,transcrib]'s note3 ,page numb]s 9 ?is book are indicat$ by numb]s enclos$ 9 curly braces1 e4g4 #ii4 ,!y h be5 locat$ :]e page breaks occurr$ 9 ! orig9al book4 ,,philosophy ,,& ,,religion ,six ,lectures ,deliv]$ at ,cambridge by ,,ha/+s ,,ra%dall ,d4 ,litt4 7,oxon471 ,d4,c4,l4 7,dunelm47 ,fell[ ( ! ,briti% ,academy ,fell[ & ,tutor ( ,new ,college1 ,ox=d ,london3 ,duckwor? ,co4 #c ,h5rietta ,/4 ,cov5t ,g>d5 #aiji ,all rights res]v$ v ,,g5]al ,,introduction ,,to ,,! ,,s]ies ,man has no deep] or wid] int]e/ ?an !ology2 none deep]1 = h[ev] mu* he may *ange1 he nev] loses 8 love ( ! _m que/ions x cov]s2 & none wid]1 = "u :atev] law he may live he nev] escapes f its spaci\s %ade2 nor does he ev] f9d t x speaks to him 9 va9 or uses a voice t fails to rea* him4 ,once ! pres5t writ] 0 talk+ ) a fri5d :o has equal fame z a /atesman & a man ( lett]s1 & he said1 ',e day ,i live1 ,politics1 :i* are affairs ( ,man & ,"t1 int]e/ me less1 :ile ,!ology1 :i* is an affair ( ,god & ,et]nity1 int]e/s me m4' ,z ) him1 s ) _m1 ?\gh ! _m feel t _! int]e/ is 9 !ology & n 9 dogma4 ,dogma1 !y "k1 is b a s]ies ( resolutions fram$ by a c\ncil or p>liam5t1 :i* !y d n respect any ! m because ! p>liam5t 0 compos$ ( ecclesia/ically-m9d$ p]sons2 :ile ! !ology :i* s int]e/s !m is a disc\rse t\*+ ,god1 ?\gh ! ,be+ s nam$ is ! ,god man conceiv$ z n only relat$ to himself & 8 _w b also z ris+ ev] high] ) ! notions ( ! self & ! _w4 ,wise books1 n 9 dogma b 9 !ology1 may !re=e be describ$ z ! supreme vi ne$ ( our day1 = only su* c save u f mu* fanaticism & secure u 9 ! full possession ( a sob] & sane reason4 ,!ology is less a s+le sci5ce ?an an encyclopa$ia ( sci5ces2 inde$ all ! sci5ces :i* h to d ) man h a bett] "r to be call$ !ological ?an an?ropological1 ?\gh ! man x /udies is n simply an individual b a race4 ,its way ( view+ man is inde$ *>act]i/ic2 f ?is h come "s ( its bright] ideals & "s ( its d>ke/ dreams4 ,! ideals are all ei!r e?ical or social1 & w\ld make ( e>? a heav51 creat+ frat]nity among/ m5 & =m+ all /ates into a goodly si/]hood2 ! dreams may be repres5t$ by doctr9es :i* conc]n s9 on ! "o side & ! w ( ,god on ! o!r4 ,b ev5 ?is w _c make s9 lum9\s1 = 7 x made radiant ) grace1 x w\ld cease to be s94 ,^! books !n1--:i* h all to be writt5 by m5 :o h liv$ 9 ! full blaze ( mod]n light1--?\gh )\t hav+ ei!r _! eyes burn$ out or _! s\ls scor*$ into ins5sibility1--are int5d$ to pres5t ,god 9 relation to ,man & ,man 9 relation to ,god4 ,x is int5d$ t !y beg91 n 9 date ( publication1 b 9 ord] ( ?\ght1 ) a ,!ological ,encyclopa$ia :i* %all %[ ! circle ( sci5ces co-ord9at$ "u ! t]m ,!ology1 ?\gh all w be view$ z relat$ to its c5tral or ma9 idea4 ,?is relation ( ,god to human k w !n be look$ at ?r\gh m9d z a communion ( ,deity ) humanity1 or ,god 9 fell[%ip vii ) concrete man4 ,on ?is basis ! idea ( ,revelation w be dealt )4 ,!n1 s f> z hi/ory & philology are conc]n$1 ! two ,sacr$ ,books1 :i* are "h mo/ significant1 w be view$ z ! s*ol>1 :o is also a div9e1 views !m2 9 o!r words1 ! ,old & ,new ,te/am5ts1 reg>d$ z human docum5ts1 w be criticis$ z a lit]ature :i* expresses relations to bo? ! pres5t & ! future2 t is1 to ! m5 & races :o made ! books1 z well z to ! races & m5 ! books made4 ,! ,bible w ?us be /udi$ 9 ! ,semitic family :i* gave x be+1 & also 9 ! ,indo-,european families :i* gave to x ! quality ( ! life to :i* !y h atta9$4 ,b ,!ology has to d ) m ?an sacr$ lit]ature2 x has also to d ) ! ?\ghts & life its hi/ory occasion$4 ,!re=e ! ,*ur* has to be /udi$ & pres5t$ z an in/itution :i* ,god f\nd$ & man adm9i/]s4 ,b x is possible to "k ?is ,*ur* only ?r\gh ! ?\ghts x ?9ks1 ! doctr9es x holds1 ! *>act]s & ! p]sons x =ms1 ! p :o are its sa9ts & embody its ideals ( sanctity1 ! acts x does1 :i* are its sacram5ts1 & ! laws x foll[s & en=ces1 :i* are its polity1 & ! "y x educates & ! nations x directs & controls4 ,^! are ! po9ts to be pres5t$ 9 ! volumes :i* foll[1 :i* are all to be occupi$ ) !ology or ! k ( ,god & ,8 ways4 ,a4 ,m4 ,f4 ',o4' ix ,,preface ,^! ,lectures 7 deliv]$ 9 ,cambridge dur+ ! ,l5t ,t]m ( la/ ye>1 on ! invitation ( a ,committee presid$ ov] by ! ,ma/] ( ,magdal5e1 be=e an audi5ce ( f ?ree hundr$ to f\r hundr$ ,univ]sity m51 *iefly ,"u-graduates4 ,!y 7 n !n1 & !y are n n[1 int5d$ = philosoph]s or ev5 = beg9n]s 9 ! sy/ematic /udy ( philosophy1 b z aids to educat$ m5 desir\s ( ?9k+ out = !mselves a reasonable basis = p]sonal ,religion4 ,! ,lectures--especially ! fir/ ?ree--deal ) que/ions on :i* ,i h already writt54 ,i am indebt$ to ! ,publi%] ( ,cont5tio ,v]itatis & ! o!r contributors to t volume = rais+ no objection to my publi%+ ,lectures :i* might possibly be reg>d$ z 9 "p a cond5sation1 9 "p an expansion ( my ,essay on ',! ultimate basis ( ,!ism4' ,i h dealt m sy/ematically ) _m ( ! problems "h discuss$ 9 an ,essay ^u ',p]sonality 9 ,god & ,man' contribut$ to ,p]sonal ,idealism 7edit$ by ,h5ry x ,/urt7 & 9 my ',!ory ( ,good & ,evil4' ,"s ( ! doctr9al que/ions t\*$ on 9 ,lecture ,,vi4 h be5 m fully dealt ) 9 my volume ( ,univ]sity ,s]mons1 ,doctr9e & ,developm5t4 ,que/ions :i* 7 ask$ at ! "t & communications :i* h s9ce rea*$ me h made me feel1 m ev5 ?an ,i did :5 ,i 0 writ+ ! ,lectures1 h[ inadequate is ! treatm5t "h giv5 to _m great problems4 ,on "s matt]s mu* full] explanation & discussion w naturally be requir$ to conv9ce p]sons previ\sly unfamili> ) ,metaphysic3 on o!rs x is ! m advanc$ /ud5t ( ,philosophy :o w compla9 t ,i h only t\*$ ^u ! fr+e ( a va/ subject4 ,b ,i h felt t ,i c\ld n s]i\sly exp& any "p ( ! ,lectures )\t *ang+ ! :ole "* ( ! book1 & ,i h be5 compell$ 9 g5]al to meet ! dem& = fur!r explanation only by ! above g5]al ref]5ce to my o!r books1 by ! addition ( a few notes1 & by app5d+ to ea* *apt] "s sugge/ions = m ext5d$ read+4 ,^! might ( c\rse h be5 indef9itely enl>g$1 b a long li/ ( books is apt to defeat its own purpose3 p ) a limit$ "t at _! disposal want to "k :i* book to make a beg9n+ ^u4 ,! ,lectures are !re=e publi%$ = ! mo/ xi "p j z !y 7 deliv]$1 9 ! hope t !y may sugge/ l9es ( ?\ght :i* may be intellectually & practically useful4 ,i tru/ t any philosoph] :o may wi% to take s]i\s notice ( my views--especially ! metaphysical views express$ 9 ! fir/ few *apt]s--w be good en\gh to rememb] t ! expression ( !m is av[$ly incomplete & elem5t>y1 & _c fairly be criticiz$ 9 mu* detail )\t ref]5ce to my o!r writ+s4 ,i am mu* indebt$ = sev]al useful sugge/ions & = valuable assi/ance 9 revis+ ! pro(s to "o ( ! he>]s ( ! ,lectures1 ,mr4 ,a4 ,g4 ,widg]y1 ,s*ol> ( ,/4 ,ca!r9e's ,college1 ,cambridge1 n[ ,lectur] 9 ,univ]sity ,college1 ,bri/ol4 ,h4 ,,ra%dall4 ,,new ,,college1 ,,ox=d1 ,jan4 #f1 #aiji4 xii ,,cont5ts ,,lecture ,i ,,m9d ,,& ,,matt]1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #a #a4 ,is ,mat]ialism possible8 ,!re is no imm$iate k ( ,matt]2 :at we "k is always ,self ,matt]4 ,! idea ( a ,matt] :i* c exi/ by itself is an inf]5ce3 is x a reasonable "o8 #b4 ,no4 ,= all t we "k ab\t ,matt] implies ,m9d4 ,?is is obvi\s z to second>y qualities 7col\r1 s\nd1 etc472 b x is no less true ( prim>y qualities 7solidity1 magnitude1 etc474 ,relations1 no less ?an s5sations1 imply ,m9d1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #h #c4 ,?is is ! great discov]y ( ,b]keley1 ?\gh he did n adequately di/+ui% betwe5 s5sations & intellectual relations1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ab #d4 ,b ,matt] c]ta9ly does n exi/ m]ely = our transitory & incomplete k3 if x _c exi/ ap>t f ,m9d1 !re mu/ be a univ]sal ,m9d 9 :i* & = :i* all ?+s exi/1 i4e4 ,god1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #af #e4 ,b ,!ism is possible )\t ,idealism4 ,! impossibility ( ,mat]ialism has g5]ally be5 recogniz$ 7e4g4 by ,sp9oza1 ,sp5c]1 ,haeckel74 ,if ! ultimate ,reality is n ,matt]1 x mu/ be utt]ly unlike any?+ we "k1 or be ,m9d4 ,! latt] view m probable1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ai #f4 ,x is m reasonable to expla9 ! l[] by ! high] ?an vice v]sa1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #bf ,,lecture ,,ii ,,! ,,univ]sal ,,cause1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #bi #a4 ,we h be5 l$ by ! ideali/ic argum5t to recognize ! necessity ( a ,m9d :i* ?9ks ! _w4 ,insuffici5cy ( ?is view4 xiii #b4 ,9 our exp]i5ces ( ext]nal ,nature we meet ) no?+ b succession1 nev] ) ,causality4 ,! ,uni=mity ( ,nature is a po/ulate ( ,physical ,sci5ce1 n a necessity ( ?\ght4 ,! idea ( ,causality d]iv$ f our consci\sness ( ,volition4 ,causality,activity1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ca #c4 ,if ev5ts mu/ h a cause1 & we "k ( no cause b ,w1 x is reasonable to inf] t ! ev5ts :i* we d n cause mu/ be caus$ by "s o!r ,w2 & ! sy/ematic unity ( ,nature implies t ?is cause mu/ be ,"o ,w1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #da #d4 ,moreov]1 ! analogy ( ! human m9d sugge/s ! probability t1 if ,god is ,m9d1 !re mu/ be 9 ,him1 z 9 u1 ! ?ree activities ( ,?\ght1 ,feel+1 & ,w1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #dd #e4 ,! above l9e ( argum5t c be us$ by ! ,reali/ :o believes matt] to be a ?+-9-itself2 b x fits 9 mu* bett] ) ! ,ideali/ic view ( ! relations betwe5 m9d & matt]1 & ) ! t5d5cy ( mod]n physics to resolve matt] into ,=ce1 4 #dh #f4 ,te/imony ( ,sp5c] & ,kant to ! !ory t ! ,ultimate ,reality is ,w1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ea #g4 ,is ,god a ,p]son8 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ed ,,lecture ,,iii ,,god ,,& ,,! ,,moral ,,consci\sness1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #eh #a4 ,! empirical /udy ( ,nature 7'r$ 9 too? & claw'7 c tell u ( purpose1 n :at ! purpose is4 ,! only s\rce ( k ( ! "* ( ,god is to be f\nd 9 ! moral ,consci\sness4 #b4 ,our moral judgem5ts are z valid z o!r judgem5ts 7e4g4 ma!matical axioms71 & equally reveal ! ?\ght ( ,god1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #fb #c4 ,?is does n imply t ! moral consci\sness is n gradually evolv$1 or t ea* individual's consci5ce is infallible1 or t our moral judgem5ts 9 detail are z c]ta9 z ma!matical judgem5ts1 or t ! detail$ rules ( human conduct are applicable to ,god1 4 4 #fc xiv #d4 ,coroll>ies3 7a7 ,belief 9 ! objectivity ( our moral judgem5ts logically implies belief 9 ,god1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #fi 7b7 ,if ,god aims at an end n fully realiz$ "h1 we h a gr\nd = po/ulat+ ,immortality1 4 4 4 4 4 4 #gg 7c7 ,evil mu/ be a necess>y means to great] good1 4 4 #gi #e4 ,9 :at s5se ?is 'limits ,god4' ,omnipot5ceability to d all ?+s :i* are 9 _! own nature possible1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ha ,,lecture ,,iv ,,difficulties ,,& ,,objections1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #hg #a4 ,is ! _w creat$8 ,!re may or may n be a beg9n+ ( ! p>ticul> s]ies ( physical ev5ts con/itut+ our _w4 ,b1 ev5 if ?is s]ies has a beg9n+1 ?is implies "s previ\s exi/5ce :i* has no beg9n+4 #b4 ,is ! :ole-"t s]ies inf9ite8 ,"t mu/ be reg>d$ z objective1 b ! 