But it is further found, as matter again of general experience, that
such formulations do not remain innocuous in the vacuum of pure
intellect, but reverberate upon action and influence conduct. When
men believe that they are surrounded with magical powers, they spend
half their lives in ritual designed to affect the operations of these
(wholly hypothetical) influences. When they worship a God whom they
rationalize as man-like, they sacrifice a large proportion of their
produce on his altars, and may even kill their fellow-creatures to
placate his (again imaginary) passions. When they believe in a Divine
Revelation, they think that they possess complete enlightenment on
the great problems of life and death; and they will then cheerfully
burn those who differ from them, or embark upon the bloodiest wars in
defence of this imaginary certainty. When they worship God as absolute
and as a person, they cannot help making deductions that lead them
into absurdities of thought and of conduct: they deny or oppose ideas
derived from a study of nature, the only actual source of knowledge,
because they conflict with what they believe to be immutable truths,
but are in reality conclusions drawn from false premisses; they tend to
an acquiescent and obscurantist spirit in the belief that such moral
and intellectual laziness is “doing God’s will,” when that will is in
reality their own personification of cosmic direction.
Sooner or later, false thinking brings wrong conduct. Man can perhaps
get along with empirical methods and ideas which turn out on analysis
to be only symbols, provided that he does not attempt difficult
construction. He can have some sort of a religion, which will be some
sort of a help to him, even when its so-called certitudes are only
a collection of mixed metaphors, in the same way as he can practise
agriculture on a basis of mingled empiricism and superstition. But just
as he is finding that he is only able to raise agricultural efficiency
to its highest pitch by relying on the result of scientific method, as
when he uses synthetic nitrates instead of ploughing in a leguminous
crop, or just as a power-station would be very difficult to run if the
staff had only symbolic ideas on the nature of electricity no closer
to the real than is the symbolism of most religions, so if he does not
bring scientific analysis into the intellectual side of his religion,
he cannot realize religious possibilities. True that in a sense all
knowledge and intellectual presentation is symbolic: but there is the
world of difference between the merely analogical symbolism which takes
one idea or thing as symbolic of another because there is some degree
of similarity between the two and the first is more familiar, and the
scientific symbolism which strives to find a scientific counter, so
to speak, which shall represent particular phenomena as closely as
possible, and them alone.
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