The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1902-11-23


us in the light Of possible party to the
moral. personal. direct and abiding rela-
ton between the divine and the human
which II Ia the essence Of all religion TO
postulate. For the argument by which
Mr.. Mallock arrives at his conclusion, we
must refer the reader to the book itself,
but we will state his conclusion. pointing
out that It Is based on scientific grounds
alone. and that. on non-scientifc grounds.
the author ultimately arrives at an oppo-
site conclusion So far as the facts and
methods Of science are concerned. we
cannot. In Mr. Mallocks opinion. resist the
conclusion that, as to his will. man is
nothing but mere machine, who. what
ever he does. deserves neither praise nor
blame. since, whatever he does, he could
not have done otherwise. As to his alleged
immortality, we have seen that the more
deeply we penetrate into the observable
facts on which his life and his mind de-
pend the more clear does it become to us
that these facts. all and singly. exhibit
his life as mere feeting phenomenon,
which appears with the body and disappears
with ii. leaving nothing behind; kind Of
life which. even II God existed, could have
nothing to hope for in His love and nothing
10 lear from ms ulsplSAslue.
The author next considers the religious
doctrine Of God. Putting the deficiencies
OF man altogether aside, and, for the sake
Of argument sipposing him to be capable
himself OF the religious relation on the
one hand, il only there Ia God who is
capable and is worthy Of it on the other,
Mr.. Mallock inquiries whether the facts
ard methods Of science compel. invite, or
even allow us to believe that God of this
kind exists To this inquiry three chapters
are allotted. The outcome of the investi-
cation b that the facts and methods Of
science will not allow us to believe in the
existence Of a God Of the kind postulated
in the conception Of religion We quote
the authors words: we have seen that,
If we consider the universe apart from
the organic life contained in il, ii is, ac-
cording to the admission Of thinkers Of
every school, a system OF absolute monism.
80 far a. observation reveals 1t to us. We
have also seen that. in spite Of every argu-
ment by which religious and metaphysical
apologists endeayor 10 escape from the
conclusion. organic life Ia a system OF alb
solute monism likewise. and that, II in the
cosinic process there has been any inter-
ference at any time. IL waa. to quote an
| expression Of Prof Wards, an interfer-
ence that took place before the process
began, not during it, We have seen that.
consequently, the entire intellectual scheme
/ of religion-the doctrines of immortality
| Of fire.. d )m and OF a God who Is. In his re-
| lation to ourselves, separable from this
| process is not only system which IN un-
! supported by any single scientific fact.
| but is also a system for which. amongst
the facts Of science. IL Is utterly impossible
! for the intellect to find a place. In other
words. that entire conception Of existence
which alone for the mass Of mankind has
| invested life with value Is In absolute
| opposition 10 that general system Of the
universe. the accuracy Of which il every
day reattcsted by every fresh addition
made to our positive knowledge"
| Is 1t, then. impossible to reconcile these
two opposites' 1t is to this question tina,
the author lastly addresses himself. In his
three final chapters he essays to show the
reader that there is a very simple method
different from that OF the religious apoiogis
or the metaphysical dreamer-by which
without any surrender OF science or common
sense the desired reconciliation may be
accomplished TO the satisfaction Of reason
dDle men. ne Itdclltu u
that we can give assent 10 the three propo.
sitions contained in the conception Of re-
ligion by an act Of faith precisely similal
to the act of faith by which we accept th'
phenomena and so-callcd laws Of science
II il, in word. the purpose Of the book be
fore us to prove that our grounds for beiev
ing in the reality Of the moral world are o
the same nature az those on which W,
believe in the reality Of the cosmic world
Let us hear Mr.. Mallock on this point; -Ou
belief in the reality Of the cosn ic world
from the stars to the chairs we sit on. Ii
so universal and instructive that It ncve
occurs to most people 10 ask themselves
how they came by it; or else II the question
ia suggested to them. they will answer tina
they derive the belief from reason and III,
evidence Of their senses. just as they deriv,
their belief in any other truth Of science
IL requires, however only n slight fJrt o
thought to understand that the real exist
ence Of anything outside ourselves is not
in any sense. a truth Of science at all Scienc,
does not give il to the world Of ordinar,
men. The world of ordinary men gives i
to science, and ordinary men themselves
get il neither from sense nor reason. Tn,
s..nses merely give men certain interna
ideas The belief in the external world /!
an inference as to the external causes oil
these internal ideas, and reason. instead o
supporting this inference that the cause
must be external objects, entirely fails. a
all thinkers now admit, to assure us Of tn
existence Of anything outside our individual
selves. II is perfectly true, as Prof ClirorC
has shown, that. If once We assent TO m
reality Of other living and conscious minds
reason then can impose on US a belief II
the world Of matter which forms the com
mon cause of all our similar experiences
but in taking this primary step Of believing
that these other minds really exist reasol
can tfrer us no help whatever. Reason i
a guide IL We follow II faithfully, not Z
belief, but TO sceptcism. But, in urSin,
this fact, are WE urging the sceptic's con
clusion that the reality Of the external worl,
u a fact of hich we are practically doubt
ful2 On the contrary, instead Of declaring
the existence of the external world to IN
doubtful, We are merely declaring tina
reason il not our sole source Of certainty"
The author points out that no one Ia
shown this to be the case with more lucidit
aad force than Hume, who Ia popularl
looked upon as leader Of modern skep
ticisn. II Ia true that Hume has show
that skcpticism ia the outcome Of philosophy