'ant9omies' involv$ 9 ! nature ( ,"t _c be resolv$1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ij #c4 ,are ,spirits creat$ or pre-exi/5t8 ,! close connexion & correspond5ce betwe5 m9d & body makes = ! =m] view4 ,difficulties ( pre-exi/5ce--h]$ity1 etc41 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ic #d4 ,an ,idealism bas$ on ,pre-exi/5ce )\t ,god is op5 to ! same objections & o!rs4 ,su* a sy/em provides no m9d 7a7 9 :i* & = :i* ! :ole sy/em exi/s1 or 7b7 to effect ! correspond5ce betwe5 m9d & body1 or 7c7 to all[ ( a purpose 9 ! ,univ]se2 )\t ?is ! _w is n rational1 4 #if #e4 ,! human m9d 7i4e4 consci\sness7 n ap>t ( ! div9e ,consci\sness1 ?\gh 9 ! close/ possible dep5d5ce ^u ,god4 ,! ,univ]se a ,unity1 b ! ,unity is n t ( ,self-,consci\sness1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #aja #f4 ,!re is no 'imm$iate' or 'intuitive' k ( ,god4 ,our k is got by inf]5ce1 l k ( our fri5d's exi/5ce1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ajf xv #g4 ,religion & ,psy*ology4 ,x is impossible to base ,religion ^u ,psy*ology or 'religi\s exp]i5ce' )\t ,metaphysics1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #aaa #h4 ,summ>y3 ! ultimate nature ( ,reality1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #aah ,note on ,non-!i/ic ,idealism1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #abh ,,lecture ,v ,,revelation1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #abg #a4 ,!re is no special organ ( religi\s k1 b religi\s k has _m *>act]i/ics :i* may be conv5i5tly sugge/$ by ! use ( ! t]m 'fai?1' especially its connexion ) "* & ,w4 #b4 ,! psy*ological causes ( religi\s belief mu/ be c>efully di/+ui%$ f ! reasons :i* make x true4 ,no logic ( discov]y4 ,_m religi\s ideas h occurr$ 9 a spontane\s or app>5tly intuitive way to p>ticul> p]sons1 ! tru? ( :i* ! philosoph] may subsequ5tly be able to te/ by philosophical reflection1 ?\gh he c\ld n h discov]$ !m1 b !y are n necess>ily true because !y arise 9 a spontane\s or unacc\ntable mann]1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #acd #c4 ,false conceptions ( ,revelation & true4 ,all k is 9 a s5se reveal$1 especially religi\s & moral k3 b spiritual insight v>ies4 ,ne$ ( ! prophet or religi\s g5ius1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #aci #d4 ,reason$ & intuitive beliefs may bo? be 'reveal$1' 4 4 #adc #e4 ,degrees ( tru? 9 ! hi/orical religions4 ,dep5d5ce ( ! individual ^u su* religions4 ,*ri/ianity occupies a unique position1 because x alone comb9es an e?ical ideal :i* appeals to ! univ]sal ,consci5ce ) a ,!ism :i* comm5ds itself to ,reason4 ,! tru? ( ,*ri/ianity is dep5d5t ^u its appeal to ! moral & religi\s consci\sness ( ! pres5t1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #adh xvi ,,lecture ,,vi ,,*ri/ianity1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #aeg #a4 ,! claim ( ,*ri/ianity to be ! special or absolute ,religion n dep5d5t ^u miracles4 #b4 ,rits*lian ,!ologians "r 9 re/+ ! tru? ( ,*ri/ianity ma9ly ^u ! appeal made by ,*ri/ to ! individual ,consci5ce3 b wrong 9 disp>ag+ 7a7 philosophical argum5ts = ,!ism1 7b7 ! relative tru? ( non-,*ri/ian sy/ems1 7c7 ! value ( ,doctr9e & necessity = ,developm5t1 4 4 4 4 4 #afa #c4 ,*ri/ian doctr9e 7esp4 ( ! ,logos7 is an attempt to express ! ,*ur*'s s5se ( ! unique value ( ,*ri/ & ,8 ,revelation4 ,! necessity = recogniz+ developm5t bo? 9 ,*ri/ian ,e?ics & 9 ,!ology1 4 4 #afd #d4 ,"s reflections on our practical attitude t[>ds ,*ri/ian doctr9e4 ,"s means ( express+ ! unique position ( ,*ri/ want$4 ,! old expressions 7 influ5c$ by philosophy ( ! "t1 b n valueless4 ,illu/rations4 ,ne$ ( re-int]pretation & fur!r developm5t1 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #afh #e4 ,! doctr9e ( cont9u\s ,revelation ?r\gh ! ,_s is a "p ( ,*ri/ianity1 & ! condition ( its acceptance z ! f9al or absolute ,religion1 4 4 4 #ahe #a ,,philosophy ,,& ,,religion ,,lecture ,i ,,m9d ,,& ,,matt] ,i h be5 invit$ to speak to y ab\t ! relations betwe5 ,religion & ,philosophy4 ,to d t 9 a logical & ?or\ghgo+ way x w\ld be necess>y to discuss elaborately ! mean+ fir/ ( ,religion & !n ( ,philosophy4 ,su* a discussion w\ld occupy at lea/ a lecture1 & ,i am unwill+ to sp5d "o out ( six scanty h\rs 9 =mal prelim9>ies4 ,i %all assume1 !re=e1 t we all "k 9 "s g5]al way ! mean+ ( ,religion4 ,x is n necess>y = our pres5t purpose to discuss su* que/ions z ! def9ition ( ,religion = purposes ( sociological inve/igation1 or ! possibility ( a ,religion )\t a belief 9 ,god1 or ! l4 ,i %all assume t1 :atev] else may be includ$ 9 ! t]m ,religion1 ,*ri/ianity may at lea/ be includ$ 9 x2 & t :at y are practically mo/ int]e/$ 9 is ! be>+ ( ,philosophy ^u ! ,*ri/ian ideas conc]n+ ! #b be+ & nature ( ,god1 ! hope ( ,immortality1 ! mean+ & possibility ( ,revelation4 ,:5 we turn to ,philosophy1 ,i _c p]haps assume ) equal confid5ce t all ( y "k :at x is4 ,b !n le>n+ :at ,philosophy is--especially t mo/ fundam5tal "p ( ,philosophy :i* is call$ ,metaphysics--is l le>n+ to swim3 y nev] discov] h[ to d x until y f9d y\rself consid]ably out ( y\r dep?4 ,y mu/ /rike out boldly1 & at la/ y discov] :at y are aft]4 ,i %all presuppose t 9 a g5]al way y d all "k t ,philosophy is an enquiry into ! ultimate nature ( ! ,univ]se at l>ge1 z oppos$ to ! discussion ( ^? p>ticul> aspects or dep>tm5ts ( x :i* are dealt ) by ! special ,sci5ces4 ,:at y want to "k1 ,i take x1 is--:at rational enquiry1 pu%$ z f> z x w g1 has to say ab\t ^? ultimate problems ( :i* ! great hi/orical ,religions likewise pr(ess to (f] solutions4 ,! nature & scope ( ,philosophy is be/ und]/ood by examples3 & !re=e ,i hope y w excuse me if )\t fur!r preface ,i plunge 9 m$ias res4 ,i %all endeav\r to presuppose no previ\s acqua9tance ) te*nical ,philosophy1 & ,i w ask ^? :o h already made "s s]i\s /udy ( ,philosophy k9dly to rememb] t ,i am try+ to make myself intelligible to ^? :o h n4 ,i %all #c n advance any?+ :i* ,i %\ld n be prep>$ to def5d ev5 be=e an audi5ce ( metaphysical exp]ts4 ,b ,i _c und]take 9 s %ort a c\rse ( lectures to meet all ! objections :i* w1 ,i "k1 be aris+ 9 ! m9ds ( any metaphysically tra9$ he>]s :o may hon\r me ) _! pres5ce1 _m ( :i* may probably occur to p]sons n s tra9$4 ,& ,i fur!r tru/ ! ,metaphysicians among y w =give me if1 9 ord] to be intelligible to all1 ,i sometimes speak ) a little less ?an ! akribeia at :i* ,i might feel b\nd to aim if ,i 7 read+ a pap] be=e an av[$ly philosophical ,society4 ,res]vations1 qualifications1 & elaborate di/9ctions mu/ be omitt$1 if ,i am to succe$ 9 say+ any?+ cle>ly 9 ! c\rse ( six lectures4 ,moreov]1 ,i w\ld rem>k t1 ?\gh ,i d n believe t an int5tion to edify is any excuse = slip%od ?\ght or intellectual di%one/y1 ,i am speak+ n[ ma9ly f ! po9t ( view ( ^? :o are enquir+ into metaphysical tru? = ! guidance ( _! own religi\s & practical life1 r ?an f ! po9t ( view ( pure speculation4 ,i d n1 = my own "p1 believe 9 any solution ( ! religi\s problem :i* evades ! ultimate problems ( all ?\ght4 ,! ,philosophy ( ,religion is = me n s mu* a special & %>ply di/+ui%$ bran* or dep>tm5t ( #d ,philosophy z a p>ticul> aspect ( ,philosophy 9 g5]al4 ,b _m que/ions :i* may be ( mu* importance f ! po9t ( view ( a complete !ory ( ! ,univ]se c be entirely1 or almo/ entirely1 put on "o side :5 ! "q is1 ',:at may ,i reasonably believe ab\t ^? ultimate que/ions :i* h a direct & imm$iate be>+ ^u my religi\s & moral life2 :at may ,i believe ab\t ,god & ,duty1 ab\t ! _w & its ultimate mean+1 ab\t ! s\l & its de/9y8' ,= su* purposes solutions /opp+ %ort ( :at w fully satisfy ! legitimate dem&s ( ! pr(ess$ ,metaphysician may be all t is necess>y1 or at lea/ all t is possible = ^? :o are n int5d+ to make a s]i\s & elaborate /udy ( ,metaphysic4 ,i h no sympa?y ) ! attempt to base ,religion ^u any?+ b hone/ enquiry into tru?3 & yet ! pr(ess$ ,philosoph]s are j ^? :o w mo/ readily recognize t !re are--if n :at are te*nically call$ degrees ( tru?--/ill diff]5t levels ( ?\ght1 diff]5t degrees ( adequacy & sy/ematic complet5ess1 ev5 )9 ! limits ( ?or\ghly philosophical ?9k+4 ,i %all assume t y are n cont5t to rema9 at ! level ( ord9>y unreflect+ ,common-s5se or ( m]ely traditional ,religion--t y d want 7s f> z "t & opportunity s]ve7 to get to ! bottom ( ?+s1 #e b t y w be cont5t 9 su* a c\rse z ! pres5t if ,i c sugge/ to y1 or help y to =m = y\rselves1 an outl9e--:at ,plato w\ld call ! hypotyposis ( a !ory ( ! ,univ]se :i* may /ill fall v f> %ort ( a f9i%$ & fully articulat$ metaphysical sy/em4 ,i suppose t to ne>ly ev]ybody :o sets himself d[n to ?9k s]i\sly ab\t ! riddle ( ! ,univ]se !re v soon occurs ! "q :e!r ,mat]ialism may n conta9 ! solution ( all difficulties4 ,i ?9k1 !re=e1 our pres5t inve/igation _h bett] beg9 ) an enquiry :e!r ,mat]ialism c possibly be true4 ,i say 'c be true' r ?an 'is true1' because1 ?\gh dogmatic ,mat]iali/s are r>e1 ! typical ,agno/ic is "o :o is at lea/ incl9$ to admit ! possibility ( ,mat]ialism1 ev5 :5 he does n1 at ! bottom ( 8 m9d1 practically assume its tru?4 ,! man :o is prep>$ to exclude ev5 ?is "o !ory ( ! ,univ]se f ! category ( possible b unprovable !ories is n1 prop]ly speak+1 an ,agno/ic4 ,to "k t ,mat]ialism at lea/ is n true is to "k some?+1 & some?+ v important1 ab\t ! ultimate nature ( ?+s4 ,i %all n attempt "h any v precise def9ition ( :at is meant by ,mat]ialism4 ,/rictly speak+1 x ought to mean ! view t no?+ really exi/s b matt]4 ,b ! exi/5ce1 9 "s s5se or #f o!r1 ( our s5sations & ?\ghts & emotions is s obvi\s to ,common-s5se t su* a cre$ c h>dly be explicitly ma9ta9$3 x is a cre$ :i* is refut$ 9 ! v act ( enunciat+ x4 ,= practical purposes1 !re=e1 ,mat]ialism may be said to be ! view t ! ultimate basis ( all exi/5ce is matt]2 & t ?\ght1 feel+1 emotion--consci\sness ( e k9d--is m]ely an effect1 a by-product or concomitant1 ( c]ta9 mat]ial processes4 ,n[ if we are to hold t matt] is ! only ?+ :i* exi/s1 or is ! ultimate s\rce ( all t exi/s1 we ought to be able to say :at matt] is4 ,to ! unreflect+ m9d matt] seems to be ! ?+ t we are mo/ c]ta9 (1 ! "o ?+ t we "k all ab\t4 ,?\ght1 feel+1 w1 x may be sugge/$1 are 9 "s s5se appe>ances :i* 7?\gh we c't help hav+ !m7 might1 f ! po9t ( view ( sup]ior insight1 turn out to be m]e delusions1 or at be/ entirely unimportant & inconsid]able entities4 ,?is attitude ( m9d has be5 amus+ly satiris$ by ! title ( "o ( ,mr4 ,bradley's philosophical essays--'on ! suppos$ uselessness ( ! ,s\l4'#a ,9 ?is /ate ( m9d matt] pres5ts itself z ! "o solid reality--z some?+ und5iable1 some?+ p]fectly intelligible1 some?+1 too1 :i* is pre-em95tly #g important & respectable2 :ile ?9k+ & feel+ & will+1 joy & sorr[1 hope & aspiration1 goodness & badness1 if !y _c exactly be got rid ( altoge!r1 are1 z x 71 negligible quantities1 :i* mu/ n be all[$ to di/urb or int]f]e ) ! s]i\s bus9ess ( ! ,univ]se4 ,f ?is po9t ( view matt] is suppos$ to be ! "o reality ) :i* we are 9 imm$iate contact1 :i* we see & t\* & ta/e & h&le e h\r ( our lives4 ,x may1 !re=e1 s\nd a r />tl+ p>adox to say t matt]--matt] 9 ! s5se ( ! ,mat]iali/--is some?