the unseen world and other essays-第28节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


ronomy；　they　made　original　discoveries　of　considerable　value；　and　if　we　turn　from　abstract　knowledge　to　the　arts　of　life；　it　cannot　be　denied　that　the　mediaeval　Mussulmans　had　reached　a　higher　plane　of　material　comfort　than　their　Christian　contemporaries。　In　short；　the　work　of　all　kinds　done　by　these　people　would　furnish　the　judicious　advocate　of　the　claims　of　the　Semitic　race　with　materials　for　a　pleasing　and　instructive　picture。　Dr。　Draper；　however；　errs；　though　no　doubt　unintentionally；　by　so　presenting　the　case　as　to　leave　upon　the　reader's　mind　the　impression　that　all　this　scientific　and　practical　achievement　was　the　work　of　Islamism；　and　that　the　Mohammedan　civilization　was　of　a　higher　type　than　the　Christian。　It　is　with　an　apparent　feeling　of　regret　that　he　looks　upon　the　ousting　of　the　Moors　from　dominion　in　Spain；　but　this　is　a　mistaken　view。　As　regards　the　first　point；　it　is　a　patent　fact　that　scientific　inquiry　was　conducted　at　the　cost　of　as　much　theological　obloquy　in　the　Mohammedan　as　in　the　Christian　world。　It　is　true　there　was　more　actual　tolerance　of　heresy　on　the　part　of　Moslem　governments　than　was　customary　in　Europe　in　those　days；　but　this　is　a　superficial　fact；　which　does　not　indicate　any　superiority　in　Moslem　popular　sentiment。　The　caliphate　or　emirate　was　a　truly　absolute　despotism；　such　as　the　Papacy　has　never　been；　and　the　conduct　of　a　sceptical　emir　in　encouraging　scientific　inquiry　goes　but　little　way　toward　proving　anything　like　a　general　prevalence　of　tolerance　or　of　free…thinking。　And　this　brings　us　to　the　second　point；that　Mohammedan　civilization　was；　on　the　whole；　rather　a　skin…deep　affair。　It　was　superficial　because　of　that　extreme　severance　between　government　and　people　which　has　never　existed　in　European　nations　within　historic　times；　but　which　has　always　existed　among　the　principal　races　that　have　professed　Moslemism。　Nowhere　in　the　Mohammedan　world　has　there　ever　been　what　we　call　a　national　life；　and　nowhere　do　we　find　in　its　records　any　trace　of　such　an　intellectual　impulse；　thrilling　through　every　fibre　of　the　people　and　begetting　prodigious　achievements　in　art；　poetry；　and　philosophy；　as　was　awakened　in　Europe　in　the　thirteenth　century　and　again　in　the　fifteenth。　Under　the　peculiar　form　of　unlimited　material　and　spiritual　despotism　exemplified　in　the　caliphate；　a　few　men　may　discover　gases　or　comment　on　Aristotle；　but　no　general　movement　toward　political　progress　or　philosophical　inquiry　is　possible。　Such　a　society　is　rigid　and　inorganic　at　bottom；　whatever　scanty　signs　of　flexibility　and　life　it　may　show　at　the　surface。　There　is　no　better　illustration　of　this；　when　well　considered；　than　the　fact　that　Moorish　civilization　remained；　politically　and　intellectually；　a　mere　excrescence　in　Spain；　after　having　been　fastened　down　over　half　the　country　for　nearly　eight　centuries。

But　we　are　in　danger　of　forgetting　our　main　theme；　as　Dr。　Draper　seems　to　do；　while　we　linger　with　him　over　these　interesting　wayside　topics。　We　may　perhaps　be　excused；　however；　if　we　have　not　yet　made　any　very　explicit　allusion　to　the　〃Conflict　between　Religion　and　Science；〃　because　this　work　seems　to　be　in　the　main　a　repetition　en　petit　of　the　〃Intellectual　Development　of　Europe；〃　and　what　we　have　said　will　apply　as　well　to　one　as　to　the　other。　In　the　little　book；　as　in　the　big　one；　we　hear　a　great　deal　about　the　Arabs；　and　something　about　Columbus　and　Galileo；　who　made　men　accept　sundry　truths　in　the　teeth　of　clerical　opposition；　and；　as　before；　we　float　gently　down　the　current　of　history　without　being　over　well…informed　as　to　the　precise　didactic　purpose　of　our　voyage。　Here；　indeed；　even　our　headings　and　running…titles　do　not　materially　help　us；　for　though　we　are　supposed　to　be　witnessing；　or　mayhap　assisting　in；　a　perennial　conflict　between　〃science〃　and　〃religion；〃　we　are　nowhere　enlightened　as　to　what　the　cause　or　character　of　this　conflict　is；　nor　are　we　enabled　to　get　a　good　look　at　either　of　the　parties　to　the　strife。　With　regard　to　it　〃religion〃　especially　are　we　left　in　the　dark。　What　this　dreadful　thing　is　towards　which　〃science〃　is　always　playing　the　part　of　Herakles　towards　the　Lernaean　Hydra；　we　are　left　to　gather　from　the　course　of　the　narrative。　Yet；　in　a　book　with　any　valid　claim　to　clearsightedness；　one　would　think　such　a　point　as　this　ought　to　receive　very　explicit　preliminary　treatment。

