Regeneration : $b A reply to Max Nordau — John Shaqi
Regeneration : $b A reply to Max NordauHake, A. Egmont (Alfred Egmont)
Philosophy
Regeneration : $b A reply to Max Nordau
Hake, A. Egmont (Alfred Egmont)
Nordau, Max Simon, 1849-1923. Entartung; World history
It is therefore not surprising that a scientist by erudition, and
especially an alienist, who, by dint of studying the mechanism which
connects what some call the soul, and others designate as the trinity
of the consciousness, the judgment, and the will, with the body, has
persuaded himself that there is nothing beyond nerves, cells and the
gray matter, should look with contempt on imagination, and yet more
so on the love of the mystical, and that his ideal man, his “original
type,” should possess so little imagination as to remain unaffected by
the mystical.
Lack of information and of observation has caused the multitude to
regard a great number of men—distinguished in the eyes of the world
exclusively by their intellectual powers—as non-mystics to such a
degree as to class them as atheists. The majority of such men, though
distinctly at variance with the dogmas and views of established sects,
have been and are, in their inner consciousness, both mystics and
religionists. When in public they have seemingly attacked religion
and mysticism, they have in reality only attacked churches and
superstition. In the judgment of a great many intelligent men the
controversy between Professor Huxley and Dr. Martineau goes far to
confirm this view. When humanity, including scientists, learns to
distinguish between religion and churches, it will be understood that
almost all men in the past and present who have deservedly been called
great, have been religionists, and therefore mystics.
Let us instance Faraday. He belonged all his life to a sect which must
be classed among the mystics, and he died a believer in its creed.
Are we then to class this keen observer, accurate investigator, and
brilliant logician, this daring pioneer of science, this ingenious
unraveller of nature’s secrets, among the degenerates? If we do, where
should we class average scientists, including Nordau? Or should we
place ourselves in the position of the common-sense German Philistine,
and declare that mysticism is not mysticism when it takes the shape of
the belief of a sect tolerated by the police?
But is not Faraday’s mysticism perfectly compatible with a sound mind?
He was one of those scientists with unclouded reasoning powers, whose
knowledge—gained by investigation, not from authorities—had taught him
how little he knew of the great mysteries of creation. He recognised
that our emotional cravings cannot be satisfied by science in its
present stage, but only by emotional realization. Hence his religious
attitude towards the great mysterious power of which he knew nothing,
but whose work became more and more manifest as his investigation
proceeded. What wiser course could a man adopt, who was so capable
of distinguishing essence from form, than to give that form to his
religion which had gratified his emotional nature as a child?
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