The plurality of the human racePouchet, G. (Georges)
Philosophy
The plurality of the human race
Pouchet, G. (Georges)
Monogenism and polygenism
This extract is so much the more important for our thesis, since we
perceive in every word the chagrin of a man who did not find in the
hearts of others a fraternal echo to his dearest sentiments. It is, in
truth, a difficulty peculiar to the study of questions of this nature.
We must, therefore, be very careful in discussing the value of any
testimony which may be brought forward, and to distrust those minds
which begin by declaring _à priori_ the universality of beliefs, hopes,
and fears among mankind, as a natural consequence of the primitive
unity of the human species. We must always examine most minutely the
accounts of travellers to which we are obliged to refer. Thus, for
example, it is evident that the older the evidence, the better it is;
but at the same time, the farther it goes back, the less chance there
is that it emanates from an independent and impartial mind, free from
all prejudice.
Happily, the exaggeration of these ideas must often suffice to put us
on our guard against them, like the candid Jesuit, whose zealous but
hazy faith thought it had discovered traces of St. Thomas’s preaching
in Brazil.[184] In an otherwise good notice of the Esquimaux,[185]
Dr. King says, “that these people have preserved, like many other
uncivilised races, a vague remembrance of the creation and of the
deluge, and that they believe in future rewards and punishments.”
In his religious zeal, Dr. King forgets that if the Esquimaux had
been able to bring a confused tradition of even the deluge and the
creation from the valley of the Euphrates, it was impossible it could
have been the same with a belief in future rewards and punishments,
seeing that the Jews themselves never possessed this belief before
their contact with Assyrian civilisation. We may read in Dr. Brecher’s
excellent work[186] the whole history of the development of this
belief in the immortality of the soul. If the German doctor wishes
piously to prove that the Jews ought, morally, to have always believed
in this immortality, at all events, his zeal has been able to invent
real proofs, which in fact, are wanting. The famous _scheol_, which
is mentioned so often in old Hebrew books, appears to be merely
the kingdom of the _dead_, and not that of _souls_, like hell,
Tartarus, the Elysian fields, and Paradise; the _scheol_ is but an
ideal representation of the tomb. Even at the time when the Jews had
generally adopted the ideas of their neighbours, during the Talmudic
period, the belief in the immortality of the soul, if it existed, was
neither completely clear nor well reasoned, since they refused all
participation in a future life to those who denied the resurrection and
the last judgment, “which was equivalent to entire annihilation.”[187]
To believe this, is certainly not to believe in the immortality of the
soul, since they regarded eternal life not as a necessary consequence,
but as a recompense for _good principles_, and having faith in them.
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