+ :i* nobody has ev] se51 t\*$1 or h&l$4 ,yet t is ! lit]al & und5iable fact4 ,nobody has ev] se5 or t\*$ or o!rwise come 9 contact ) a piece ( matt]4 ,= 9 ! exp]i5ce :i* ! pla9 man calls see+ or t\*+ !re is always pres5t ano!r ?+4 ,ev5 if we suppose t he is ,ju/ifi$ 9 say+ ',i t\* matt]1' !re is always pres5t ! ',i' z well z ! matt]4#b ,x is always & inevitably matt] m9d t he kn[s4 ,nobody ev] c get away f ?is ',i1' nobody c ev] see or feel :at matt] is l ap>t f ! ',i' :i* kn[s #h x4 ,he may1 inde$1 inf] t ?is matt] exi/s ap>t f ! ',i' :i* kn[s x4 ,he may inf] t x exi/s1 & may ev5 g z f> z to assume t1 ap>t f 8 see+ or t\*+1 or anybody else's see+ or t\*+1 matt] possesses all ^? qualities :i* x possesses = 8 own consci\sness4 ,b ?is is inf]5ce1 & n imm$iate k4 ,& ! validity or reasonabl5ess ( ! inf]5ce may be disput$4 ,h[ f> x is reasonable or legitimate to attribute to matt] z x is 9 itself ! qualities :i* x has = u mu/ dep5d ^u ! nature ( ^? qualities4 ,let u !n g on to ask :e!r ! qualities :i* con/itute matt] z we "k x are qualities :i* we c reasonably or ev5 intelligibly attribute to a suppos$ matt]-9-itself1 to matt] consid]$ z some?+ capable ( exi/+ by itself altoge!r ap>t f any k9d ( consci\s exp]i5ce4 ,9 matt]1 z we "k x1 !re are two elem5ts4 ,!re are c]ta9 s5sations1 or c]ta9 qualities :i* we come to "k by s5sation1 & !re are c]ta9 relations4 ,n[1 ) reg>d to ! s5sations1 a v little reflection w1 ,i ?9k1 %[ u t x is absolutely mean+less to say t matt] has ! qualities impli$ by ^! s5sations1 ev5 :5 !y are n felt1 & w\ld /ill possess !m1 ev5 suppos+ x nev] _h be5 & nev] w\ld be felt by any "o :atev]4 ,9 a _w 9 :i* #i !re 7 no eyes & no m9ds1 :at w\ld be ! mean+ ( say+ t ?+s 7 r$ or blue8 ,9 a _w 9 :i* !re 7 no e>s & no m9ds1 !re w\ld cle>ly be no su* ?+ z s\nd4 ,?is is exactly ! po9t at :i* ,locke's analysis /opp$4 ,he admitt$ t ! 'second>y qualities'--col\rs1 s\nds1 ta/es--( objects 7 really n 9 ! ?+s !mselves b 9 ! m9d :i* p]ceives !m4 ,:at exi/$ 9 ! ?+s 0 m]ely a p[] ( produc+ ^! s5sations 9 u1 ! quality 9 ! ?+ be+ n 9 ! lea/ l ! s5sations :i* x produces 9 u3 he admitt$ t ?is p[] ( produc+ a s5sation 0 some?+ diff]5t f1 & totally unlike1 ! s5sation itself4 ,b :5 he came to ! prim>y qualities--solidity1 %ape1 magnitude & ! l--he suppos$ t ! qualities 9 ! ?+ 7 exactly ! same z !y are = our m9ds4 ,if all m9d 7 to disappe> f ! ,univ]se1 !re w\ld h5ce=? be no r$ & blue1 no hot & cold2 b ?+s w\ld /ill be big or small1 r\nd or squ>e1 solid or fluid4 ,yet1 ev5 ) ^! 'prim>y qualities' ! ref]5ce to m9d is really !re j z mu* z 9 ! case ( ! second>y qualities2 only ! fact is n q s obvi\s4 ,& "o reason = ?is is t ^! prim>y qualities involve1 mu* m gl>+ly & unmi/akably ?an ! second>y1 some?+ :i* is n m]e s5sation--some?+ :i* #aj implies ?\ght & n m]e s5se4 ,:at d we mean by solidity1 = in/ance8 ,we mean p>tly t we get c]ta9 s5sations f t\*+ ! object--s5sations ( t\* & s5sations ( :at is call$ ! muscul> s5se1 s5sations ( muscul> ex]tion & ( pressure resi/$4 ,n[1 s f> z t is :at solidity means1 x is cle> t ! quality 9 "q involves z direct a ref]5ce to our subjective feel+s z ! second>y qualities ( col\r & s\nd4 ,b some?+ m ?an ?is is impli$ 9 our idea ( solidity4 ,we ?9k ( ext]nal objects z occupy+ space4 ,& spaciality _c be analys$ away into m]e feel+s ( ours4 ,! feel+s ( t\* :i* we d]ive f an object come to u "o aft] ! o!r4 ,no m5tal reflection ^u s5sations :i* come "o aft] ! o!r 9 "t c\ld ev] give u ! idea ( space1 if !y 7 n spacially relat$ f ! fir/4 ,x is ( ! ess5ce ( spaciality t ! p>ts ( ! object %all be ?\ght ( z exi/+ side by side1 outside "o ano!r4 ,b ?is side-by-sid5ess1 ?is outsid5ess1 is aft] all a way 9 :i* ! ?+s pres5t !mselves to a m9d4 ,space is made up ( relations2 & :at is ! mean+ ( relations ap>t f a m9d :i* relates1 or = :i* ! ?+s are relat$8 ,if spaciality 7 a quality ( ! ?+ 9 itself1 x w\ld exi/ no matt] :at became ( o!r ?+s4 ,x w\ld be q possible1 !re=e1 #aa t ! top ( ?is table %\ld exi/ )\t ! bottom3 yet ev]ybody surely w\ld admit ! mean+lessness ( talk+ ab\t a piece ( matt] 7no matt] h[ small1 be x an atom or ! smalle/ electron conceiv$ by ! mo/ rec5t physical speculation7 :i* _h a top )\t a bottom1 or a "r-h& side )\t a left4 ,?is space-occupy+ quality :i* is ! mo/ fundam5tal elem5t 9 our ord9>y conception ( matt] is :olly made up ( ! relation ( "o "p ( x to ano!r4 ,n[ c a relation exi/ except = a m9d8 ,z x seems to me1 ! sugge/ion is mean+less4 ,relat$ness only has a mean+ :5 ?\ght ( 9 connection ) a m9d :i* is capable ( grasp+ or hold+ toge!r bo? t]ms ( ! relation4 ,! relation betwe5 po9t ,a & po9t ,b is n 9 po9t ,a or 9 po9t ,b tak5 by !mselves4 ,x is all 9 ! 'betwe5'3 'betwe5ness' f its v nature _c exi/ 9 any "o po9t ( space or 9 sev]al isolat$ po9ts ( space or ?+s 9 space2 x mu/ exi/ only 9 "s "o exi/5t :i* holds toge!r & connects ^? po9ts4 ,& no?+1 z f> z we c und]/&1 c d t except a m9d4 ,ap>t f m9d !re c be no relat$ness3 ap>t f relat$ness no space3 ap>t f space no matt]4 ,x foll[s t ap>t f m9d !re c be no matt]4 ,x w probably be kn[n to all ( y t ! #ab fir/ p]son to make ?is mom5t\s inf]5ce 0 ,bi%op ,b]keley4 ,!re 01 inde$1 an obscure m$ieval s*oolman1 h>dly recogniz$ by ! hi/orians ( ,philosophy1 "o ,ni*olas ( ,autrec\rt1 ,dean ( ,metz1#c :o anticipat$ him 9 ! f\rte5? c5tury1 & o!r bett]-kn[n s*oolm5 :o approximat$ to ! position2 & !re are1 ( c\rse1 elem5ts 9 ! tea*+ ( ,plato & ev5 ( ,ari/otle1 or possible int]pretations ( ,plato & ,ari/otle1 :i* po9t 9 ! same direction4 ,b full-bl[n ,idealism1 9 ! s5se :i* involves a d5ial ( ! indep5d5t exi/5ce ( matt]1 is always associat$ ) ! "n ( ,bi%op ,b]keley4 ,i c be/ make my mean+ pla9 to y by quot+ a passage or two f 8 ,pr9ciples ( ,human ,k1 9 :i* he ext5ds to ! prim>y qualities ( matt] ! analysis :i* ,locke _h already appli$ to ! second>y4 ',b1 ?\gh x 7 possible t solid1 figur$1 moveable sub/ances may exi/ )\t ! m9d1 correspond+ to ! ideas we h ( bodies1 yet h[ is x possible = u to "k ?is8 ,ei!r we mu/ "k x by ,s5se or by ,reason4--,z = our s5ses1 by !m we h ! k only ( our s5sations1 ideas1 or ^? ?+s t are imm$iately p]ceiv$ by s5se1 call !m :at y w2 b !y d n in=m u t ?+s exi/ #ac )\t ! m9d1 or unp]ceiv$1 l to ^? :i* are p]ceiv$4 ,?is ! ,mat]iali/s !mselves ackn[l$ge4--,x rema9s !re=e t if we h any k at all ( ext]nal ?+s1 x mu/ be by ,reason inf]r+ _! exi/5ce f :at is imm$iately p]ceiv$ by s5se4 ,b :at reason c induce u to believe ! exi/5ce ( bodies )\t ! m9d1 f :at we p]ceive1 s9ce ! v patrons ( ,matt] !mselves d n pret5d !re is any necess>y connexion betwixt !m & our ideas8 ,i say x is grant$ on all h&s--& :at happ5s 9 dreams1 fr5zies1 & ! l1 puts x beyond dispute--t x is possible we might be affect$ ) all ! ideas we h n[1 ?\gh !re 7 no bodies exi/+ )\t resembl+ !m4 ,h5ce1 x is evid5t ! supposition ( ext]nal bodies is n necess>y = ! produc+ our ideas2 s9ce x is grant$ !y are produc$ sometimes1 & might possibly be produc$ always 9 ! same ord] we see !m 9 at pres5t1 )\t _! concurr5ce4 99 99 99 99 99 99 ',9 %ort1 if !re 7 ext]nal bodies1 x is impossible we %\ld ev] come to "k x2 & if !re 7 n1 we might h ! v same reasons to ?9k !re 7 t we h n[4 ,suppose--:at no "o c d5y possible--an intellig5ce )\t ! help ( ext]nal bodies1 to be affect$ ) ! same tra9 ( s5sations or ideas t y are1 impr9t$ 9 ! same ord] & ) l vividness 9 8 m9d4 ,i ask :e!r t intellig5ce ha? n all ! reason to believe ! exi/5ce ( corporeal sub/ances1 repres5t$ by 8 ideas1 & excit+ !m 9 8 m9d1 t y c possibly h = believ+ ! same ?+8 ,( ?is !re c be no #ad "q--:i* "o consid]ation 7 en\gh to make any reasonable p]son suspect ! /r5g? ( :atev] argum5ts he may ?9k himself to h1 = ! exi/5ce ( bodies )\t ! m9d4'#d ,d y say t 9 t case ! tables & *airs mu/ be suppos$ to disappe> ! mom5t we all leave ! room8 ,x is true t we d commonly ?9k ( ! tables & *airs z rema9+1 ev5 :5 !re is no "o !re to see or t\* !m4 ,b t only means1 ,b]keley expla9s1 t if we or any "o else 7 to come back into ! room1 we %\ld p]ceive !m4 ,moreov]1 ev5 9 ?9k+ ( !m z ?+s :i* might be p]ceiv$ "u c]ta9 conditions1 !y h ent]$ our m9ds & s proclaim$ _! ideal or m9d-imply+ "*4 ,to prove t ?+s exi/ )\t ! m9d we %\ld h to conceive ( ?+s z unconceiv$ or un?\ght (4 ,& t is a feat :i* no "o has ev] yet succe$$ 9 accompli%+4 ,"h is ,b]keley's own answ] to ! objection3 ',b1 say y1 surely !re is no?+ easi] ?an = me to imag9e trees1 = in/ance1 9 a p>k1 or books exi/+ 9 a closet1 & nobody by to p]ceive !m4 ,i answ]1 y may s1 !re is no difficulty 9 x2 b :at is all ?is1 ,i besee* y1 m ?an fram+ 9 y\r m9d c]ta9 ideas :i* y call books & trees1 & #ae at ! same "t omitt+ to frame ! idea ( any "o t may p]ceive !m8 ,b d n y y\rself p]ceive or ?9k ( !m all ! :ile8 ,?is !re=e is no?+ to ! purpose3 x only %ews y h ! p[] ( imag9+ or =m+ ideas 9 y\r m9d2 b x does n %ew t y c conceive x possible ! objects ( y\r ?\ght may exi/ )\t ! m9d4 ,to make out ?is1 x is necess>y t y conceive !m exi/+ unconceiv$ or un?\ght (1 :i* is a manife/ repugnancy4 ,:5 we d our utmo/ to conceive ! exi/5ce ( ext]nal bodies1 we are all ! :ile only contemplat+ our own ideas4 ,b ! m9d1 tak+ no notice ( itself1 is delud$ to ?9k x c & does conceive bodies exi/+ un?\ght ( or )\t ! m9d1 ?\gh at ! same "t !y are appreh5d$ by1 or exi/ 91 itself4 ,a little att5tion w discov] to any "o ! tru? & evid5ce ( :at is "h said1 & make x unnecess>y to insi/ on any o!r pro(s aga9/ ! exi/5ce ( mat]ial sub/ance4'#e ,b]keley no d\bt did n adequately appreciate ! importance ( ! di/9ction betwe5 m]e s5sations & m5tal relations4 ,9 ! p>agraph :i* ,i h read to y he t5ds to expla9 space away into m]e subjective feel+s3 9 ?is respect & 9 _m o!rs he has be5 correct$ by ,kant & ! po/-,kantian ,ideali/s4 ,d\btless we _c analyse away our conception ( space or ( sub/ance into m]e feel+s4 ,b relations imply m9d no less ?an s5sations4 ,?+s are no m]e #af bundles ( s5sations2 we d ?9k ( !m z objects or sub/ances possess+ attributes4 ,inde$ to call !m 7) ,b]keley71 'bundles ( s5sations' implies t ! bundle is z important an elem5t 9 ?+hood z ! s5sations !mselves4 ,! bundle implies :at ,kant w\ld call ! intellectual 'categories' ( ,sub/ance1 ,quantity1 ,quality1 & ! l4 ,we d ?9k objects3 b an object is /ill an object ( ?\ght4 ,we c atta* no intelligible mean+ to ! t]m 'object' :i* does n imply a subject4 ,if !re is no?+ 9 matt]1 z we "k x1 :i* does n obvi\sly imply m9d1 if ! v idea ( matt] is un9telligible ap>t f m9d1 x is cle> t matt] c nev] h exi/$ )\t m9d4 ,:at !n1 x may be ask$1 ( ! ?+s :i* no human eye has ev] se5 or ev5 ?\ght (8 ,are we to suppose t a new planet comes into exi/5ce = ! fir/ "t :5 fir/ x sails into ! telescope ( ! a/ronom]1 & t ,sci5ce is wrong 9 inf]r+ t x exi/$ n only be=e t p>ticul> a/ronom] saw x1 b be=e !re 7 any a/ronom]s or o!r human or ev5 animal intellig5ces ^u ?is planet to obs]ve x8 ,did ! _w ( ,geology come into exi/5ce = ! fir/ "t :5 "s eighte5?