« PreviousContinue »
spirits often breaks out in gross superstition and strange fanaticism among the people; as witness now the pilgrimages to Lourdes and elsewhere in France, and the belief in spirit-rappings.
II. A man has knowledge of personal beings other than himself.
1. The objection that man in his self-consciousness is shut up within his own subjectivity and unable to know other beings as personal, involves agnosticism. It is, however, a common objection, urged by persons who are not agnostics. For example, Prof. Newcomb says:
“Should we see in visible masses of matter the same kind of motion which we know must take place among the molecules of matter as they arrange themselves into the complex attitudes necessary to form the leaf of a plant, we should at once conclude that they were under the direction of a living being who was superintending the execution of these arrangements. · But our knowledge of will as an agent is so absolutely limited to the study of our own wills that we cannot pronounce any generalization respecting it.” If a man has knowledge of personality in himself, he of course can recognize the characteristics of personality when they appear in another. The objection, therefore, must assume that man has no knowledge of himself as a person. It necessarily issues in the universal skepticism of Hume.
2. The philosophy of Kant gives a basis for knowledge of personal beings so far as it allows knowledge of anything. Kant's intuition of sense is not intuition in its proper significance. Like Hume's, it is a mere receptivity of impressions. But he insists that the mind is also something more than that, and is so constituted as to give further knowledge. The impressions of sense cannot be grasped in the unity of intuition except as the mind gives the forms of time and space, and thus makes it possible to unite them. The mind also proceeds from individuals to generals. Knowledge is expressed in general propositions; and the mere reception of impressions cannot give such knowledge. Therefore again in order to knowledge, elements must be supplied from the mind itself; these are the categories of quantity, quality, relation and modality. We cannot stop with disconnected and unrelated impressions. We do not know merely disconnected impressions, but we know them also as defined in time and space, and also existing as substance and quality, cause and effect, in unity, plurality, totality and other categories. Knowledge implies also an element of necessity or universality, as in the axioms of mathematics and the judgments of causality and identity. Thus it contains elements which are not impressions of sense and cannot be resolved into those impressions. And thus Hume's theory of knowledge is refuted as inadequate. Consequently Hume's inference that knowledge is limited within the subjectivity of the subject of the sensations is no more valid;
the objective validity of knowledge is demonstrated in the sense in which Kant uses the phrase, namely, the equal validity of the facts to all men as well as to myself. It follows that my knowledge of an object is not an impression limited within my own subjectivity, but is the knowledge of an object which is equally real to all men. But if knowledge is thus common to all men, then through this community of inte!ligence men are capable of knowing one another as intelligent beings.
Thus Kant demonstrated that, even if knowledge begins in a reception of impressions, it must transcend those impressions and the subjectivity which as mere impressions they imply; that in all knowledge are elements of intellect transcending sense; and that men, transcending each his own subjectivity, come into communion with one another and know one another as rational beings.
3. The recognition of sense as perceptive intuition involving at once the intuition of the object perceived and of the self perceiving, implies without further argument the possibility of knowing rational beings other than ourselves. Kant by his false conception of sense as a mere receptivity of impression is obliged, in order to show the objective validity of knowledge, to resort to the roundabout process which I have indicated. He refutes Hume from his own premises and establishes the reality and validity of the mind's own action in all knowledge. But to one who recognizes perceptive and rational intuition, Kant's roundabout reasoning is unnecessary. Such an one, in accordance with our constant consciousness, ascribes to intuition the knowledge which Kant laboriously proves.
Perceptive intuition gives the knowledge of the Me, as distinguished from the not-me; equally it must give the knowledge of the Me as distinguished from the Thou. Says Krug: "Over against the ve always stands also the thou; that is, a not
me, in which the Me finds itself again, or recognizes a being like itself."*
4. The acts of our fellow-men reveal them to us as persons or rational free-agents. Intercommunication by language and by other signs, co-operation for common ends, reciprocal confidence, love, gov. ernment, religious fellowship, the existence of society and its institutions, rest on the facts that men know one another as rational beings, and that the qualities of personality are common to them all. When one knows in self-consciousness what the characteristics of personality are, he can recognize them when manifested in another.
5. That man imagines that he finds the characteristics of personality in an impersonal thing and so mistakes the impersonal for the personal,
* Article Ich: Vol. II., p. 427. Encyklopädisch-philosophisches Lexicon.
is no argument against the reality of his knowledge of personal beings; for just so scientists sometimes mistake the action of one natural object for that of another. The savage does not mistake his fellow-men for brutes or stones. But on account of his limited knowledge the horizon which divides himself and his tribesmen from the supernatural is very near; and he thinks he sees the supernatural in what he afterwards discovers to belong to nature only. The horizon widens and widens till in his higher development he comes to know the one Supreme God. But this does not prove that the spiritual and supernatural are unreal. It reveals the fact that, in every stage of his development, man finds the supernatural and spiritual in himself, and expects to find the same in other beings; and, however high he rises in development, he always finds the supernatural and spiritual, not only with him in his fellow-men, but beyond and above him in a God.
