The teachers of a theistic morality, when the audience is devout, have
only to fortify the impression that the rules of conduct are certified
by God the invisible King. The ethical problem for the common man is
to recognize the well-known credentials of his teachers. In practice
he has merely to decide whether the priest, the prince, and the
elders, are what they claim to be. When he has done that, there are no
radical questions to be asked. But the teachers of humanism have no
credentials. Their teaching is not certified. They have to prove their
case by the test of mundane experience. They speak with no authority,
which can be scrutinized once and for all, and then forever accepted.
They can proclaim no rule of conduct with certainty, for they have no
inherent personal [p139] authority and they cannot be altogether sure
they are right. They cannot command. They cannot truly exhort. They
can only inquire, infer, and persuade. They have only human insight
to guide them and those to whom they speak must in the end themselves
accept the full responsibility for the consequences of any advice they
choose to accept.
Yet with all its difficulties, it is to a morality of humanism that men
must turn when the ancient order of things dissolves. When they find
that they no longer believe seriously and deeply that they are governed
from heaven, there is anarchy in their souls until by conscious effort
they find ways of governing themselves.
PART II [p141]
THE FOUNDATIONS OF HUMANISM
_The stone which the builders rejected,
The same is become the head of the corner?_
Luke XX, 17.
INTRODUCTION [p143]
The upshot of the discussion to this point is that modernity destroys
the disposition to believe that behind the visible world of physical
objects and human institutions there is a supernatural kingdom from
which ultimately all laws, all judgments, all rewards, all punishments,
and all compensations are derived. To those who believe that this
kingdom exists the modern spirit is nothing less than treason to God.
The popular religion rests on the belief that the kingdom is an
objective fact, as certain, as definite, and as real, in spite of
its invisibility, as the British Empire; it holds that this faith
is justified by overwhelming evidence supplied by revelation,
unimpeachable testimony, and incontrovertible signs. To the modern
spirit, on the other hand, the belief in this kingdom must necessarily
seem a grandiose fiction projected by human needs and desires. The
humanistic view is that the popular faith does not prove the existence
of its objects, but only the presence of a desire that such objects
should exist. The popular religion, in short, rests on a theory which,
if true, is an extension of physics and of history; the humanistic view
rests on human psychology and an interpretation of human experience.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account