-c5tury geologi/ fir/ suspect$ t ! _w 0 m ?an six ?\s& ye>s old8 ,are all ^? ages ( pa/ #ag hi/ory1 :5 ! e>? & ! sun 7 b nebulae1 a m]e imag9ation1 or did t nebul\s mass come into exi/5ce ?\s&s or millions ( ye>s aft]w>ds :5 ,kant or ,laplace fir/ conceiv$ t x _h exi/$8 ,! supposition is cle>ly self-contradictory & impossible4 ,if ,sci5ce be n a mass ( illusion1 ?is planet exi/$ millions ( ye>s be=e any human--or1 s f> z we "k1 any animal m9ds--exi/$ to ?9k its exi/5ce4 ,& yet ,i h endeav\r$ to %[ ! absurdity ( suppos+ t matt] c exi/ except = a m9d4 ,x is cle>1 !n1 t x _c be m]ely = su* m9ds z ours t ! _w has always exi/$4 ,our m9ds come & g4 ,!y h a beg9n+2 !y g to sleep2 !y may1 = aught t we c imm$iately "k1 come to an end4 ,at no "t does any "o ( !m1 at no "t d all ( !m toge!r1 appreh5d all t !re is to be kn[n4 ,we d n create a ,univ]se2 we discov] x piece by piece1 & aft] all v imp]fectly4 ,matt] _c intelligibly be suppos$ to exi/ ap>t f ,m9d3 & yet x cle>ly does n exi/ m]ely = our m9ds4 ,ea* ( u kn[s only "o little bit ( ! ,univ]se3 all ( u toge!r d n "k ! :ole4 ,if ! :ole is to exi/ at all1 !re mu/ be "s "o m9d :i* kn[s ! :ole4 ,! m9d :i* is necess>y to ! v exi/5ce ( ! ,univ]se is ! m9d t we call ,god4 #ah ,9 ?is way we are1 z x seems to me1 l$ up by a tra9 ( reason+ :i* is positively irresi/ible to ! idea t1 s f> f matt] be+ ! only exi/5ce1 x has no exi/5ce ( its own ap>t f "s m9d :i* kn[s x--9 :i* & = :i* x exi/s4 ,! exi/5ce ( a ,m9d possess+ univ]sal k is necess>y z ! presupposition bo? ( !re be+ any _w to "k1 & also ( !re be+ any less] m9ds to "k x4 ,x is1 inde$1 possible to believe 9 ! et]nal exi/5ce ( limit$ m9ds1 :ile d5y+ ! exi/5ce ( ! "o ,omnisci5t ,m9d4 ,t is a hypo!sis on :i* ,i w say a ^w h]eaft]4#f ,x is en\gh "h to say t x is "o :i* is n requir$ to expla9 ! _w z we "k x4 ,! obvi\s prima facie view ( ! matt] is t ! m9ds :i* app>5tly h a beg9n+1 :i* develope sl[ly & gradually & 9 close connexion ) c]ta9 physical processes1 owe _! orig9 to :atev] is ! ultimate s\rce or gr\nd ( ! physical processes !mselves4 ,! ord] or sy/ematic int]connexion ( all ! obs]vable ph5om5a 9 ! ,univ]se sugge/s t ! ultimate ,reality mu/ be "o ,be+ ( "s k9d2 ! argum5t :i* ,i h sugge/$ leads u to reg>d t "o ,reality z a spiritual ,reality4 ,we are n yet entitl$ to speak ( ?is physical ,univ]se z caus$ #ai by ,god3 t is a "q :i* ,i hope to discuss 9 our next lecture4 ,all t ,i want to e/abli% n[ is t we _c expla9 ! _w )\t ! supposition ( "o univ]sal ,m9d 9 :i* & = :i* all s-call$ mat]ial ?+s exi/1 & always h exi/$4 ,s f> ,i h endeav\r$ to e/abli% ! exi/5ce ( ,god by a l9e ( ?\ght :i* also leads to ! position t matt] has no indep5d5t exi/5ce ap>t f consci\s m9d1 t at bottom no?+ exi/s except m9ds & _! exp]i5ces4 ,n[ ,i "k t ?is is a l9e ( ?\ght :i*1 to ^? :o are unfamili> ) x1 seems s p>adoxical & extravagant t1 ev5 :5 a man does n see 8 way to reply to x1 x w seldom produce imm$iate or p]man5t conviction ! fir/ "t he becomes acqua9t$ ) x4 ,x is = ! mo/ "p only by a consid]able c\rse ( habituation1 ext5d+ ov] "s ye>s1 t a man succe$s 9 ?9k+ himself into ! ideali/ic view ( ! ,univ]se4 ,& aft] all1 !re are _m m9ds--"s ( !m1 ,i mu/ admit1 n want+ 9 philosophical p[]--:o nev] succe$ 9 accompli%+ t feat at all4 ,!re=e1 :ile ,i feel b\nd to ass]t t ! cle>e/ & mo/ irrefragable argum5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,god is t :i* is suppli$ by ! ideali/ic l9e ( ?\ght1 ,i %\ld be sorry to h to admit t a man #bj _c be a ,!i/1 or t he _c be a ,!i/ on reasonable gr\nds1 )\t fir/ be+ an ,ideali/4 ,f my own po9t ( view mo/ ( ! o!r reasons = believ+ 9 ! exi/5ce ( ,god resolve !mselves into ideali/ic argum5ts imp]fectly ?\ght out4 ,b !y may be v good argum5ts1 z f> z !y g1 ev5 :5 !y are n ?\ght out to :at seem to me _! logical consequ5ces4 ,"o ( ^! l9es ( ?\ght ,i %all hope to develope 9 my next lecture2 b mean:ile let me attempt to r$uce ! argum5t aga9/ ,mat]ialism to a =m 9 :i* x w p]haps appeal to ,common-s5se )\t mu* pr(\nd metaphysical reflection4 ,at ! level ( ord9>y common-s5se ?\ght !re appe> to be two k9ds ( ,reality--m9d & matt]4 ,& yet our exp]i5ce ( ! unity ( ,nature1 ( ! intimate connexion betwe5 human & animal m9ds & _! organisms 7organisms gov]n$ by a s+le intelligible & int]connect$ sy/em ( laws7 is su* t we c h>dly help reg>d+ !m z manife/ations or products or effects or aspects ( "s "o ,reality4 ,!re is1 almo/ obvi\sly1 "s k9d ( ,unity und]ly+ all ! div]sity ( ?+s4 ,our _w does n arise by ! com+ toge!r ( two q indep5d5t ,realities--m9d & matt]--gov]n$ by no law or by unconnect$ & indep5d5t sy/ems ( law4 #ba ,all ?+s1 all ph5om5a1 all ev5ts =m p>ts ( a s+le int]-relat$1 intelligible :ole3 t is ! presupposition n only ( ,philosophy b ( ,sci5ce4 ,or if any "o *ooses to say t x is a presupposition & s an unw>rantable piece ( dogmatism1 ,i w say t x is ! hypo!sis to :i* all our k po9ts4 ,x is at all ev5ts ! "o common meet+-po9t ( ne>ly all s]i\s ?9k]s4 ,! "q rema9s1 ',:at is ! nature ( ?is "o ,reality8' ,n[1 if ?is ultimate ,reality be n m9d1 x mu/ be "o ( two ?+s4 ,x mu/ be matt]1 or x mu/ be a ?ird ?+ :i* is nei!r m9d nor matt]1 b some?+ q diff]5t f ei!r4 ,n[ _m :o w n foll[ ! ideali/ic l9e ( ?\ght ! :ole way--s f> z to recognize t ! ultimate ,reality is ,m9d--w at lea/ admit t ,ideali/s h successfully %[n ! impossibility ( suppos+ t ! ultimate ,reality c be matt]4 ,= all ! prop]ties ( matt] are prop]ties :i* imply "s relation to our s5sibility or our ?\ght4 ,moreov]1 !re is su* a complete het]og5eity betwe5 consci\sness & unconsci\s matt]1 consid]$ z some?+ capable ( exi/+ )\t m9d1 t x seems utt]ly impossible & un?9kable t m9d %\ld be simply ! product or attribute ( matt]4 ,t ! ultimate ,reality _c be :at we mean by matt] has be5 admitt$ by ! mo/ naturali/ic1 #bb &1 9 ! ord9>y s5se1 anti-religi\s ?9k]s--,sp9oza1 = in/ance1 & ,haeckel1 & ,h]b]t ,sp5c]4 ,! "q rema9s1 ',:i* is ! easi]1 ! m probable1 ! m reasonable !ory--t ! ultimate ,reality %\ld be ,m9d1 or t x %\ld be some?+ s utt]ly un9telligible & inconceivable to u z a t]tium quid--a my/]i\s ,unkn[n & ,unkn[able--:i* is nei!r m9d nor matt]8' ,= my own "p1 ,i see no reason to suppose t our inability to ?9k ( any?+ :i* is nei!r matt] nor m9d b q unlike ei!r is a m]e imp]fection ( human ?\ght4 ,x seems m reasonable to assume t our inability to ?9k ( su* a my/]i\s ,x is due to !re be+ no su* ?+4#g ,our only way ( judg+ ( ! ,unkn[n is by ! analogy ( ! kn[n4 ,x is m probable1 surely1 t ! _w kn[n to u %\ld exhibit some?+ ( ! *>act]i/ics ( ! ,reality f :i* x is d]iv$1 or ( :i* x =ms a manife/ation1 ?an t x %\ld exhibit none ( ^! *>act]i/ics4 ,no d\bt1 if we 7 to argue f "s small "p ( our exp]i5ce1 or f ! detail$ *>act]i/ics ( "o "p ( our exp]i5ce to :at is beyond our exp]i5ce2 if1 = in/ance #bc 7,i am "h reply+ to an objection ( ,hoeffd+'s71 a bl9d man 7 to argue t ! _w mu/ be col\rless because he sees no col\r1 or if any ( u 7 to affirm t 9 o!r planets !re c be no col\rs b :at we see1 no s5sations b :at we feel1 no m5tal p[]s b :at we possess1 ! inf]5ce w\ld be prec>i\s en\gh4 ,! ,an?ropomorphi/ 9 ! /rict s5se--! man :o ?9ks t ,god or ! gods mu/ h human bodies--no d\bt r5d]s himself liable to ! gibe t1 if ox5 c\ld ?9k1 !y w\ld imag9e ! gods to be l ox51 & s on4 ,b ! cases are n p>allel4 ,we h no difficulty 9 ?9k+ t 9 o!r worlds !re may be col\rs :i* we h nev] se51 or :ole gr\ps ( s5sation diff]5t f our own3 we _c ?9k t any exi/5ce %\ld be nei!r m9d nor matt]1 b utt]ly unlike ei!r4 ,we are n argu+ f ! m]e abs5ce ( "s special exp]i5ce1 b f ! :ole "* ( all ! ?\ght & exp]i5ce t we actually possess1 ( all t we are & ! :ole ,univ]se ) :i* we are 9 contact4 ,! *>act]i/ic ( ! :ole _w :i* we "k is t x consi/s ( m9d & matt] 9 close connexion--we may waive = a mom5t ! nature ( t connexion4 ,is x m probable t ! ultimate ,reality :i* lies beyond our rea* %\ld be some?+ :i* possesses ! *>act]i/ics ( m9d1 or t x %\ld #bd be totally unlike ei!r m9d or matt]8 ,d y insi/ t we logically ought to say x might conta9 ! *>act]i/ics ( bo? m9d & matt]8 ,!re is only "o way 9 :i* su* a comb9ation seems cle>ly ?9kable by u1 i4e4 :5 we repres5t matt] z ei!r 9 ! ideali/ic s5se ! ?\ght or exp]i5ce ( m9d1 or 7aft] ! fa%ion ( ord9>y reali/ic ,!ism7 z creat$ or produc$ by m9d4 ,b if y insi/ on some?+ m ?an ?is1 if y want to ?9k ( ! qualities ( matt] z 9 "s o!r way includ$ 9 ! nature ( ! ultimate ,reality z well z ^? ( m9d1 at all ev5ts we c\ld /ill urge t we %all get ne>] to ! tru? by ?9k+ ( ?is ultimate ,reality 9 its m9d-aspect ?an by ?9k+ ( x 9 its matt]-aspect4 ,i d n believe t ! human m9d is really equal to ! task ( ?9k+ ( a ,reality :i* is "o & yet is nei!r m9d nor matt] b some?+ :i* comb9es ! nature ( bo?4 ,practically1 :]e su* a cre$ is pr(ess$1 ! man ei!r ?9ks ( an unconsci\s ,reality 9 "s way g5]at+ or evolv+ m9d1 & s falls back into ! ,mat]ialism :i* he has v]bally disclaim$2 or he ?9ks ( a m9d produc+ or caus+ or g5]at+ a matt] :i* :5 produc$ is some?+ diff]5t f itself4 ,?is la/ is ( c\rse ord9>y ,!ism 9 ! =m 9 :i* x is commonly #be held by ^? :o are n ,ideali/s4 ,f a practical & religi\s po9t ( view !re is no?+ to be said aga9/ su* a view4 ,/ill x involves a ,dualism1 ! philosophical difficulties ( :i* ,i h attempt$ to sugge/ to y4 ,i confess t = my own "p ! only way 9 :i* ,i c conceive ( a s+le ultimate ,reality :i* comb9es ! attributes ( :at we call m9d ) ^? ( :at we "k z matt] is by ?9k+ ( a ,m9d consci\s ( a _w or nature :i* has no exi/5ce except 9 & = t ,m9d & :atev] less complete consci\snesses t may be4 ,i tru/ t ^? :o h fail$ to foll[ my sket* ( ! argum5ts :i* lead to ?is ideali/ic conclusion may at lea/ be l$ by x to see ! difficulties ei!r ( ,mat]ialism or ( t k9d ( agno/ic ,pan!ism :i*1 :ile admitt+ 9 words t ! ultimate ,reality is n matt]1 refuses to inve/ x ) ! attributes ( m9d4 ,! argum5t may be r$uc$ to its simple/ =m by say+ we believe t ! ultimate ,reality is ,m9d because m9d w expla9 matt]1 :ile matt] w n expla9 m9d3 :ile ! idea ( a ,some?+ :i* is nei!r 9 m9d nor matt] is bo? un9telligible & gratuit\s4 ,& ?is l9e ( ?\ght may be supplem5t$ by ano!r4 ,:atev] may be ?\ght ( ! exi/5ce ( matt] ap>t f m9d1 e "o w #bf admit t matt] possesses no value or wor? ap>t f m9d4 ,:5 we br+ into acc\nt our moral judgem5ts or judgem5ts ( value1 we h no difficulty 9 recogniz+ m9d z ! highe/ or be/ k9d ( exi/5ce kn[n to u4 ,!re is1 surely1 a c]ta9 intr9sic probability 9 suppos+ t ! ,reality f :i* all be+ is d]iv$ mu/ possess at lea/ z mu* wor? or value z ! d]iv$ be+2 & t 9 ?9k+ ( t ,reality by ! analogy ( ! highe/ k9d ( exi/5ce kn[n to u we %all come ne>] to a true ?