The Creator, and what we may know of the method of creationDallinger, W. H. (William Henry)
Religion
The Creator, and what we may know of the method of creation
Dallinger, W. H. (William Henry)
Creation; Evolution; God; Religion and science
Science refuses absolutely to recognise mind as the primal cause of
the sequences of matter. This is just;—within the strict region of its
research; for phenomena, their sequences and classification, are its
sole domain. But observe, science, universally, puts _force_ where the
reason asks for cause. The forces affecting matter are tacitly assumed
to be competent to account for every activity, every sequence, every
phenomenon, and all the harmonies of universal being. A nexus for the
infinite diversities and harmonies, a basis for all the equilibrium of
nature, is found by modern science in force. But force is as absolutely
inscrutable as mind. Force can never be known in itself; it is known by
its manifestations. It is not a phenomenon; it produces phenomena. We
cannot know it; but we know nothing without it.
Then the ultimate analysis of physical science is the relations of
force and matter. But force is a subject of knowledge to science
only in its manifestations; that is, motion. In irreducible terms,
therefore, the final analysis of science is _matter as affected by
motion_. These—matter and motion—are held by many advanced physicists
to be the primary elements of all phenomena; the most minute, subtile,
and occult reaction, and the most majestic cosmic manifestation are
held to be explained by these. Thus the whole cosmos, with its infinite
complexities and harmonies, arose in space, and is in space, because of
the affections of matter by motion. To search out the motions on which
all changes are based, to reduce all the activities of the universe,
from the awful movement of a constellation, to the rhythmic swing of
an atom; from the origin of mind, and the writing of Faust, to the
building of a snow crystal, or the production of a flower, to sheer
mechanics—matter affected by motion—is held to be the chief mission of
science.
But examine for a moment the nature of the problem. The matter with
which analysis is thus finally concerned cannot be matter as we know
it. It is the existing _properties_ or _qualities_ of matter that
affect us. Matter is hard, it is yellow, it is sweet. Now the very
qualities that _make_ matter as we know it are demonstrated by modern
science to be but ‘modes of motion;’ matter is hot because the ultimate
atoms of it vibrate in a special manner. The yellowness of an object is
not in _it_, but in our percipient faculty. That which is yellow emits
certain light vibrations only; these affect the retina in a special
manner, and this affection we call the perception of yellowness. It is
thus with all the qualities of matter.
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