The Collected Works of Ambrose Bierce, Volume 11: AntepenultimataBierce, Ambrose
General
The Collected Works of Ambrose Bierce, Volume 11: Antepenultimata
Bierce, Ambrose
American essays; American literature
“I don’t repudiate the presumptive arguments of schoolmen. I merely
supplement them with something positive. For instance, if you assumed
the existence of God this argument of the scholastics is a good one.
God has implanted in all men the desire of perfect happiness. This
desire can not be satisfied in our lives here. If there were not
another life wherein to satisfy it then God would be a deceiver. _Voila
tout._”
There is more: the desire of perfect happiness does not imply
immortality, even if there is a God, for
(1) God may not have implanted it, but merely suffers it to exist, as
he suffers sin to exist, the desire of wealth, the desire to live
longer than we do in this world. It is not held that God implanted all
the desires of the human heart. Then why hold that he implanted that of
perfect happiness?
(2) Even if he did—even if a divinely implanted desire entail its own
gratification—even if it can not be gratified in this life—that does
not imply immortality. It implies _only_ another life long enough for
its gratification just once. An eternity of gratification is not a
logical inference from it.
(3) Perhaps God _is_ “a deceiver;” who knows that he is not? Assumption
of the existence of a God is one thing; assumption of the existence of
a God who is honorable and candid according to our conception of honor
and candor is another.
(4) There may be an honorable and candid God. He may have implanted
in us the desire of perfect happiness. It may be—it is—impossible to
gratify that desire in this life. Still, another life is not implied,
for God may not have intended us to draw the inference that he is going
to gratify it. If omniscient and omnipotent, God must be held to have
intended whatever occurs, but no such God is assumed in M. Flammarion’s
illustration, and it may be that God’s knowledge and power are
limited, or that one of them is limited.
M. Flammarion is a learned, if somewhat theatrical, astronomer. He
has a tremendous imagination, which naturally is more at home in the
marvelous and catastrophic than in the orderly regions of familiar
phenomena. To him the heavens are an immense pyrotechnicon and he is
the master of the show and sets off the fireworks. But he knows nothing
of logic, which is the science of straight thinking, and his views of
things have therefore no value; they are nebulous.
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