\ght ( x ?an by any o!r way ( ?9k+ possible to u4 ,?is is a l9e ( argum5t :i* ,i hope to develope fur!r :5 ,i come to exam9e ! be>+ ^u ! religi\s problem ( :at is z real a "p ( our exp]i5ce z any o!r--our moral exp]i5ce4 ,i w rem9d y 9 conclusion1 t our argum5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,god is at pres5t incomplete4 ,i h tri$ to lead y to ! idea t ! ultimate ,reality is spiritual1 t x is a ,m9d :i* kn[s1 or is consci\s (1 matt]4 ,i h tri$ to lead y ) ! ,ideali/ to ?9k ( ! physical ,univ]se z hav+ no exi/5ce except 9 ! m9d ( ,god1 or at all ev5ts 7= ^? :o fail to foll[ ! ideali/ic l9e ( ?\ght7 to believe t ! ,univ]se does n exi/ )\t su* a ,m9d4 ,:at fur!r relation exi/s betwe5 physical nature & ?is ,univ]sal ,_s1 ,i %all hope 9 ! next lecture #bg to consid]2 & 9 s do+ to sugge/ a l9e ( argum5t :i* w indep5d5tly lead to ! same result1 & :i* does n necess>ily presuppose ! acceptance ( ! ideali/ic cre$4 ,,lit]ature ,! read] :o wi%es to h ! ideali/ic argum5t sket*$ 9 ! =ego+ *apt] develop$ m fully %\ld read ,b]keley's ,pr9ciples ( ,human ,k4 ,= ! correction ( ,b]keley's s5sationali/ic mi/akes ! be/ c\rse is to read ,kant's ,critique ( ,pure ,reason or ! %ort] ,prolegom5a to any future ,metaphysic or any ( ! num]\s expositions or comm5t>ies ^u ,kant4 7,"o ( ! be/ is ! ',reproduction' prefix$ to ,dr4 ,hut*ison ,/irl+'s ,text-book to ,kant47 ,! non-metaphysical read] %\ld1 h[ev]1 be in=m$ t ,kant is v h>d read+1 & is sc>cely intelligible )\t "s slight k ( ! previ\s hi/ory ( ,philosophy1 especially ( ,locke1 ,b]keley1 & ,hume1 :ile "s acqua9tance ) elem5t>y ,logic is also desirable4 ,he w f9d ! argum5t = non-s5sationali/ic ,idealism re-/at$ 9 a po/-,kantian b mu* easi] =m 9 ,f]ri]'s ,in/itutes ( ,metaphysic4 ,! argum5t = a !i/ic ,idealism is p[]fully /at$ 7?\gh x is n easy read+7 9 ! late ,pr(4 ,t4 ,h4 ,gre5's ,prolegom5a to ,e?ics1 ,book ,i4 ,9 view ( rec5t reali/ic revivals ,i may add t ! e>li] *apt]s ( ,mr4 ,bradley's ,appe>ance & ,reality /ill seem to me to conta9 an unansw]able def5ce ( ,idealism z aga9/ ,mat]ialism or any =m ( ,realism1 ?\gh 8 ,idealism is n ( ! !i/ic type def5d$ 9 ! above lecture4 ,! ideali/ic argum5t is /at$ 9 a way :i* makes /rongly = ,!ism by ,pr(essor ,w>d 9 ,naturalism & ,agno/icism--a "w :i* w\ld p]haps be ! be/ sequel to ^! lectures = any read] #bh :o does n want to und]take a :ole c\rse ( philosophical read+3 read]s entirely unacqua9t$ ) ,physical ,sci5ce might d well to beg9 ) ,"p ,,ii4 ,a m elem5t>y & v cle> def5ce ( ,!ism f ! ideali/ic po9t ( view is to be f\nd 9 ,dr4 ,ill+wor?'s ,p]sonality ,human & ,div9e4 ,repres5tatives ( non-ideali/ic ,!ism w be m5tion$ at ! end ( ! next lecture4 #a ,m9d1 vol4 iv4 7,u4,s471 #ahhe4 #b ,i d n mean ( c\rse t 9 ! e>lie/ /ages ( consci\sness ?is di/9ction is actually made2 b1 if !re are /ages ( consci\sness 9 :i* ! ',i' is n realiz$1 ! idea ( matt] or ev5 ( an 'object' or 'n-self' exi/+ ap>t f consci\sness mu/ be suppos$ to be equally abs5t4 #c ,i h dealt at l5g? ) ?is =gott5 ?9k] 9 a ,presid5tial ,address to ! ,ari/otelian ,society1 pr9t$ 9 _! ,proce$+s = #aijg4 #d ,pr9ciples ( ,human ,k1 pt4 i41 ,sections #ah1 #bj4 #e ,pr9ciples ( ,human ,k1 pt4 #a41 ,section #bc4 #f ,see ,lecture ,,iv41 pp4 #if-aja1 #abc-f4 #g ,i h attempt$ to meet ?is l9e ( argum5t some:at m adequately1 9 ! =m 9 :i* x has rec5tly be5 tak5 up by ,pr(essor ,hoeffd+ 9 8 ,philosophy ( ,religion1 9 a review 9 ! ,review ( ,!ology & ,philosophy = ,novemb]1 #aijg 7vol4 iii474 #bi ,,lecture ,,ii ,,! ,,univ]sal ,,cause ,9 my la/ lecture ,i endeav\r$ to %[ t matt]1 s f> f con/itut+ ! ultimate ,reality1 _c reasonably be ?\ght ( z exi/+ at all )\t m9d2 & t we _c expla9 ! _w )\t assum+ ! exi/5ce ( a ,m9d 9 :i* & = :i* ev]y?+ t is n m9d has its be+4 ,b we are /ill v f> f hav+ fully cle>$ up ! relation betwe5 ! div9e ,m9d & t ,nature :i* exi/s 9 x & = x3 :ile we h h>dly dealt at all ) ! relation betwe5 ! univ]sal ,m9d & ^? less] m9ds :i* we h treat$--s f> )\t mu* argum5t--z 9 "s way d]iv$ f1 or dep5d5t ^u1 t ,m9d4 ,s f> z our previ\s l9e ( argum5t goes1 we might h to look ^u ! _w z ! ?\ght ( ,god1 b n z caus$ by ,him or due to ,8 w4 ,we might speak ( ,god z 'mak+ ,nature1' b only 9 ! s5se 9 :i* y or ,i make ,nature :5 we ?9k x or exp]i5ce x4 #cj ',! _w is z necess>y to ,god z ,god is to ! _w1' we are (t5 told--= in/ance by my own rev]$ tea*]1 ! late ,pr(essor ,gre54 ,h[ unsatisfactory ?is position is f a religi\s po9t ( view ,i ne$ h>dly insi/4 ,= all t su* a !ory has to say to ! contr>y1 we might h to suppose t1 ?\gh ,god is p]fectly good1 ! _w :i* ,he is compell$ to ?9k is v bad1 & go+ f bad to worse4 ,to ?9k ( ,god m]ely z ! ,m9d :i* et]nally contemplates ,nature1 )\t hav+ any p[] :atev] ( det]m9+ :at sort ( ,nature x is to be1 supplies no gr\nd = hope or aspiration--/ill less = wor%ip1 adoration1 imitation4 ,i sugge/$ ! possibility t f su* a po9t ( view ,god might be ?\ght ( z good1 & ! _w z bad4 ,b t is really to conc$e too mu*4 ,a be+ )\t a w c\ld z little be bad z he c\ld be good3 he w\ld be simply a be+ )\t a "*4 ,f an intellectual po9t su* a way ( look+ at ! ,univ]se might be m intellig5t or intelligible ?an t ( pure ,mat]ialism or pure ,agno/icism2 b morally & religi\sly ,i don't "k t1 :5 its consequ5ces are fully realiz$1 x is any great improvem5t ^u ei!r ( !m4#a #ca ,moreov]1 ev5 intellectually x fails to satisfy ! dem& :i* mo/ reflect+ p feel1 t ! _w %all be reg>d$ z a ,unity ( "s k9d4 ,if ,god is ?\ght ( z l9k$ by "s inexplicable fate to a ,nature ov] :i* ,he has no sort ( control--n s mu* control z a m]e human be+ :o c produce limit$ *anges 9 ! _w1--we c h>dly be said to h r$uc$ ! _w to a ,unity4 ,! old ,dualism has brok5 out aga93 aft] all we /ill h ,god & ! _w confront+ "o ano!r2 nei!r ( !m is 9 any way expla9$ by ! o!r4 ,/ill less c\ld su* a _w be suppos$ to h a purpose or rational end4 ,= our own m]e intellectual satisfaction z well z = ! satisfaction ( our religi\s ne$s we mu/ g on to ask :e!r we are n ju/ifi$ 9 ?9k+ ( ,god z ! ,cause or ,creator ( ! _w1 z well z ! ,?9k] ( x4 ,?is enquiry introduces u to ! :ole problem ( ,causality4 ,! sket* :i* ,i gave y la/ "t ( ,bi%op ,b]keley's argum5t 0 a v imp]fect "o4 ,bi%op ,b]keley 0 f "o po9t ( view a great philosophic iconocla/1 ?\gh he de/roy$ only t he might build up4 ,he de/roy$ ! sup]/ition ( a self-exi/+ matt]3 #cb he also wag$ w> aga9/ :at ,i w v5ture to call ! k9dr$ sup]/ition ( a my/]i\s causal nexus betwe5 ! physical antec$5t & ! physical consequ5t4 ,on ?is side 8 "w 0 c>ri$ on by ,hume4 ,b]keley resolv$ our k into a succession ( 'ideas4' ,he did1 no d\bt1 fall into ! mi/ake ( treat+ our k z if x 7 a m]e succession ( feel+s3 he ignor$ f> too mu*--?\gh he did n d s completely--t o!r elem5t 9 our k1 ! elem5t ( intellectual relation1 ( :i* ,i said some?+ la/ "t4 ,"h1 no d\bt1 ,b]keley has be5 correct$ by ,kant2 &1 s f>1 practically all mod]n ,ideali/s w own _! indebt$ness to ,kant4 ,ev5 9 ! appreh5sion ( a succession ( ideas1 9 ! m]e recognition t ?is feel+ comes aft] t1 !re is an elem5t :i* _c be expla9$ by m]e feel+4 ,! appreh5sion t ?is feel+ came aft] t feel+ is n itself a feel+4 ,b c ,i detect any relation betwe5 ^! exp]i5ces ( m9e except t ( succession8 ,we commonly speak ( fire z ! cause ( ! melt+ ( ! wax1 b :at d we really "k ab\t ! matt]8 ,surely on reflection we mu/ admit t we "k no?+ b ?is--t1 s f> z our exp]i5ce goes1 ! application ( fire is always foll[$ by ! melt+ ( ! wax4 ,:]e ?is is ! case we d1 f ! po9t ( view ( #cc ord9>y life1 speak ( ! "o ph5om5on z ! cause ( ! o!r4 ,:]e we don't discov] su* an inv>iable succession1 we don't ?9k ( ! "o ev5t z ! cause ( ! o!r4 ,i %all be told1 p]haps1 t on ?is view ( ! nature ( ,causality we ought to speak ( night z ! cause ( day4 ,s p]haps we %\ld1 if ! result to :i* we are l$ by a m limit$ exp]i5ce 7 n correct$ by ! results ( a l>g] exp]i5ce4 ,to say no?+ ( ! valuable correction af=d$ by ! pol> w9t] & ! pol> summ]1 we h le>n$ by a m compreh5sive exp]i5ce to replace ! law t day foll[s night by ! wid] g5]alisation t ! visibility ( objects is inv>iably co9cid5t ^u ! pres5ce ( "s lum9\s body & n ^u a previ\s /ate ( d>kness4 ,b betwe5 cases ( :at we call m]e succession & :at is commonly call$ causal sequ5ce ! diff]5ce lies m]ely 9 ! obs]v$ fact t 9 "s cases ! sequ5ce v>ies1 :ile 9 o!rs no exception has ev] be5 discov]$4 ,no matt] h[ frequ5tly we obs]ve t a s5sation ( r$ foll[s ! impact ^u ! aural n]ve ( a %ock d]iv$ f a wave ( e!r ( su* & su* a l5g?1 we see no reason :y x %\ld d s4 ,we may1 no d\bt1 make a /ill wid] g5]alization1 & say t e ev5t 9 ,nature is inv>iably prec$$ by "s def9ite complex ( conditions1 #cd & s arrive at a g5]al law ( ! ,uni=mity ( ,nature4 ,& su* a law is und\bt$ly ! express or impli$ basis ( all inf]5ce 9 ! ,physical ,sci5ces4 ,:5 we h once accept$ t law 7z ! :ole mass ( our exp]i5ce 9 ! purely physical region incl9es u to d71 !n a s+le in/ance ( ,a ,b ,c be+ foll[$ by ,d 7:5 we are q sure t we h includ$ all ! antec$5ts :i* we d n "k f o!r exp]i5ce to be irrelevant7 w w>rant our conclud+ t we h discov]$ a law ( nature4 ,on ! next occasion ( ,a ,b ,c's occurr5ce we confid5tly pr$ict t ,d w foll[4 ,b1 h[ev] (t5 we h obs]v$ su* a sequ5ce1 & h[ev] _m simil> sequ5ces we may h obs]v$1 we are no ne>] to kn[+ :y ,d %\ld foll[ ,,abc3 we c only "k t x always does3 & on ! /r5g? ( t k we inf]1 ) a probability :i* we d no d\bt = practical purposes treat z a c]ta9ty1 t x always w4 ,b on reflection we c see no reason :y a wave ( e!r ( a c]ta9 l5g? %\ld produce r$ r ?an blue1 a col\r r ?an a s\nd4 ,!re1 z always1 we discov] no?+ b succession1 n necess>y connexion4 ,^! cases ( unv>i$ succession among ph5om5a1 x %\ld be obs]v$1 are q diff]5t f cases ( real necess>y connexion4 ,we don't want to exam9e ?\s&s ( in/ances ( two #ce add$ to two to be q sure t !y always make f\r1 nor 9 mak+ ! inf]5ce d we appeal to any m g5]al law ( ,uni=mity4 ,we simply see t x is & always mu/ be s4 ,mill no d\bt tells u he has no difficulty 9 suppos+ t 9 ! region ( ! fix$ />s two & two might make five1 b nobody believes him4 ,at all ev5ts few ( u c pret5d to su* feats ( intellectual ela/icity4 ,no am\nt ( contradictory te/imony f travell]s to ! fix$ />s1 no matt] :e!r !y 7 ,bi%ops ( ! highe/ "* or tra9$ z ,pr(essors ( physical ,sci5ce1 w\ld induce u to give a mom5t's cr$5ce to su* a /ory4 ,we simply see t two & two mu/ make f\r1 & t x is inconceivable !y %\ld ev]1 h[ev] exceptionally1 make five4 ,x is q o!rwise ) any case ( succession among ext]nal ph5om5a1 no matt] h[ unv>i$4 ,s long z we conf9e ourselves to m]ely physical ph5om5a 7,i put aside = ! mom5t ! case ( consci\s or o!r liv+ be+s7 n[h]e c we discov] any?+ b succession2 n[h]e d we discov] ,causality 9 ! s5se ( a necess>y connexion ! rev]sal ( :i* is inconceivable4 ,are we !n to conclude t !re is no su* ?+ z ,causality1 t 9 se>*+ = a cause ( ev]y?+ t happ5s1 we are pursu+ a m]e w o' ! wisp1 us+ a m]e vox nihili :i* has #cf z little mean+ = ! reflect+ m9d z fate or =tune8 ,surely1 9 ! v act ( mak+ ! di/9ction betwe5 succession & causality1 9 ! v act ( d5y+ t we c discov] any causal connexion betwe5 "o physical ph5om5on & ano!r1 we imply t we h got ! idea ( ,causality 9 our m9ds2 & t1 h[ev] little we may h discov]$ a g5u9e cause1 we c\ld n believe t any?