heretics- 第39部分

is　a　sort　of　notion　that　extreme　convictions　specially　upon　cosmic　matters；



have　been　responsible　in　the　past　for　the　thing　which　is　called　bigotry。



But　a　very　small　amount　of　direct　experience　will　dissipate　this　view。



In　real　life　the　people　who　are　most　bigoted　are　the　people



who　have　no　convictions　at　all。　　The　economists　of　the　Manchester



school　who　disagree　with　Socialism　take　Socialism　seriously。



It　is　the　young　man　in　Bond　Street；　who　does　not　know　what　socialism



means　much　less　whether　he　agrees　with　it；　who　is　quite　certain



that　these　socialist　fellows　are　making　a　fuss　about　nothing。



The　man　who　understands　the　Calvinist　philosophy　enough　to　agree　with　it



must　understand　the　Catholic　philosophy　in　order　to　disagree　with　it。



It　is　the　vague　modern　who　is　not　at　all　certain　what　is　right



who　is　most　certain　that　Dante　was　wrong。　　The　serious　opponent



of　the　Latin　Church　in　history；　even　in　the　act　of　showing　that　it



produced　great　infamies；　must　know　that　it　produced　great　saints。



It　is　the　hard…headed　stockbroker；　who　knows　no　history　and



believes　no　religion；　who　is；　nevertheless；　perfectly　convinced



that　all　these　priests　are　knaves。　　The　Salvationist　at　the　Marble



Arch　may　be　bigoted；　but　he　is　not　too　bigoted　to　yearn　from



a　common　human　kinship　after　the　dandy　on　church　parade。



But　the　dandy　on　church　parade　is　so　bigoted　that　he　does　not



in　the　least　yearn　after　the　Salvationist　at　the　Marble　Arch。



Bigotry　may　be　roughly　defined　as　the　anger　of　men　who　have



no　opinions。　　It　is　the　resistance　offered　to　definite　ideas



by　that　vague　bulk　of　people　whose　ideas　are　indefinite　to　excess。



Bigotry　may　be　called　the　appalling　frenzy　of　the　indifferent。



This　frenzy　of　the　indifferent　is　in　truth　a　terrible　thing；



it　has　made　all　monstrous　and　widely　pervading　persecutions。



In　this　degree　it　was　not　the　people　who　cared　who　ever　persecuted；



the　people　who　cared　were　not　sufficiently　numerous。　　It　was　the　people



who　did　not　care　who　filled　the　world　with　fire　and　oppression。



It　was　the　hands　of　the　indifferent　that　lit　the　faggots；



it　was　the　hands　of　the　indifferent　that　turned　the　rack。　　There　have



come　some　persecutions　out　of　the　pain　of　a　passionate　certainty；



but　these　produced；　not　bigotry；　but　fanaticisma　very　different



and　a　somewhat　admirable　thing。　　Bigotry　in　the　main　has　always



been　the　pervading　omnipotence　of　those　who　do　not　care　crushing



out　those　who　care　in　darkness　and　blood。







There　are　people；　however；　who　dig　somewhat　deeper　than　this



into　the　possible　evils　of　dogma。　　It　is　felt　by　many　that　strong



philosophical　conviction；　while　it　does　not　（as　they　perceive）



produce　that　sluggish　and　fundamentally　frivolous　condition　which　we



call　bigotry；　does　produce　a　certain　concentration；　exaggeration；



and　moral　impatience；　which　we　may　agree　to　call　fanaticism。



They　say；　in　brief；　that　ideas　are　dangerous　things。



In　politics；　for　example；　it　is　commonly　urged　against　a　man　like



Mr。　Balfour；　or　against　a　man　like　Mr。　John　Morley；　that　a　wealth



of　ideas　is　dangerous。　　The　true　doctrine　on　this　point；　again；



is　surely　not　very　difficult　to　state。　　Ideas　are　dangerous；



but　the　man　to　whom　they　are　least　dangerous　is　the　man　of　ideas。



He　is　acquainted　with　ideas；　and　moves　among　them　like　a　lion…tamer。



Ideas　are　dangerous；　but　the　man　to　whom　they　are　most　dangerous



is　the　man　of　no　ideas。　　The　man　of　no　ideas　will　find　the　first



idea　fly　to　his　head　like　wine　to　the　head　of　a　teetotaller。



It　is　a　common　error；　I　think；　among　the　Radical　idealists　of　my　own



party　and　period　to　suggest　that　financiers　and　business　men　are　a



danger　to　the　empire　because　they　are　so　sordid　or　so　materialistic。



The　truth　is　that　financiers　and　business　men　are　a　danger　to



the　empire　because　they　can　be　sentimental　about　any　sentiment；



and　idealistic　about　any　ideal；　any　ideal　that　they　find　lying　about。



just　as　a　boy　who　has　not　known　much　of　women　is　apt　too　easily



to　take　a　woman　for　the　woman；　so　these　practical　men；　unaccustomed



to　causes；　are　always　inclined　to　think　that　if　a　thing　is　proved



to　be　an　ideal　it　is　proved　to　be　the　ideal。　　Many；　for　example；



avowedly　followed　Cecil　Rhodes　because　he　had　a　vision。



They　might　as　well　have　followed　him　because　he　had　a　nose；



a　man　without　some　kind　of　dream　of　perfection　is　quite　as　much



of　a　monstrosity　as　a　noseless　man。　　People　say　of　such　a　figure；



in　almost　feverish　whispers；　〃He　knows　his　own　mind；〃　which　is　exactly



like　saying　in　equally　feverish　whispers；　〃He　blows　his　own　nose。〃



Human　nature　simply　cannot　subsist　without　a　hope　and　aim



of　some　kind；　as　the　sanity　of　the　Old　Testament　truly　said；