The　course　of　the　narrative；　however；　leaves　us　in　little　doubt　as　to　what　Dr。　Draper　means　by　a　conflict　between　science　and　religion。　When　he　enlarges　on　the　trite　story　of　Galileo；　and　alludes　to　the　more　modern　quarrel　between　the　Church　and　the　geologists；　and　does　this　in　the　belief　that　he　is　thereby　illustrating　an　antagonism　between　religion　and　science；　it　is　obvious　that　he　identifies　the　cause　of　the　anti…geologists　and　the　persecutors　of　Galileo　with　the　cause　of　religion。　The　word　〃religion〃　is　to　him　a　symbol　which　stands　for　unenlightened　bigotry　or　narrow…minded　unwillingness　to　look　facts　in　the　face。　Such　a　conception　of　religion　is　common　enough；　and　unhappily　a　great　deal　has　been　done　to　strengthen　it　by　the　very　persons　to　whom　the　interests　of　religion　are　presumed　to　be　a　professional　care。　It　is　nevertheless　a　very　superficial　conception；　and　no　book　which　is　vitiated　by　it　can　have　much　philosophic　value。　It　is　simply　the　crude　impression　which；　in　minds　unaccustomed　to　analysis；　is　left　by　the　fact　that　theologians　and　other　persons　interested　in　religion　are　usually　alarmed　at　new　scientific　truths；　and　resist　them　with　emotions　so　highly　wrought　that　they　are　not　only　incapable　of　estimating　evidence；　but　often　also　have　their　moral　sense　impaired；　and　fight　with　foul　means　when　fair　ones　fail。　If　we　reflect　carefully　on　this　class　of　phenomena；　we　shall　see　that　something　besides　mere　pride　of　opinion　is　involved　in　the　struggle。　At　the　bottom　of　changing　theological　beliefs　there　lies　something　which　men　perennially　value；　and　for　the　sake　of　which　they　cling　to　the　beliefs　as　long　as　possible。　That　which　they　value　is　not　itself　a　matter　of　belief；　but　it　is　a　matter　of　conduct；　it　is　the　searching　after　goodness；after　a　higher　life　than　the　mere　satisfaction　of　individual　desires。　All　animals　seek　for　fulness　of　life；　but　in　civilized　man　this　craving　has　acquired　a　moral　significance；　and　has　become　a　spiritual　aspiration；　and　this　emotional　tendency；　more　or　less　strong　in　the　human　race；　we　call　religious　feeling　or　religion。　Viewed　in　this　light；　religion　is　not　only　something　that　mankind　is　never　likely　to　get　rid　of；　but　it　is　incomparably　the　most　noble　as　well　as　the　most　useful　attribute　of　humanity。

Now；　this　emotional　prompting　toward　completeness　of　life　requires；　of　course；　that　conduct　should　be　guided；　as　far　as　possible；　in　accordance　with　a　true　theory　of　the　relations　of　man　to　the　world　in　which　he　lives。　Hence；　at　any　given　era　the　religious　feeling　will　always　be　found　enlisted　in　behalf　of　some　theory　of　the　universe。　At　any　time；　whatever　may　be　their　shortcomings　in　practice；　religious　men　will　aim　at　doing　right　according　to　their　conceptions　of　the　order　of　the　world。　If　men's　conceptions　of　the　order　of　nature　remained　constant；　no　apparent　conflict　between　their　religious　feelings　and　their　knowledge　need　ever　arise。　But　with　the　first　advance　in　our　knowledge　of　nature　the　case　is　altered。　New　and　strange　theories　are　naturally　regarded　with　fear　and　dislike　by　persons　who　have　always　been　accustomed　to　find　the　sanction　and　justification　of　their　emotional　prompting　toward　righteousness　in　old　familiar　theories　which　the　new　ones　are　seeking　to　supplant。　Such　persons　oppose　the　new　doctrine　because　their　engrained　mental　habits　compel　them　to　believe　that　its　establishment　will　in　some　way　lower　men's　standard　of　life；　and　make　them　less　careful　of　their　spiritual　welfare。　This　is　the　case；　at　all　events；　when　theologians　oppose　scientific　conclusions　on　religious　grounds；　and　not　simply　from　mental　dulness　or　rigidity。　And；　in　so　far　as　it　is　religious　feeling　which　thus　prompts　resistance　to　scientific　innovation；　it　may　be　said；　with　some　appearance　of　truth；　that　there　is　a　conflict　between　religion　and　science。

But　there　must　always　be　two　parties　to　a　quarrel；　and　our　statement　has　to　be　modified　as　soon　as　we　consider　what　the　scientific　innovator　impugns。　It　is　not　the　emotional　prompting　toward　righteousness；　it　is　not　the　yearning　to　live　im　Guten；　Ganzen；　Wahren；　that　he　seeks　to　weaken；　quite　likely　he　has　all　this　as　much　at　heart　as　the　theologian　who　vituperates　him。　Nor　is　it　true　that　his　discoveries；　in　spite　of　him；　tend　to　destroy　this　all…important　mental　attitude。　It　would　be　ridiculous　to　say　that　the　fate　of　religious　feeling　is　really　involved　in　the　fate　of　grotesque　cosmogonies　and　theosophies　framed　in　the　infancy　of　men's　knowledge　of　nature；　for　history　shows　us　quite　the　contrary。　Religious　feeling　has　survived　the　heliocentric　theory　and　the　discoveries　of　geologists；　and　it　will　be　none　the　worse　for　the　establishment　of　Darwinism。　It　is　the　merest　truism　to　say　that　religion　strikes　its　roots　deeper　down　into　human　nature　than　speculative　opinion；　and　is　accordingly　independent　of　any　particular　set　of　beliefs。　Since；