+ c\ld happ5 )\t a cause4 ,= my own "p1 ,i f9d x q possible to believe t a ph5om5on :i* has be5 foll[$ by ano!r ph5om5on #iiii times %\ld on ! #aj1jjj? "t be foll[$ by "s o!r ph5om5on4 ,give me ! requisite exp]i5ce1 & belief w\ld foll[2 give me ev5 any adequate evid5ce t ano!r p]son has _h su* an exp]i5ce 7?\gh ,i %\ld be v p>ticul> ab\t ! evid5ce71 & ,i %\ld f9d no difficulty 9 believ+ x4 ,b to tell me t ! exception to an obs]v$ law might take place )\t any cause at all = ! v>iation w\ld seem to be pure nons5se4 ,put ! matt] 9 ano!r way4 ,let u suppose an empty _w1 if "o c speak ( su* a ?+ )\t contradiction--let u suppose t at "o "t no?+ :atev] _h exi/$1 nei!r m9d nor matt] nor any ( t my/]i\s entity :i* "s p f9d x possible to believe 9 :i* is #cg nei!r m9d nor matt]4 ,let u suppose lit]ally nobody & no?+ to h exi/$4 ,n[ c\ld y "u ^! conditions rationally suppose t any?+ c\ld h come into exi/5ce8 ,c\ld y = "o mom5t admit ! possibility t aft] c\ntless aeons ( no?+ness a fla% ( lightn+ %\ld occur or an animal be born8 ,surely1 on reflection ^? :o are mo/ suspici\s ( a priori k1 :o are mo/ unwill+ to c>ry _! speculations beyond ! limits ( actual exp]i5ce1 w be prep>$ to say1 ',no1 ! ?+ is utt]ly = ev] impossible4' ,ex nihilo nihil fit3 = e ev5t !re mu/ be a cause4 ,^? :o pr(ess to reject all o!r a priori or self-evid5t k1 %[ by _! e ?\ght & e act t !y nev] really d\bt t mu*4 ,n[1 x w\ld be j possible to cont5d t we h got ! b>e ab/ract concept or category ( ,causality 9 our m9ds1 & yet t !re is no?+ )9 our exp]i5ce to give x any positive cont5t--s t we %\ld h to say1 ',e ev5t mu/ h a cause1 b we nev] "k or c "k :at t cause is4 ,if we are to talk ab\t causes at all1 we c only say ,! ,unkn[able is ! cause ( all ?+s4' ,su* a position c be b>ely /at$ )\t a contradiction4 ,b surely x is a v difficult "o4 ,nature does n g5]ally supply u ) categories ( ?\ght1 :ile x gives u no p[] #ch or opportunity ( us+ !m4 ,x w\ld be l hold+1 = in/ance1 t we h inde$ be5 end[$ ) ! idea ( numb] 9 g5]al1 b t we _c discov] )9 our exp]i5ce any num]able ?+s2 t we h got ! idea ( #a1 #b1 #c1 #d1 etc41 b h no capacity :atev] = actually c\nt+--= say+ t "h are ?ree apples1 & !re f\r m>bles4 ,&1 psy*ologically1 x w\ld be difficult to f9d any p>allel to any?+ ( ! k9d4 ,nature does n fir/ supply u ) cle>ly def9$ categories ( ?\ght1 & !n give u a mat]ial to ex]cise !m ^u4 ,9 g5]al we discov] ^! ab/ract categories by us+ !m 9 our actual ?9k+4 ,we c\nt beads or m5 or horses be=e we evolve an ab/ract idea ( numb]1 or an ab/ract multiplication table4 ,x is v difficult to see h[ ?is idea ( ,cause c\ld possibly h got into our heads if we _h nev] 9 ! :ole c\rse ( our exp]i5ce come into any sort ( contact ) any actual concrete cause4 ,:]e !n1 )9 our exp]i5ce1 if n 9 ! succession ( ext]nal ev5ts1 %all we look = a cause--= some?+ to :i* we c apply ?is category or ab/ract notion ( causality8 ,i answ] ',we mu/ look )93 x is 9 our exp]i5ce ( volition t we actually f9d some?+ answ]+ to our idea ( causal connexion4' ,& "h1 ,i w\ld invite y n to ?9k s mu* ( our consci\sness ( actually #ci mov+ our limbs4 ,"h x is possible to argue plausibly t ! exp]i5ce ( ex]cis+ causality is a delusion4 ,i imag9e t1 if ,i w to d s1 ,i c move my arm2 b ,i w to /ret* out my arm1 & lo6 x rema9s glu$ to my side1 = ,i h sudd5ly be5 p>alys$4 ,or ,i may be told t ! consci\sness ( ex]t+ p[] is a m]e exp]i5ce ( muscul> contraction1 & ! l4 ,i w\ld ask y to ?9k r ( y\r p[] ( direct+ ! succession ( y\r own ?\ghts4 ,i am directly consci\s1 = in/ance1 t ! reason :y ,i am n[ ?9k+ ( ,causality1 & n 7say7 ( ,t>iff ,re=m1 is ! fact t ,i h conceiv$ ! design ( deliv]+ a c\rse ( lectures on ?is subject2 ! succession ( ideas :i* fl[ ?r\gh my m9d z ,i write or speak is only explicable by ref]5ce to an end--an end :i* ,i am /riv+ to br+ into actual be+4 ,9 su* volunt>ily conc5trat$ purposeful successions ( ?\ght ,i am imm$iately ex]cis+ causality3 & ?is causality does fur!r influ5ce ! ord] ( ev5ts 9 physical nature4 ,my p5 or my tongue moves 9 consequ5ce ( ?is /riv+ ( m9e1 ?\gh no d\bt = su* ef=ts to take place o!r physical conditions mu/ be presuppos$1 :i* are n :olly )9 my own control4 ,i am ! cause1 b n ! :ole or sole cause ( ^! physical di/urbances 9 ext]nal nature3 ,i am a cause b n an uncaus$ cause4 #dj ,my volition1 ?\gh x is n ! sole cause ( ! ev5t :i* ,i w1 is en\gh to give me a conception ( a cause :i* is ! sole cause ( ! ev5ts4 ,! attempt is ( c\rse sometimes made1 z x 0 made by ,hume1 to expla9 away ?is imm$iate consci\sness ( volition1 & to say t all t ,i imm$iately "k is ! succession ( my subjective exp]i5ces4 ,x may be cont5d$ t ,i don't "k1 any m ?an 9 ! case ( ext]nal ph5om5a1 t because ! ?\ght ( my lecture comes fir/ & ! ?\ght ( putt+ my p5 into ! ink to write x comes aft]w>ds1 !re=e ! "o ?\ght causes ! o!r4 ,h5ce x is important to po9t out t ,i h a negative exp]i5ce ) :i* to contra/ ! positive exp]i5ce4 ,i d n always1 ev5 z reg>ds my own inw>d exp]i5ces1 assume t succession implies ,causality4 ,suppos+1 z ,i speak or write1 a tw+e ( ! g\t sudd5ly introduces itself into ! succession ( my exp]i5ces3 !n ,i am consci\s ( no su* inn] connexion betwe5 ! new exp]i5ce & t :i* w5t be=e x4 ,!n ,i am z di/9ctly consci\s ( passivity--( n caus+ ! succession ( ev5ts :i* take place 9 my m9d--z ,i am 9 ! o!r case ( actively caus+ x4 ,if ! consci\sness ( ex]cis+ activity is a delusion1 :y does n t delusion occur 9 ! "o case z mu* z 9 ! o!r8 ,i hold !n t 9 ! consci\sness ( #da our own activity we get a real direct exp]i5ce ( ,causality4 ,:5 ,causality is int]pret$ to mean m]e necess>y connexion--l ! ma!matical connexion betwe5 f\r & twice two or ! logical connexion betwe5 ! premisses ( a ,syllogism & its conclusion1--its nature is fundam5tally misrepres5t$4 ,! ess5ce ( ,causality is n necess>y connexion b ,activity4 ,su* activity we enc\nt] 9 our own exp]i5ce ( volition & n[h]e else4#b ,n[1 if ! only cause ( :i* ,i am imm$iately consci\s is ! w ( a consci\s rational be+1 is x n reasonable to inf] t "s su* ag5cy is at "w 9 ! case ( ^? ph5om5a :i* we see no reason to attribute to ! volunt>y actions ( m5 & animals8 ,x is well kn[n t primitive man took ?is /ep4 ,primitive man _h no notion ( ! ',uni=mity ( ,nature'3 x is only v gradually t civiliz$ man has discov]$ x4 ,b primitive man nev] d\bt$ = "o in/ant ! law ( ,causality3 he nev] d\bt$ t = any *ange1 or at lea/ = any *ange ( ! k9d :i* mo/ frequ5tly attract$ 8 att5tion1 !re mu/ #db be a cause4 ,ev]y?+ t mov$ he suppos$ to be alive1 or to be "u ! influ5ce ( "s liv+ be+ m or less l himself4 ,if ! sea rag$1 he suppos$ t ! ,sea-god 0 angry4 ,if x did n ra9 to-day1 :5 x ra9$ ye/]day1 t 0 due to ! fav\r ( ! ,sky-god1 & s on4 ,! _w = him 0 full ( spirits4 ,! argum5t ( primitive man's unconsci\s b ?or\ghly s\nd ,metaphysic is well express$ by ! f9e l9es ( ,wordswor? 9 ! ,excursion3 ,once m to di/ant ages ( ! _w ,let u rev]t1 & place be=e our ?\ghts ,! face :i* rural solitude might we> ,to ! un5light5$ swa9s ( pagan ,greece4 --,9 t fair clime1 ! lonely h]dsman1 /ret*$ ,on ! s(t grass ?r\gh half a summ]'s day1 ,) music lull$ 8 indol5t repose3 ,&1 9 "s fit ( we>9ess1 if he1 ,:5 8 own brea? 0 sil5t1 *anc$ to he> ,a di/ant /ra91 f> sweet] ?an ! s\nds ,:i* 8 poor skill c\ld make1 8 fancy fet*$1 ,ev5 f ! blaz+ *>iot ( ! sun1 ,a be>dless ,y\?1 :o t\*$ a gold5 lute1 ,& fill$ ! illum9$ groves ) ravi%m5t4 ,! nightly hunt]1 lift+ a bright eye ,up t[>ds ! cresc5t moon1 ) grateful he>t ,call$ on ! lovely w&]] :o be/[$ ,t timely light1 to %>e 8 joy\s sport3 ,& h5ce1 a beam+ ,goddess ) h] ,nymphs1 ,across ! lawn & ?r\gh ! d>ksome grove1 7,n unaccompani$ ) tuneful notes ,by e*o multipli$ f rock or cave71 #dc ,swept 9 ! /orm ( *ace2 z moon & />s ,glance rapidly along ! cl\d$ heav51 ,:5 w9ds are bl[+ /rong4 ,! travell] slak$ ,8 ?ir/ f rill or gu%+ f\nt1 & ?ank$ ,! ,naiad4 ,sunbeams1 ^u di/ant hills ,glid+ apace1 ) %ad[s 9 _! tra91 ,might1 ) small help f fancy1 be trans=m$ ,into fleet ,oreads sport+ visibly4 ,! ,zephyrs fann+1 z !y pass$1 _! w+s1 ,lack$ n1 = love1 fair objects :om !y woo$ ,) g5tle :isp]4 ,)]$ b\ghs grotesque1 ,/ripp$ ( _! leaves & twigs by ho>y age1 ,f dep? ( %aggy cov]t peep+ =? ,9 ! l[ vale1 or on /eep m\nta9 side2 ,&1 sometimes1 int]mix$ ) /irr+ horns ,( ! live de]1 or goat's dep5d+ be>d1-- ,^! 7 ! lurk+ ,satyrs1 a wild brood ,( gamesome ,deities2 or ,pan himself1 ,! simple %eph]d's awe-inspir+ ,god6#c ,gr[+ exp]i5ce ( ! unity ( ,nature1 ( ! int]dep5d5ce ( all ! v>i\s =ces & dep>tm5ts ( ,nature1 h made su* a view ( x impossible to civiliz$ & educat$ man4 ,primitive man 0 q "r 9 argu+ t1 :]e he saw motion1 !re mu/ be consci\sness l 8 own4 ,b we h be5 l$ by ,sci5ce to believe t :atev] is ! cause ( any "o ph5om5on 7at lea/ 9 inanimate nature71 mu/ be ! cause ( all4 ,! int]connexion1 ! regul>ity1 ! ord] obs]vable 9 ph5om5a are too great to be ! result ( *ance or ( ! undesign$ concurr5ce ( a numb] ( #dd indep5d5t ag5cies3 & p]haps we may g on fur!r to argue t ?is "o cause mu/ be ! ultimate cause ev5 ( ^? ev5ts :i* are directly & imm$iately caus$ by our own wills4 ,b t is a "q :i* ,i w put aside = ! pres5t4 ,at lea/ = ! ev5ts ( physical nature !re mu/ be "o ,cause4 ,& if ! only sort ( cause we "k is a consci\s & rational be+1 !n we h ano!r mo/ p[]ful reason = believ+ t ! ultimate reality1 f :i* all o!r reality is d]iv$1 is ,m9d--a s+le consci\s ,m9d :i* we may n[ fur!r describe z n only ,?\ght or ,intellig5ce b also ,w4#d ,let me add ?is additional consid]ation 9 support ( ! conclusion t ! _w is n m]ely ?\ght by ,god b is also will$ by ,god4 ,:5 we talk ab\t ?\ght )\t w1 we are talk+ ab\t some?+ t we "k absolutely no?+ ab\t4 ,9 all ! consci\sness t we "k (1 9 e mom5t ( our own imm$iate wak+ exp]i5ce1 we f9d ?\ght1 feel+1 will+4 ,ev5 9 ! consci\sness ( animals !re appe>s to be some?+ analog\s to ^! ?ree sides or aspects ( consci\sness3 b at all ev5ts 9 develop$ human consci\sness we "k ( no su* ?+ z ?9k+ )\t will+4 ,all ?\ght involves att5tion1 & to att5d is to w4 ,if1 !re=e1 on ! gr\nds #de sugge/$ by ! ,hegelian or o!r po/-,kantian ,ideali/s1 we h be5 l$ to ?9k t ! ultimate ,reality is ,m9d or ,_s1 we %\ld naturally conclude by analogy t x mu/ be ,w z well z ,?\ght &--,i may add1 ?\gh x h>dly belongs to ! pres5t argum5t to insi/ ^u t--,feel+4 ,on ! o!r h& if1 ) m5 l ,s*op5hau] & ,ed\>d von ,h>tmann1#e we are conduct$ by ! appe>ances ( design 9 ,nature to ! idea t ,nature is /riv+ aft] some?