanctions OF morality in the
natural and inevitable results Of the
conduct itself and to establish moral
4 sity on rational basis by exhibiting
the unacceptable consequences OF right
land wrong action, OF good and evil
character. as in themselves sufficient
grounds for the choice Of the one and
the avoidance OF the other.
i In the historical evolution of religion
i may be distinguished three general
stages. The first may be described az a
\ stage of magical and of sacrificial rites
4 The second stage is that at which en-
Z phasis is placed upon creed and dogma
A upon a right Intellectual attitude to-
4 ward the deity. The third stage Is that
1 in which the emphasis is shifted to NOR.
j ality-to conduct and character.
The powerful and varied influences
b which religious beliefs have exercised
7 upon conduct in the course OF human
2 history can not receive a detailed dis
d cussion. 1t is clear, however. that these
i Influences have been OF dual nature
e partly beneticent and partly baneful
j For while heroic and sanity souls have
a again and again quickened their mora
/ life at the altar OF religion, the fanatic
4 and the inhuman prosecutor have NJ
less surely drawn inspiration from tn,
same source. An age OF faith, Is no
sipso facto an age of morality, nor al
!. age of doubt" necessarily one OF i'm
morality. 1t all depends upon the kim
of faith and of doubt in question. Blu
one should surely be cautious abou
Identifying moral conviction with re
ligious emotion Examples are neve
. wanting of those who believe ane
/ Etremble,' and yet boldly play the devil
= Il ".
For its theoretical support, for tn,
establishment Of those metap physical be
Iliefs which form the intellectual base
4 iof it's faith, religion requires ethics. Thi
ordar Of dependence can not, from
theoretical point Of view, be safely re
!. yersed. To assert that in the last analy
sis morality is dependent upon a belle
. | in God who exists az numerical,
] k,1 fr1N
s finite souls externally and immortall
separable from God" is completely I
I invert the evidence, to place the pyra
mid of thought on its apex instead Of 1t
base. To insist upon such metaphysical
beliefs az the basis of ethical teachin
9 zee ms to ME not only false In theory. blu
q pernicious in practical tendency. TIL
t actual experience of the good life is 1t
n own best vindication as that OF the ev
is its completest refutation. No view
e more shallow than that which sees 1
: morality only a means for securing tn
: blessings OF a future life. Nay NOR,
v morality would still remain and Its re
h quirements be no Less exacting wer
: mankind to reject belief in the trans
8 cendent. AS Martineau has said, .'Di
|. we even imagine that we came out {
: nothing and went back into nothing an
: had ties only with one another, still 8
3 long as we are what We are, our lii
Z fmust.take form from liz own germ, an
n grow and ramify into moral commun
!. tiea."
q Finally. II In the evolution OF rellgic
i, Its value has been placed more an
Z more in its ethical content, may II n,
+ be true. as many have conceived, tn,
3 religion Will at last be merged In mo