lecture01- 第4部分

or　of　non…religious　content。







To　plead　the　organic　causation　of　a　religious　state　of　　mind；



then；　in　refutation　of　its　claim　to　possess　superior　spiritual



value；　is　quite　illogical　and　arbitrary；　unless　one　has



already　worked　out　in　advance　some　psycho…physical　theory



connecting　spiritual　values　in　general　with　determinate　sorts　of



physiological　change。　　Otherwise　none　of　our　thoughts　and



feelings；　not　even　our　scientific　doctrines；　not　even　our



DIS…beliefs；　could　retain　any　value　as　revelations　of　the　truth；



for　every　one　of　them　without　exception　flows　from　the　state　of



its　possessor's　body　at　the　time。







It　is　needless　to　say　that　medical　materialism　draws　in　point　of



fact　no　such　sweeping　skeptical　conclusion。　　It　is　sure；　just　as



every　simple　man　is　sure；　that　some　states　of　mind　are　inwardly



superior　to　others；　and　reveal　to　us　more　truth；　and　in　this　it



simply　makes　use　of　an　ordinary　spiritual　judgment。　　It　has　no



physiological　theory　of　the　production　of　these　its　favorite



states；　by　which　it　may　accredit　them；　and　its　attempt　to



discredit　the　states　which　it　dislikes；　by　vaguely　associating



them　with　nerves　and　liver；　and　connecting　them　with　names



connoting　bodily　affliction；　is　altogether　illogical　and



inconsistent。







Let　us　play　fair　in　this　whole　matter；　and　be　quite　candid　with



ourselves　and　with　the　facts。　　When　we　think　certain　states　of



mind　superior　to　others；　is　it　ever　because　of　what　we　know



concerning　their　organic　antecedents？　　No！　it　is　always　for　two



entirely　different　reasons。　　It　is　either　because　we　take　an



immediate　delight　in　them；　or　else　it　is　because　we　believe　them



to　bring　us　good　consequential　fruits　for　life。　　When　we　speak



disparagingly　of　〃feverish　fancies；〃　surely　the　fever…process　as



such　is　not　the　ground　of　our　disesteemfor　aught　we　know　to　the



contrary；　103　degrees　or　104　degrees　Fahrenheit　might　be　a　much



more　favorable　temperature　for　truths　to　germinate　and　sprout　in；



than　the　more　ordinary　blood…heat　of　97　or　98　degrees。　　It　is



either　the　disagreeableness　itself　of　the　fancies；　or　their



inability　to　bear　the　criticisms　of　the　convalescent　hour。　　When



we　praise　the　thoughts　which　health　brings；　health's　peculiar



chemical　metabolisms　have　nothing　to　do　with　determining　our



judgment。　　We　know　in　fact　almost　nothing　about　these



metabolisms。　　It　is　the　character　of　inner　happiness　in　the



thoughts　which　stamps　them　as　good；　or　else　their　consistency



with　our　other　opinions　and　their　serviceability　for　our　needs；



which　make　them　pass　for　true　in　our　esteem。







Now　the　more　intrinsic　and　the　more　remote　of　these　criteria　do



not　always　hang　together。　　Inner　happiness　and　serviceability　do



not　always　agree。　　What　immediately　feels　most　〃good〃　is　not



always　most　〃true；〃　when　measured　by　the　verdict　of　the　rest　of



experience。　　The　difference　between　Philip　drunk　and　Philip　sober



is　the　classic　instance　in　corroboration。　　If　merely　〃feeling



good〃　could　decide；　drunkenness　would　be　the　supremely　valid



human　experience。　　But　its　revelations；　however　acutely



satisfying　at　the　moment；　are　inserted　into　an　environment　which



refuses　to　bear　them　out　for　any　length　of　time。　　The　consequence



of　this　discrepancy　of　the　two　criteria　is　the　uncertainty　which



still　prevails　over　so　many　of　our　spiritual　judgments。　　There



are　moments　of　sentimental　and　mystical　experiencewe　shall



hereafter　hear　much　of　themthat　carry　an　enormous　sense　of



inner　authority　and　illumination　with　them　when　they　come。　　But



they　come　seldom；　and　they　do　not　come　to　everyone；　and　the　rest



of　life　makes　either　no　connection　with　them；　or　tends　to



contradict　them　more　than　it　confirms　them。　　Some　persons　follow



more　the　voice　of　the　moment　in　these　cases；　some　prefer　to　be



guided　by　the　average　results。　　Hence　the　sad　discordancy　of　so



many　of　the　spiritual　judgments　of　human　beings；　a　discordancy



which　will　be　brought　home　to　us　acutely　enough　before　these



lectures　end。







It　is；　however；　a　discordancy　that　can　never　be　resolved　by　any



merely　medical　test。　　A　good　example　of　the　impossibility　of



holding　strictly　to　the　medical　tests　is　seen　in　the　theory　of



the　pathological　causation　of　genius　promulgated　by　recent



authors。　　〃Genius；〃　said　Dr。　Moreau；　〃is　but　one　of　the　many



branches　of　the　neuropathic　tree。〃　　〃Genius；〃　says　Dr。　Lombroso；



〃is　a　symptom　of　hereditary　degeneration　of　the　epileptoid



variety；　and　is　allied　to　moral　insanity。〃　　　〃Whenever　a　man's



life；〃　writes　Mr。　Nisbet；　〃is　at　once　sufficiently　illustrious



and　recorded　with　sufficient　fullness　to　be　a　subject　of