where　there　is　no　vision　the　people　perisheth。　　But　it　is　precisely



because　an　ideal　is　necessary　to　man　that　the　man　without　ideals



is　in　permanent　danger　of　fanaticism。　　There　is　nothing　which　is



so　likely　to　leave　a　man　open　to　the　sudden　and　irresistible　inroad



of　an　unbalanced　vision　as　the　cultivation　of　business　habits。



All　of　us　know　angular　business　men　who　think　that　the　earth　is　flat；



or　that　Mr。　Kruger　was　at　the　head　of　a　great　military　despotism；



or　that　men　are　graminivorous；　or　that　Bacon　wrote　Shakespeare。



Religious　and　philosophical　beliefs　are；　indeed；　as　dangerous



as　fire；　and　nothing　can　take　from　them　that　beauty　of　danger。



But　there　is　only　one　way　of　really　guarding　ourselves　against



the　excessive　danger　of　them；　and　that　is　to　be　steeped　in　philosophy



and　soaked　in　religion。







Briefly；　then；　we　dismiss　the　two　opposite　dangers　of　bigotry



and　fanaticism；　bigotry　which　is　a　too　great　vagueness　and　fanaticism



which　is　a　too　great　concentration。　　We　say　that　the　cure　for　the



bigot　is　belief；　we　say　that　the　cure　for　the　idealist　is　ideas。



To　know　the　best　theories　of　existence　and　to　choose　the　best



from　them　（that　is；　to　the　best　of　our　own　strong　conviction）



appears　to　us　the　proper　way　to　be　neither　bigot　nor　fanatic；



but　something　more　firm　than　a　bigot　and　more　terrible　than　a　fanatic；



a　man　with　a　definite　opinion。　　But　that　definite　opinion　must



in　this　view　begin　with　the　basic　matters　of　human　thought；



and　these　must　not　be　dismissed　as　irrelevant；　as　religion；



for　instance；　is　too　often　in　our　days　dismissed　as　irrelevant。



Even　if　we　think　religion　insoluble；　we　cannot　think　it　irrelevant。



Even　if　we　ourselves　have　no　view　of　the　ultimate　verities；



we　must　feel　that　wherever　such　a　view　exists　in　a　man　it　must



be　more　important　than　anything　else　in　him。　　The　instant　that



the　thing　ceases　to　be　the　unknowable；　it　becomes　the　indispensable。



There　can　be　no　doubt；　I　think；　that　the　idea　does　exist　in　our



time　that　there　is　something　narrow　or　irrelevant　or　even　mean



about　attacking　a　man's　religion；　or　arguing　from　it　in　matters



of　politics　or　ethics。　　There　can　be　quite　as　little　doubt　that　such



an　accusation　of　narrowness　is　itself　almost　grotesquely　narrow。



To　take　an　example　from　comparatively　current　events：　　we　all　know



that　it　was　not　uncommon　for　a　man　to　be　considered　a　scarecrow



of　bigotry　and　obscurantism　because　he　distrusted　the　Japanese；



or　lamented　the　rise　of　the　Japanese；　on　the　ground　that　the　Japanese



were　Pagans。　　Nobody　would　think　that　there　was　anything　antiquated



or　fanatical　about　distrusting　a　people　because　of　some　difference



between　them　and　us　in　practice　or　political　machinery。



Nobody　would　think　it　bigoted　to　say　of　a　people；　〃I　distrust　their



influence　because　they　are　Protectionists。〃　　No　one　would　think　it



narrow　to　say；　〃I　lament　their　rise　because　they　are　Socialists；



or　Manchester　Individualists；　or　strong　believers　in　militarism



and　conscription。〃　　A　difference　of　opinion　about　the　nature



of　Parliaments　matters　very　much；　but　a　difference　of　opinion　about



the　nature　of　sin　does　not　matter　at　all。　　A　difference　of　opinion



about　the　object　of　taxation　matters　very　much；　but　a　difference



of　opinion　about　the　object　of　human　existence　does　not　matter　at　all。



We　have　a　right　to　distrust　a　man　who　is　in　a　different　kind



of　municipality；　but　we　have　no　right　to　mistrust　a　man　who　is　in



a　different　kind　of　cosmos。　　This　sort　of　enlightenment　is　surely



about　the　most　unenlightened　that　it　is　possible　to　imagine。



To　recur　to　the　phrase　which　I　employed　earlier；　this　is　tantamount



to　saying　that　everything　is　important　with　the　exception　of　everything。



Religion　is　exactly　the　thing　which　cannot　be　left　out



because　it　includes　everything。　　The　most　absent…minded　person



cannot　well　pack　his　Gladstone…bag　and　leave　out　the　bag。



We　have　a　general　view　of　existence；　whether　we　like　it　or　not；



it　alters　or；　to　speak　more　accurately；　it　creates　and　involves



everything　we　say　or　do；　whether　we　like　it　or　not。　　If　we　regard



the　Cosmos　as　a　dream；　we　regard　the　Fiscal　Question　as　a　dream。



If　we　regard　the　Cosmos　as　a　joke；　we　regard　St。　Paul's　Cathedral　as



a　joke。　　If　everything　is　bad；　then　we　must　believe　（if　it　be　possible）



that　beer　is　bad；　if　everything　be　good；　we　are　forced　to　the　rather



fantastic　conclusion　that　scientific　philanthropy　is　good。　　Every　man



in　the　street　must　hold　a　metaphysical　system；　and　hold　it　firmly。



The　possibility　is　that　he　may　have　held　it　so　firmly　and　so　long



as　to　have　forgotten　all　about　its　existence。







This　latter　situation　is　certainly　possible；　in　fact；　it　is　the　situation



of　the　whole　modern　world。