+1 t ! ultimate ,reality is ,w1 we mu/ supplem5t t l9e ( argum5t by inf]r+ f ! analogy ( our own ,consci\sness t ,w )\t ,reason is an un9telligible & mean+less ab/raction1 & t 7z inde$ ev5 ,h>tmann saw7 ,s*op5hau]'s ,w )\t ,reason 0 z impossible an ab/raction z ! app>5tly w-less univ]sal ,?9k] ( ! ,hegelian3#f :ile aga9/ ,s*op5hau] & 8 m reasonable successor1 ,h>tmann1 ,i %\ld insi/ t an unconsci\s ,w is z un9telligible a contradiction z an unconsci\s ,reason4 ,s*op5hau] & ,hegel seem to h se51 ea* ( !m1 exactly #df half ( ! tru?3 ,god is n ,w )\t ,reason or ,reason )\t ,w1 b bo? ,reason & ,w4 ,& "h ,i mu/ try to meet an inevitable objection4 ,i d n say t ^! ?ree activities ( ! human intellect /& 9 ,god side by side ) ! same di/9ctness & 7if ,i may say s7 irr$ucibility t !y d 9 u4 ,:at feel+ is = a ,be+ :o has no mat]ial organism1 we c =m no di/9ct conception4 ,our ?\ght ) its clumsy processes ( inf]5ce f ! kn[n to ! unkn[n mu/ be v unlike :at ?\ght is 9 a ,be+ to :om no?+ is unkn[n4 ,all our ?\ght too involves g5]alization1 & 9 univ]sal concepts 7z ,mr4 ,bradley has %[n u7 mu* t 0 pres5t 9 ! liv+ exp]i5ce ( actual p]ception is necess>ily left out4 ,?\ght is b a sort ( reproduction--& a v imp]fect reproduction--( actual1 liv+1 s5sible exp]i5ce4 ,we _c suppose1 !n1 t 9 ,god !re is ! same di/9ction betwe5 actual pres5t exp]i5ce & ! univ]sal concepts employ$ 9 ?9k+ :i* !re is 9 u4 ,& s1 aga91 will+ mu/ be a v diff]5t ?+ 9 a be+ :o wills or creates ! objects ( 8 own ?\ght f :at x is 9 be+s :o c only a*ieve _! ends by di/+ui%+ 9 ! %>pe/ possible mann] betwe5 ! indef9ite multiplicity ( ?+s :i* !y "k b d n cause & ! t9y fragm5t #dg ( ! ,univ]se :i* by means ( ?is k !y c control4 ,nev]!less1 ?\gh all our ?\ghts ( ,god mu/ be inadequate1 x is by ?9k+ ( ,him z ,?\ght1 ,w & ,feel+--emancipat$ f ^? limitations :i* are obvi\sly due to human conditions & are inapplicable to a ,univ]sal ,m9d--t we %all atta9 to ! true/ k ( ,god :i* lies )9 our capacity4 ,d y f9d a difficulty 9 ! idea ( p>tial & inadequate k8 ,j ?9k1 !n1 ( our k ( o!r p's *>act]s--( :at goes on 9 o!r p's m9ds4 ,x is only by ! analogy ( our own imm$iate exp]i5ce t we c come to "k any?+ at all ( :at goes on 9 o!r p's m9ds4 ,&1 aft] all1 su* insight into o!r p's ?\ghts1 emotions1 motives1 int5tions1 *>act]s1 rema9s v imp]fect4 ,! difficulty is greate/ :5 ! m9d :i* we seek to p5etrate is f> above our own4 ,h[ little mo/ ( u "k :at x w\ld feel l to be a ,%akespe>e1 a ,moz>t1 or a ,plato6 ,& yet x w\ld be absurd to talk z if our k ( our fell[s 0 no k at all4 ,x is suffici5t n m]ely to guide our own ?\ghts & actions1 b to make possible sympa?y1 fri5d%ip1 love4 ,is x n s ) our k ( ,god8 ,! ,gno/icism :i* =gets ! imm5sity ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 ! ,div9e ,m9d & ! human is n less unreasonable--n #dh less oppos$ to ! pr9ciples on :i* we conduct our ?9k+ 9 e o!r dep>tm5t ( life--?an ! ,agno/icism :i* rejects probabilities because we _c h imm$iate c]ta9ties1 & insi/s on kn[+ no?+ because we _c "k ev]y?+4 ,! argum5t :i* inf]s t ,god is ,w f ! analogy ( our own consci\sness is "o :i* is 9 itself indep5d5t ( ,idealism4 ,x has be5 us$ by _m philosoph]s :o are ,reali/s1 su* z ,reid or ,dr4 ,m>t9eau1 z well z by ,ideali/s l ,b]keley1 or ,pfleid]]1 or ,lotze4 ,x does n necess>ily presuppose ,idealism2 b x does1 to my m9d1 fit 9 inf9itely bett] ) ! ideali/ic mode ( ?\ght ?an ) ! reali/ic4 ,if y hold t !re is no difficulty 9 suppos+ dead1 in]t matt] to exi/ )\t any m9d to ?9k x or "k x1 b t only a ,m9d c be suppos$ to cause *ange or motion1 y are assum+ a h>d & fa/ di/9ction betwe5 matt] & =ce :i* ! :ole tr5d ( mod]n ,sci5ce is t5d+ to break d[n4 ,x seems to imply ! old ,greek conception ( an in]t1 passive1 *>act]less hule :i* c only be act$ ^u f )\t4 ,! mod]n ,physici/1 ,i imag9e1 kn[s no?+ ( an in]t matt] :i* c nei!r attract nor repel1 ev5 if he does n def9itely emb>k on ! m speculative !ory :i* actually def9es ! atom or ! electron #di z a c5tre ( =ce4 ,activity belongs to ! v ess5ce ( matt] z und]/ood by mod]n ,sci5ce4 ,if matt] c exi/ )\t m9d1 !re is 7f ! sci5tific po9t ( view7 "s difficulty 9 cont5d+ t x _c likewise move or act )\t be+ influ5c$ by an extrane\s ,m9d4 ,if1 on ! o!r h&1 ) ! ,ideali/ we treat ! notion ( matt] )\t m9d z an un9telligible ab/raction1 t l9e ( ?\ght w\ld prep>e u to see 9 =ce no?+ b a mode ( m5tal action4 ,! ,ideali/ :o has already id5tifi$ matt] ) ! object ( ?\ght w f9d no difficulty 9 go+ on to see 9 =ce simply ! activity or expression or object ( ,w4 ,& if he le>ns f ! ,physici/ t we _c 9 ! la/ resort--f ! physical po9t ( view--di/+ui% matt] f =ce1 t w fit 9 v well ) ! metaphysical position :i* reg>ds ?\ght & w z simply two insep>able aspects ( ! life ( m9d4 ,& n[ ,i w return once m = a mom5t to ! ideali/ic argum5t4 ,i h no d\bt t _m ( y w h felt a difficulty 9 accept+ ! position t ! _w ) :i* we come 9 contact is m]ely a /ate ( our own or anybody else's consci\sness4 ,x is s obvi\s t 9 our exp]i5ce we are 9 contact ) a _w :i* we d n create2 :i* is :at x is :e!r we l x or n2 :i* opposes itself at e turn to our desires & #ej incl9ations4 ,y may h be5 conv9c$ t we "k no?+ ( any ext]nal _w except ! effects :i* x produces ^u consci\sness4 ,b1 y w say to y\rselves1 !re mu/ h be5 some?+ to cause ^! effects4 ,y are p]fectly "r 9 s ?9k+4 ,c]ta9ly 9 our exp]i5ce ( ! _w we are 9 contact ) a ,reality :i* is n any /ate ( our own m9d1 a ,reality :i* we d n create b simply discov]1 a ,reality f :i* are d]iv$ ! s5sations :i* we _c help feel+1 & ! objects :i* we _c help ?9k+4 ,s f> y are q "r4 ,b v (t51 :5 ! ,reali/ insi/s t !re mu/ be some?+ to cause 9 my m9d ?is appe>ance1 :i* ,i call my consci\sness ( a table1 he assumes all ! :ile t ?is some?+--! real table1 ! table 9 itself--is !re1 inside or beh9d ! ph5om5al table t ,i actually see & feel2 out !re1 9 space4 ,b if we 7 "r 9 our analysis ( space1 if we 7 "r 9 argu+ t space is made up ( intellectual relations#g & t #ea intellectual relations c h no be+ & no mean+ except 9 & = a m9d :i* appreh5ds !m1 !n x is obvi\s t y mu/ n ?9k ( ?is ,reality :i* is ! cause ( our exp]i5ce ( ext]nal objects1 z be+ !re1 z occupy+ space1 z be+ 'ext]nal4' ,if space be a =m ( our ?\ght1 or 79 ,kantian language7 a =m ( our s5sibility1 !n ! ,reality :i* is to h an exi/5ce 9 itself1 _c be 9 space4 ,a reality :i* is n 9 space c no long] be ?\ght ( z matt]3 :atev] else matt] 7z commonly conceiv$7 means1 x is c]ta9ly some?+ :i* occupies space4 ,n[ we "k ( no k9d ( exi/5ce :i* is n 9 space except ,m9d4 ,on ! ideali/ic view to :i* ,i h be5 endeav\r+ to lead y1 we are1 inde$1 ju/ifi$ 9 say+ t !re is a ,reality :i* is ! und]ly+ cause or gr\nd ( our exp]i5ces1 b t t ,reality is "o :i* we may describe z ,?\ght no less ?an z ,w4 ,x may int]e/ "s ( y to "k h[ ne> "o :o is (t5 consid]$ ! typical repres5tative ( naturali/ic1 if n mat]iali/ic1 modes ( ?\ght1 ultimately came to accept+ ?is id5tification4 ,let me read to y a passage f "o ( ,mr4 ,sp5c]'s lat] works--! ?ird volume ( 8 ,sociology3-- ',?is transfiguration1 :i* ! inquiries ( physici/s cont9ually increase1 is aid$ by t o!r #eb transfiguration result+ f metaphysical inquiries4 ,subjective analysis compels u to admit t our sci5tific int]pretations ( ! ph5om5a :i* objects pres5t1 are express$ 9 t]ms ( our own v>i\sly-comb9$ s5sations & ideas--are express$1 t is1 9 elem5ts belong+ to consci\sness1 :i* are b symbols ( ! some?+ beyond consci\sness4 ,?\gh analysis aft]w>ds re9/ates our primitive beliefs1 to ! ext5t ( %[+ t beh9d e gr\p ( ph5om5al manife/ations !re is always a nexus1 :i* is ! reality t rema9s fix$ amid appe>ances :i* are v>iable2#a yet we are %[n t ?is nexus ( reality is = ev] inaccessible to consci\sness4 ,& :51 once m1 we rememb] t ! activities con/itut+ consci\sness1 be+ rigor\sly b\nd$1 _c br+ 9 among !mselves ! activities beyond ! b\nds1 :i* !re=e seem unconsci\s1 ?\gh production ( ei!r by ! o!r seems to imply t !y are ( ! same ess5tial nature2 ?is necessity we are "u to ?9k ( ! ext]nal en]gy 9 t]ms ( ! int]nal en]gy1 gives r a spirituali/ic ?an a mat]iali/ic aspect to ! ,univ]se3 fur!r ?\ght1 h[ev]1 oblig+ u to recognize ! tru? t a conception giv5 9 ph5om5al manife/ations ( ?is ultimate en]gy c 9 no wise %[ u :at x is4'#h ,n[1 ,i ?9k ?is is "o ( ! passages :i* w\ld ju/ify ,mr4 ,bradley's well-kn[n epigram1 t ,mr4 ,h]b]t ,sp5c] has told u m ab\t ! ,unkn[able ?an ! ra%e/ ( !ologians has ev] v5tur$ to tell u ab\t ,god4 #ec ,ev5 ,kant1 :o is l>gely responsible = ! mi/akes ab\t ,causality aga9/ :i* ?is lecture has be5 a prote/--,i mean ! t5d5cy to resolve x into necess>y connexion--did 9 ! end come to admit t 9 ! l>ge resort we come into contact ) ,causality only 9 our own ,wills4 ,i owe ! ref]5ce to ,pr(essor ,w>d1 & w quote ! p>agraph 9 :i* he introduces x3-- ',pres5tation1 ,feel+1 ,conation1 are ev] "o insep>able :ole1 & advance cont9u\sly to high] & high] =ms4 ,b = ! fact t psy*ology 0 9 ! fir/ in/ance /udi$1 n = its own sake1 b 9 subs]vi5ce to speculation1 ?is c>d9al importance ( activity w\ld n h be5 s long ov]look$4 ,we %\ld n h he>d s mu* ( passive s5sations & s little ( active movem5ts4 ,x is especially int]e/+ to f9d t ev5 ,kant at l5g?--9 8 late/ "w1 ! po/hum\s treatise on ! ,connexion ( ,physics & ,metaphysics1 only rec5tly discov]$ & publi%$--came to see ! fundam5tal "* ( volunt>y movem5t4 ,i w v5ture to quote "o s5t5ce3 ,we %\ld n recognise ! mov+ =ces ( matt]1 n ev5 ?r\gh exp]i5ce1 if we 7 n consci\s ( our own activity 9 ourselves ex]t+ acts ( repulsion1 approximation1 etc4 ,b to ,ma9e de ,biran1 (t5 call$ ! ,fr5* ,kant1 to ,s*op5hau]1 &1 f9ally1 to our own ,briti% psy*ologi/s1 ,br[n1 ,hamilton1 ,ba91 ,sp5c]1 is especially due ! m]it ( see+ ! p>am\nt importance ( ! active side ( exp]i5ce4 ,to ?is !n prim>ily1 & n to any m]ely #ed intellectual function1 we may safely ref] ! category ( causality4'#i ,i may add t ,pr(essor ,w>d's ,naturalism & ,agno/icism1 f :i* ,i h quot$1 con/itutes ! mo/ brilliant & important mod]n def5ce ( ! doctr9e :i* ,i h endeav\r$ v inadequately to set be=e y 9 ?is lecture4 ,x is a rem>kable fact t ! typical expon5t ( popul> s-call$ 'sci5tific' ,agno/icism1 & ! f\nd] ( t high] metaphysical ,agno/icism :i* has play$ s l>ge a "p 9 ! hi/ory ( mod]n ,philosophy1 %\ld be=e _! dea?s h bo? made confessions :i* really am\nt to an abjuration ( all ,agno/icism4 ,if ! ultimate ,reality is to be ?\ght ( z a rational ,w1 analog\s to ! w :i* ea* ( u is consci\s ( himself hav+ or be+1 he is no long] ! ,unkn[n or ! ,unkn[able1 b ! ,god ( ,religion1 :o has reveal$ ,himself 9 ! consci\sness ( man1 'made 9 ! image ( ,god4' ,:at m ab\t ,himself we may also hold to be reveal$ 9 ! human _s1 ,i hope to consid] 9 our next lecture4 ,b1 mean:ile1 a ^w may be utt]$ 9 answ] to ! "q :i* may v probably be ask$--,is ,god a ,p]son8 ,a complete answ] to ! "q w\ld involve elaborate discussions1 b = our pres5t purpose ! "q may be answ]$ v #ee briefly4 ,if we are ju/ifi$ 9 ?9k+ ( ,god aft] ! analogy ( a human s\l--if we are ju/ifi$ 9 ?9k+ ( ,him z a self-consci\s ,be+ :o ?9ks1 feels1 & wills1 & :o is1 moreov] 7if ,i may a little anticipate ! subject ( our next lecture7 9 relation )1 capable ( lov+ & be+ lov$ by o!r su* be+s--!n x seems mo/ natural to speak ( ,god's exi/5ce z p]sonal4 ,= to be a self-consci\s be+--consci\s ( itself & o!r be+s1 ?9k+1 will+1 feel+1 lov+--is :at we mean by be+ a p]son4 ,if any "o pref]s to speak ( ,god z 'sup]-p]sonal1' !re is no great objection to s do+1 provid$ t phrase is n made 7z x (t5 is7 an excuse = really ?9k+ ( ,god aft] ! analogy ( "s k9d ( exi/5ce l[] ?an t ( p]sons--z a =ce1 an unconsci\s sub/ance1 or m]ely a "n = ! totality ( ?