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！
in more senses than one。 They all have exactly that combination we
have noted： the combination of an expansive and exhaustive reason
with a contracted common sense。 They are universal only in the
sense that they take one thin explanation and carry it very far。
But a pattern can stretch for ever and still be a small pattern。
They see a chess…board white on black； and if the universe is paved
with it； it is still white on black。 Like the lunatic； they cannot
alter their standpoint； they cannot make a mental effort and suddenly
see it black on white。
Take first the more obvious case of materialism。 As an explanation
of the world； materialism has a sort of insane simplicity。 It has
just the quality of the madman's argument； we have at once the sense
of it covering everything and the sense of it leaving everything out。
Contemplate some able and sincere materialist； as； for instance；
Mr。 McCabe； and you will have exactly this unique sensation。
He understands everything； and everything does not seem
worth understanding。 His cosmos may be complete in every rivet
and cog…wheel； but still his cosmos is smaller than our world。
Somehow his scheme； like the lucid scheme of the madman； seems unconscious
of the alien energies and the large indifference of the earth；
it is not thinking of the real things of the earth； of fighting
peoples or proud mothers； or first love or fear upon the sea。
The earth is so very large； and the cosmos is so very small。
The cosmos is about the smallest hole that a man can hide his head in。
It must be understood that I am not now discussing the relation
of these creeds to truth； but； for the present； solely their relation
to health。 Later in the argument I hope to attack the question of
objective verity； here I speak only of a phenomenon of psychology。
I do not for the present attempt to prove to Haeckel that materialism
is untrue； any more than I attempted to prove to the man who thought
he was Christ that he was labouring under an error。 I merely remark
here on the fact that both cases have the same kind of completeness
and the same kind of incompleteness。 You can explain a man's
detention at Hanwell by an indifferent public by saying that it
is the crucifixion of a god of whom the world is not worthy。
The explanation does explain。 Similarly you may explain the order
in the universe by saying that all things； even the souls of men；
are leaves inevitably unfolding on an utterly unconscious tree
the blind destiny of matter。 The explanation does explain；
though not； of course； so completely as the madman's。 But the point
here is that the normal human mind not only objects to both；
but feels to both the same objection。 Its approximate statement
is that if the man in Hanwell is the real God； he is not much
of a god。 And； similarly； if the cosmos of the materialist is the
real cosmos； it is not much of a cosmos。 The thing has shrunk。
The deity is less divine than many men； and （according to Haeckel）
the whole of life is something much more grey； narrow； and trivial
than many separate aspects of it。 The parts seem greater than
the whole。
For we must remember that the materialist philosophy （whether
true or not） is certainly much more limiting than any religion。
In one sense； of course； all intelligent ideas are narrow。
They cannot be broader than themselves。 A Christian is only
restricted in the same sense that an atheist is restricted。
He cannot think Christianity false and continue to be a Christian；
and the atheist cannot think atheism false and continue to be
an atheist。 But as it happens； there is a very special sense
in which materialism has more restrictions than spiritualism。
Mr。 McCabe thinks me a slave because I am not allowed to believe
in determinism。 I think Mr。 McCabe a slave because he is not
allowed to believe in fairies。 But if we examine the two vetoes we
shall see that his is really much more of a pure veto than mine。
The Christian is quite free to believe that there is a considerable
amount of settled order and inevitable development in the universe。
But the materialist is not allowed to admit into his spotless machine
the slightest speck of spiritualism or miracle。 Poor Mr。 McCabe
is not allowed to retain even the tiniest imp； though it might be
hiding in a pimpernel。 The Christian admits that the universe is
manifold and even miscellaneous； just as a sane man knows that he
is complex。 The sane man knows that he has a touch of the beast；
a touch of the devil； a touch of the saint； a touch of the citizen。
Nay； the really sane man knows that he has a touch of the madman。
But the materialist's world is quite simple and solid； just as
the madman is quite sure he is sane。 The materialist is sure
that history has been simply and solely a chain of causation；
just as the interesting person before mentioned is quite sure that
he is simply and solely a chicken。 Materialists and madmen never
have doubts。
Spiritual doctrines do not actually limit the mind as do
materialistic denials。 Even if I believe in immortality I need not think
about it。 But if I disbelieve in immortality I must not think about it。
In the first case the road is open and I can go as far as I like；
in the second the road is shut。 But the case is even stronger；
and the parallel with madness is yet more strange。 For it was our
case against the exhaustive and logical theory of the lunatic that；
right or wrong； it gradually destroyed his humanity。 Now it is the charge
against the main deductions of the materialist that； right or wrong；
they gradually destroy his humanity； I do not mean only kindness；
I mean hope； courage； poetry； initiative； all that is human。
For instance； when materialism leads men to complete fatalism （as it
generally does）； it is quite idle to pretend that it is in any sense
a liberating force。 It is absurd to say that you are especially
advancing freedom when you only use free thought to destroy free will。
The determinists come to bind； not to loose。 They may well call
their law the 〃chain〃 of causation。 It is the worst chain that ever
fettered a human being。 You may use the language of liberty；
if you like； about materialistic teaching； but it is obvious that this
is just as inapplicable to it as a whole as the same language when
applied to a man locked up in a mad…house。 You may say； if you like；
that the man is free to think himself a poached egg。 But it is
surely a more massive and important fact that if he is a poached egg
he is not free to eat； drink； sleep； walk； or smoke a cigarette。
Similarly you may say； if you like； that the bold determinist
speculator is free to disbelieve in the reality of the will。
But it is a much more massive and important fact that he is not
free to raise； to curse； to thank； to justify； to urge； to punish；
to resist temptations； to incite mobs； to make New Year resolutions；
to pardon sinners； to rebuke tyrants； or even to say 〃thank you〃
for the mustard。
In passing from this subject I may note that there is a queer
fallacy to the effect that materialistic fatalism is in some way
favourable to mercy； to the abolition of cruel punishments or
punishments of any kind。 This is startlingly the reverse of the truth。
It is quite tenable that the doctrine of necessity makes no difference
at all； that it leaves the flogger flogging and the kind friend
exhorting as before。 But obviously if it stops either of them it
stops the kind exhortation。 That the sins are inevitable does not
prevent punishment； if it prevents anything it prevents persuasion。
Determinism is quite as likely to lead to cruelty as it is certain
to lead to cowardice。 Determinism is not inconsistent with the
cruel treatment of criminals。 What it is （perhaps） inconsistent
with is the generous treatment of criminals； with any appeal to
their better feelings or encouragement in their moral struggle。
The determinist does not believe in appealing to the will； but he does
believe in changing the environment。 He must not say to the sinner；
〃Go and sin no more；〃 because the sinner cannot help it。 But he
can put him in boiling oil； for boiling oil is an environment。
Considered as a figure； therefore； the materialist has the fantastic
outline of the figure of the madman。 Both take up a position
at once unanswerable and in