Decadence: Henry Sidgwick memorial lecture, 1908 — John Shaqi
Decadence: Henry Sidgwick memorial lecture, 1908Balfour, Arthur James
Philosophy
Decadence: Henry Sidgwick memorial lecture, 1908
Balfour, Arthur James
Nationalism; Political science
It is curious how deeply imbedded in ordinary discourse are traces
of the conviction that childhood, maturity, and old age, are stages
in the corporate, as they are in the individual, life. “A young and
vigorous nation,” “a decrepit and moribund civilisation”--phrases like
these, and scores of others containing the same implication, come as
trippingly from the tongue as if they suggested no difficulty and
called for no explanation. To Macaulay (unless I am pressing his famous
metaphor too far) it seemed natural that ages hence a young country
like New Zealand should be flourishing, but not less natural that an
old country like England should have decayed. Berkeley, in a well-known
stanza, tells how the drama of civilisation has slowly travelled
westwards to find its loftiest development, but also its final
catastrophe, in the New World. While every man who is weary, hopeless,
or disillusioned talks as if he had caught these various diseases from
the decadent epoch in which he was born.
But why _should_ civilisations thus wear out and great communities
decay? and what evidence is there that in fact they do? These
questions, though I cannot give to them any conclusive answers, are
of much more than a merely theoretic interest. For if current modes
of speech take decadence more or less for granted, with still greater
confidence do they speak of Progress as assured. Yet if both are
real they can hardly be studied apart, they must evidently limit and
qualify each other in actual experience, and they cannot be isolated in
speculation.
Though antiquity, Pagan and Christian, took a different view, it
seems easier, _a priori_, to understand Progress than Decadence. Even
if the former be limited, as presumably it is, by the limitation of
human faculty, we should expect the ultimate boundary to be capable of
indefinite approach, and we should _not_ expect that any part of the
road towards it, once traversed, would have to be retraced. Even in the
organic world, decay and death, familiar though they be, are phenomena
that call for scientific explanation. And Weismann has definitely asked
how it comes about that the higher organisms grow old and die, seeing
that old age and death are not inseparable characteristics of living
protoplasm, and that the simplest organisms suffer no natural decay,
perishing, when they do perish, by accident, starvation, or specific
disease.
The answer he gives to his own question is that the death of the
individual is so useful to the race, that Natural Selection has, in
all but the very lowest species, exterminated the potentially immortal.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account