6. It is objected that man's conception of God and of all supernatural and spiritual beings is anthropomorphic and therefore false. This, however, is only a pictorial way of representing to the imagination the objection already considered in its abstract form, that all knowledge is unreal, because relative to our faculties; or, knowledge is impossible because there is a mind that knows. If any being is endowed with intelligence and rationality, intelligence and rationality in every being must be essentially the same; otherwise the so-called intelligence in one, , being contradictory to the intelligence of another, would not be real knowledge; and the so-called rationality, being contradictory to another rationality, would be irrational. If, then, man is endowed with reason, all knowledge which is in accordance with reason is in accordance with the reason of man ; and in this sense all real knowledge must be anthropomorphic, for if it were not it would be contrary to reason. There is as much anthropomorphism in physical science as there is in theology. Prof. Fiske admits that belief in spirit is scarcely more anthropomorphic than belief in power.* The affirmation that the sun attracts the earth is as really anthropomorphic as the affirmation that "nature abhors a vacuum.” Since the principles and laws of science discovered by the human mind are found to be true of stars in the remotest space within the range of the telescope, and in the remotest discoverable distances of past time, and in the utmost sphere of microscopic vision, it is reasonable to conclude that man's reason and intelligence accord with the reason and intelligence which are universal and eternal.
* Cosmic Philosophy. Vol. II., pp. 449, 450.
& 83. The Two Systems. We have scientific knowledge of two grand systems in the universe, the natural and the rational. Impersonal beings exist in the unity of the system of nature; personal beings exist in the unity of the system of reason, free moral agency, and moral government.
Man has knowledge of himself as connected with both of these systems. In the impressions of sense, in his locomotion in space, in the weight of his body, and in all his action through it on his environment and its action on him, he knows his own organism as a part of the system of nature. He knows the outward world as the sphere in which and on which he acts, and as containing the forces which he uses and the resources of which he avails himself in accomplishing his own ends. In a similar manner man in his knowledge of himself and other men as persons, knows himself existing with other personal beings in the unity of a rational and moral system. He knows this world of personality also as the sphere in which and on which he acts and as containing the spiritual agencies and influences by which he accomplishes his ends. We believe in a spiritual world as the sphere and environment of our spiritual energies just as we believe in the natural world as the sphere and environment of our physical energies.
Thus man knowing himself as nature and spirit, knows himself connected with both spheres and finds the powers of both these grand systems of the universe meeting in and sweeping through his being.
84. The Existence of a Personal God a Necessary
Datum of Scientific Knowledge. The existence of the personal God or the Supreme Reason energizing in the universe is a necessary datum of scientific knowledge. So far from its being true that God is contradictory to Reason or is Unknowable, his existence is a necessary presupposition in all knowledge which has scientific accuracy and comprehensiveness; that is, in all accurate and ascertained knowledge of the particular realities of the universe and their comprehensive unity and harmony in a system of things. The existence of God is the keystone of the arch of human knowledge, without which the whole fabric breaks down and crumbles to pieces.
I. The existence of God is necessary to the trustworthiness of the human reason as an organ of necessary and universal principles. If man has self-evident knowledge of any principle which is a universal law of thought; in other words, if he has knowledge of any principle the contradictory of which is absurd, then Reason is supreme ad absolute in the universe, and the principles and laws which reveal
themselves in human reason as regulative of all thought and energy, exist eternal in that supreme and absolute Reason. Then the universe is grounded in Reason, and Reason is everywhere and always the same; Reason in God is the same in kind with Reason in man, who is in the image of God. This datum or presupposition is indispensable to the trustworthiness of human Reason.
Hence the demand that the trustworthiness of Reason be established by proof or argument is inadmissible. Reason can demonstrate itself only by its own rationality as the sun can reveal itself only by shining. Some writers say that the trustworthiness of Reason can be sustained only by an appeal to morals. God, it is said, could not do so wrong an act as to give man a constitution which would always deceive him. As Mr. Chubb put it, “God would not be so mean as to do it.” But this appeal to the moral implies the presupposition of a righteous God. It is an appeal to the practical reason for verification of the speculative reason. The only solid basis of scientific knowledge is the recognition of Reason as absolute and supreme, and of the human mind as Reason, and therefore so constituted that its knowledge is illumined and its thought regulated by principles that are eternal and regulative in the Absolute Reason. The existence of God the Absolute Reason, is a necessary prerequisite to the possibility of scientific human knowledge.
II. The existence of God is necessarily prerequisite to the community of human knowledge. Community of knowledge implies the participation of men in a common knowledge of facts and truths, a common recognition of the same laws of thought, the same moral ideas and law, the same standard of perfection and of good. Necessary to this is the supremacy over all men of one and the same absolute and unchanging Reason. And this Reason energizing is the personal God.
III. The existence of God is necessarily prerequisite to the completeness of 'human thought in the knowledge of all particulars in the unity of an all-comprehending system. Human thought consists in apprehending and distinguishing particulars, and in finding their relations in the unity of a whole. The ultimate and necessary problem of the Reason is to find the unity of the All, or to know the All in One. The existence of God is a presupposition necessary to the solving of this ultimate problem ; and this presupposition is either explicit or implicit in all scientific knowledge of the many in one.
It is only as we recognize God that we can know natural things in the unity of a system of nature. We have seen that the archetypal thought or plan of the universe is eternal in the absolute Reason. This excludes caprice, chance, fate, and all disorder. God's almightiness is controlled by Reason; it cannot give reality to what Reason knows to be absurd, and it acts only in accordance with perfect wisdom and love