profitable　study；　he　inevitably　falls　into　the　morbid　category。　。



。　。　　And　it　is　worthy　of　remark　that；　as　a　rule；　the　greater　the



genius；　the　greater　the　unsoundness。〃＇3＇







＇3＇　　J。　F。　Nisbet：　　The　Insanity　of　Genius；　3d　ed。；　London；　1893；



pp。　xvi。；　xxiv。















Now　do　these　authors；　after　having　succeeded　in　establishing　to



their　own　satisfaction　that　the　works　of　genius　are　fruits　of



disease；　consistently　proceed　thereupon　to　impugn　the　VALUE　of



the　fruits？　　Do　they　deduce　a　new　spiritual　judgment　from　their



new　doctrine　of　existential　conditions？　Do　they　frankly　forbid　us



to　admire　the　productions　of　genius　from　now　onwards？　　and　say



outright　that　no　neuropath　can　ever　be　a　revealer　of　new　truth？







No！　their　immediate　spiritual　instincts　are　too　strong　for　them



here；　and　hold　their　own　against　inferences　which；　in　mere　love



of　logical　consistency；　medical　materialism　ought　to　be　only　too



glad　to　draw。　　One　disciple　of　the　school；　indeed；　has　striven　to



impugn　the　value　of　works　of　genius　in　a　wholesale　way　（such



works　of　contemporary　art；　namely；　as　he　himself　is　unable　to



enjoy；　and　they　are　many）　by　using　medical　arguments。＇4＇　　But　for



the　most　part　the　masterpieces　are　left　unchallenged；　and　the



medical　line　of　attack　either　confines　itself　to　such　secular



productions　as　everyone　admits　to　be　intrinsically　eccentric；　or



else　addresses　itself　exclusively　to　religious　manifestations。　



And　then　it　is　because　the　religious　manifestations　have　been



already　condemned　because　the　critic　dislikes　them　on　internal　or



spiritual　grounds。







＇4＇　　Max　Nordau；　in　his　bulky　book　entitled　Degeneration。















In　the　natural　sciences　and　industrial　arts　it　never　occurs　to



anyone　to　try　to　refute　opinions　by　showing　up　their　author's



neurotic　constitution。　　Opinions　here　are　invariably　tested　by



logic　and　by　experiment；　no　matter　what　may　be　their　author's



neurological　type。　　It　should　be　no　otherwise　with　religious



opinions。　　Their　value　can　only　be　ascertained　by　spiritual



judgments　directly　passed　upon　them；　judgments　based　on　our　own



immediate　feeling　primarily；　and　secondarily　on　what　we　can



ascertain　of　their　experiential　relations　to　our　moral　needs　and



to　the　rest　of　what　we　hold　as　true。







Immediate　luminousness；　in　short；　philosophical　reasonableness；



and　moral　helpfulness　are　the　only　available　criteria。　Saint



Teresa　might　have　had　the　nervous　system　of　the　placidest　cow；



and　it　would　not　now　save　her　theology；　if　the　trial　of　the



theology　by　these　other　tests　should　show　it　to　be　contemptible。　



And　conversely　if　her　theology　can　stand　these　other　tests；　it



will　make　no　difference　how　hysterical　or　nervously　off　her



balance　Saint　Teresa　may　have　been　when　she　was　with　us　here



below。







You　see　that　at　bottom　we　are　thrown　back　upon　the　general



principles　by　which　the　empirical　philosophy　has　always　contended



that　we　must　be　guided　in　our　search　for　truth。　　Dogmatic



philosophies　have　sought　for　tests　for　truth　which　might　dispense



us　from　appealing　to　the　future。　Some　direct　mark；　by　noting



which　we　can　be　protected　immediately　and　absolutely；　now　and



forever；　against　all　mistakesuch　has　been　the　darling　dream　of



philosophic　dogmatists。　　It　is　clear　that　the　ORIGIN　of　the　truth



would　be　an　admirable　criterion　of　this　sort；　if　only　the　various



origins　could　be　discriminated　from　one　another　from　this　



point　of　view；　and　the　history　of　dogmatic　opinion　shows　that



origin　has　always　been　a　favorite　test。　　Origin　in　immediate



intuition；　origin　in　pontifical　authority；　origin　in　supernatural



revelation；　as　by　vision；　hearing；　or　unaccountable　impression；



origin　in　direct　possession　by　a　higher　spirit；　expressing　itself



in　prophecy　and　warning；　origin　in　automatic　utterance



generallythese　origins　have　been　stock　warrants　for　the　truth



of　one　opinion　after　another　which　we　find　represented　in



religious　history。　　The　medical　materialists　are　therefore　only



so　many　belated　dogmatists；　neatly　turning　the　tables　on　their



predecessors　by　using　the　criterion　of　origin　in　a　destructive



instead　of　an　accreditive　way。







They　are　effective　with　their　talk　of　pathological　origin　only　so



long　as　supernatural　origin　is　pleaded　by　the　other　side；　and



nothing　but　the　argument　from　origin　is　under　discussion。　　But



the　argument　from　origin　has　seldom　been　used　alone；　for　it　is



too　obviously　insufficient。　　Dr。　Maudsley　is　perhaps　the



cleverest　of　the　rebutters　of　supernatural　religion　on　grounds　of



origin。　　Yet　he　finds　himself　forced　to　write：







〃What　right　have　we　to　believe　Nature　under　any　obligation　to　do



her　work　by　means　of　complete　minds　only？