+s4 ,b = myself1 ,i pref] to say t our own self-consci\sness gives u only an ideal ( ! highe/ type ( exi/5ce :i* x nev]!less v imp]fectly satisfies1 & !re=e ,i w\ld r ?9k ,god is a ,p]son 9 a f> tru]1 high]1 m complete s5se ?an t 9 :i* any human be+ c be a p]son4 ,god alone fully realizes ! ideal ( ,p]sonality4 ,! ess5ce ( ,p]sonality is some?+ positive3 x signifies to u ! highe/ k9d ( be+ )9 our k--n 7z is too (t5 suppos$7 ! m]e limitations #ef & re/ra9ts :i* *>act]ize human consci\s life z we "k x 9 ourselves4 ,if we are ju/ifi$ 9 ?9k+ ( ,god aft] ! analogy ( ! highe/ exi/5ce )9 our k1 we _h bett] call ,him a ,p]son4 ,! ^w is no d\bt inadequate to ! reality1 z is all ! language t we c employ ab\t ,god2 b x is at lea/ m adequate ?an ! t]ms employ$ by ^? :o scruple to speak ( ,god z a ,p]son4 ,x is at lea/ m adequate & m intellig5t ?an to speak ( ,him z a =ce1 a sub/ance1 a 'some?+ n ourselves :i* makes = righte\sness4' ,?+s d n 'make = righte\sness'2 & 9 us+ ! t]m ,p]son we %all at lea/ make x cle> t we d n ?9k ( ,him z a '?+1' or a collection ( ?+s1 or a vague sub/ratum ( ?+s1 or ev5 a m]e totality ( m9ds l our own4#aj ,,lit]ature ,z has be5 expla9$ 9 ?is ,lecture1 _m ideali/ic writ]s :o insi/ ^u ! necessity ( ,god z a univ]sal1 kn[+ ,m9d to expla9 bo? ! exi/5ce ( ! _w & our k ( x1 are m or less ambigu\s ab\t ! "q :e!r ! div9e ,m9d is to be ?\ght ( z will+ or caus+ ! _w1 ?\gh passages occur 9 ! writ+s ( mo/ ( !m :i* t5d 9 ?is direction4 ',god #eg mu/ be ?\ght ( z creat+ ! objects ( 8 own ?\ght' is a p]fectly or?odox ,hegelian =mula4 ,among ! ideali/ic writ]s 7besides ,b]keley7 :o correct ?is--z x seems to me--"o-sid$ t5d5cy1 & :o accept on ! :ole ! view ( ! div9e ,causality tak5 9 ?is ,lecture1 may be m5tion$ ,lotze1 ! #i? ,book ( ^: ,microcosmus 7translat$ by ,miss ,elizabe? ,hamilton & ,miss ,con/ance ,jones7 or ! ?ird ,book ( 8 ,logic 7translation ed4 by ,pr(4 ,bosanquet71 may v well be read by !mselves 78 views may also be /udi$ 9 8 %ort ,philosophy ( ,religion--two translations1 by ! late ,mrs4 ,conybe>e & by ,pr(essor ,ladd72 ,pfleid]]1 ,philosophy & ,developm5t ( ,religion1 especially *apt] v42 & ,pr(essor ,w>d's ,naturalism & ,agno/icism4 ,among ! non-ideali/ic writ]s :o h bas$ _! argum5t = ! exi/5ce ( ,god ma9ly or l>gely ^u ! consid]ation t ,causality is un9telligible ap>t f a rational ,w1 may be m5tion$--among old] writ]s ,reid1 ,essays on ! ,active ,p[]s ( ,man1 ,essay ,i4 7especially *apt] v471 & among m rec5t ones ,m>t9eau1 ,a ,/udy ( ,religion4 ,fl9t's ,!ism may be recomm5d$ z "o ( ! be/ attempts to /ate ! !i/ic case ) a m9imum ( te*nical ,metaphysic4 ,two little books by ,pr(essor ,&rew ,se? 7n[ ,se? ,pr+le-,pattison71 ?\gh n prim>ily occupi$ ) ! religi\s problem1 may be m5tion$ z v useful introductions to ,philosophy--,! ,scotti% ,philosoph]s & ,hegelianism & ,p]sonality4 #a ,( c\rse deeply religi\s m5 l ,gre5 :o h held ?is view did n admit1 or did n realize1 su* consequ5ces4 ,! t5d5cy "h criticiz$ is und\bt$ly d]iv$ f ,hegel1 b passages sugge/ive ( ! opposite view c be extract$ f 8 writ+s1 e4g43 ',god1 h[ev]1 z subjective ,p[]1 is n simply w1 int5tion1 etc41 b r imm$iate ,cause' 7,philosophy ( ,religion1 ,eng4 trans41 ii4 p4 #abi74 #b ,! idea ( ,causality 0 by ,kant id5tifi$ ) ! idea ( logical connexion1 i4e4 ! relation ( ! premisses ( a syllogism to its conclusion2 b ?is does n involve "t at all1 & "t is ess5tial to ! idea ( ,causality4 ,= an admirable v9dication ( our imm$iate consci\sness ( ,causality see ,pr(essor ,/\t's *apt] on ',! ,concept ( ,m5tal ,activity' 9 ,analytic ,psy*ology 7,book ,,ii4 *ap4 i474 #c ,excursion1 ,book ,,iv4 #d ,= ! fur!r developm5t ( ?is argum5t see ,lecture ,,iv4 #e ,see especially ! e>li] *apt]s ( ,! ,philosophy ( ! ,unconsci\s 7translat$ by ,w4 ,c4 ,c\pl&74 #f ,( c\rse passages c be quot$ f ,hegel himself :i* sugge/ ! idea t ,god is ,w z well z ,?\ght2 ,i am speak+ ( ! g5]al t5d5cy ( ,hegel & _m ( 8 disciples4 ,"s rec5t ,hegelians1 su* z ,pr(essor ,boyce1 seem to be less op5 to ?is criticism1 b !re are difficulties 9 ?9k+ ( ,god z ,w & yet cont9u+ to speak ( ultimate ,reality z out ( ,"t4 #g ,x may be object$ t ?is is true only ( 'conceptual space' 7t is1 ! space ( ,geometry71 b n ( 'p]ceptual space1' i4e4 space z x pres5ts itself 9 a *ild's p]ception ( an object4 ,! di/9ction is no d\bt f _m po9ts ( view important1 b we mu/ n speak ( 'conceptual space' & 'p]ceptual space' z if !y _h no?+ to d ) "o ano!r4 ,if ! relations ( conceptual space 7 n 9 "s s5se conta9$ or impli$ 9 our p]ceptions1 no am\nt ( ab/raction or reflection c\ld get ! relations out ( !m4 #h ,sociology1 vol4 iii4 p4 #agb4 #i ,naturalism & ,agno/icism1 vol4 ii4 pp4 #aia-b4 #aj ,= a fur!r discussion ( ! subject ! read] may be ref]r$ to my essay on ',p]sonality 9 ,god & ,man' 9 ,p]sonal ,idealism4 #eh ,,lecture ,,iii ,,god ,,& ,,! ,,moral ,,consci\sness ,a c\rse ( purely metaphysical reason+ has l$ u up to ! idea ( ,god--t is to say1 ( a consci\s & rational ,m9d & ,w = :i* ! _w exi/s & by :i* t _w & all o!r spirits are caus$ to exi/4 ,i h pass$ ov] a ho/ ( difficulties--! relation ( ,god to "t1 ! "q :e!r or 9 :at s5se ! _w may be suppos$ to h a beg9n+ & an end1 ! "q ( ! relation 9 :i* ,god1 ! univ]sal ,m9d1 /&s to o!r m9ds1 ! "q ( ,free-w4 ,^! are difficulties :i* w\ld involve elaborate metaphysical discussions3 ,i %all return to "s ( !m 9 a lat] lecture4 ,x mu/ suffice = ! pres5t to say t m ?an "o answ] to _m ( ^! que/ions might conceivably be giv5 consi/5tly ) ! view ( ! div9e nature :i* ,i h cont5d$ =4 ,all t ,i ne$ insi/ on = my pres5t purpose is-- 7#a7 ,t ,god is p]sonal 9 ! s5se t ,he is a #ei self-consci\s1 ?9k+1 will+1 feel+ ,be+1 di/+ui%able f ea* & all less p]fect m9ds4 7#b7 ,t all o!r m9ds are 9 "s s5se br\ght into be+ by ! div9e ,m9d1 :ile at ! same "t !y h su* a resemblance to1 or community ( nature )1 _! s\rce t !y may be reg>d$ z n m]e creations b z 9 "s s5se reproductions1 m or less imp]fect1 ( t s\rce1 approximat+ 9 v>i\s degrees to t ideal ( ,p]sonality :i* is realis$ p]fectly 9 ,god alone4 ,9 proportion z !y approximate to t ideal1 !y are causes ( _! own actions1 & c claim = !mselves ! k9d ( causality :i* we attribute 9 its p]fection to ,god4 ,i cont5t myself n[ ) claim+ = ! develop$1 rational human self a measure ( fre$om to ! ext5t :i* ,i h j def9$--t x is ! real cause ( its own actions4 ,x is capable ( self-det]m9ation4 ,! man's actions are det]m9$ by 8 "*4 ,t is q consi/5t ) ! admission t ,god is ! ultimate cause ( a self ( su* & su* a "* com+ into exi/5ce at su* & su* a "t4 7#c7 ,i w n say t ! conception ( ^? :o reg>d ! human m9d z lit]ally a "p ( ! div9e1 s t ! human consci\sness is 9 no s5se outside ( ! div9e1 is necess>ily1 = ^? :o hold x1 inconsi/5t ) ! conception ( #fj p]sonality bo? 9 ,god & man3 ,i w only say t ,i d n myself und]/& su* an ass]tion4 ,i reg>d ! human m9d z d]iv$ f ,god1 b n z be+ "p ( ,god4 ,fur!r discussion ( ?is "q ,i res]ve = my next lecture4 ,we h l$ up to ! idea ( ,god's exi/5ce4 ,b s f> we h discov]$ no?+ at all ab\t ,8 "* or purposes4 ,& x is cle> t )\t "s su* k ! belief 9 ,god c\ld be ( little or no value f any religi\s or moral po9t ( view4 ,h[ are we to le>n any?+ ab\t ! "* ( ,god8 ,i imag9e t at ! pres5t day few p w attempt to prove ! goodness or b5evol5ce ( ,god f an empirical exam9ation ( ! facts ( ,nature or ( ,hi/ory4 ,!re is1 no d\bt1 mu* 9 ,hi/ory & 9 ,nature to sugge/ ! idea ( ,b5evol5ce1 b !re is mu* to sugge/ a directly opposite conclusion4 ,few ( u at ! pres5t day are likely to be mu* impress$ by ! argum5t :i* ,paley bases ^u ! exi/5ce ( ! little app>atus 9 ! ?roat by :i* x is b5evol5tly arrang$ t1 ?\gh con/antly on ! po9t ( be+ *ok$ by our food1 we h>dly ev] are *ok$4 ,i _c help rem9d+ y ( ! *>act]i/ic passage3 ',consid] a city-fea/1' he exclaims1 ':at m&ucation1 :at deglutition1 & yet n "o ,ald]man *ok$ 9 a c5tury6' ,su* argum5ts look at ! matt] f ! po9t #fa ( view ( ! ,ald]man3 ! po9t ( view ( ! turtle & ! turkey is entirely =gott54 ,i w\ld n = a mom5t speak disrespectfully ( ! argum5t f design4 ,d>w9ism has *ang$ its =m1 b anybody :o reads ,ed\>d von ,h>tmann's ,philosophy ( ! ,unconsci\s is n likely to rise f its p]usal ) ! idea t ! evid5ces ( design h be5 de/roy$ by ,d>w9ism1 :atev] he may ?9k ( ,h>tmann's /range conclusion t ! design c be expla9$ by ! op]ation ( an unconsci\s ,m9d or ,w4 ,! philosophical argum5t ( ,mr4 ,r4 ,b4 ,haldane 9 ,! ,pa?way to ,reality1#a & ! purely biological argum5t ( ,dr4 ,john ,haldane 9 8 two lectures on ,life & ,me*anism1 & /ill m rec5tly ! brilliant & v important "w ( ,m4 ,b]gson1 ,l',evolution ,creatrice h1 z x seems to me1 abundantly %[n t x is z impossible z ev] x 0 to expla9 ev5 ! gr[? ( a plant )\t suppos+ t 9 x & all organic ,nature !re is a /riv+ t[>ds an end4 ,b ! argum5t f design1 ?\gh x te/ifies to purpose 9 ! ,univ]se1 tells u no?+ ab\t ! nature ( t purpose4 ,purpose is "o ?+2 b5evol5t purpose is ano!r4 ,nobody's e/imate ( ! comp>ative am\nt ( happ9ess & mis]y 9 ! _w is wor? mu*2 b = my own "p1 if ,i tru/$ simply to empirical evid5ce1 #fb ,i %\ld n be dispos$ to d m ?an slightly att5uate ! pessimism ( ! ,pessimi/s4 ,at all ev5ts1 ,nature is f> too 'r$ 9 too? & claw' to p]mit ( our bas+ an argum5t = a b5evol5t deity ^u a contemplation ( ! facts ( animal & human life4 ,!re is b "o s\rce f :i* su* an idea c possibly be d]iv$--f ! evid5ce ( our own moral consci\sness4 ,our moral ideals are ! "w ( ,reason4 ,t ! happ9ess ( _m ought to be pref]r$ to ! happ9ess ( "o1 t pleasure is bett] ?an pa91 t goodness is ( m value ?an pleasure1 t "s pleasures are bett] ?an o!rs--su* judgem5ts are z mu* ! "w ( our own ,reason1 !y are z mu* self-evid5t tru?s1 z ! tru? t two & two make f\r1 or t ,a _c be bo? ,b & n ,b at ! same "t1 or t two /raight l9es _c enclose a space4 ,we h e "r to assume t su* tru?s hold good = ,god z well z = man4 ,if su* ,idealism z ,i h endeav\r$ to lead y to is well f\nd$1 ! m9d :i* kn[s comes f ,god1 & !re=e ! k :i* t m9d possesses mu/ also be tak5 z an imp]fect or fragm5t>y reproduction ( ,god's k4 ,& ! ,!i/ :o rejects ,idealism b admits ! exi/5ce ( self-evid5t tru?s w be equally ju/ifi$ 9 assum+ t1 = ,god z well z = man1 two & two mu/ make #fc f\r4 ,we h j z mu* "r to assume t our moral ideas--our ideas ( value--mu/ come f ,god too4 ,= ,god too1 z = u1 !re mu/ exi/ ! idea1 ! ultimate category ( ! good2 & our judgem5ts ( value--judgem5ts t su* & su* an end is good or wor? /riv+ =--9 s f> z !y are true judgem5ts1 mu/ be suppos$ to repres5t ,8 judgem5ts4 ,we are consci\s1 9 proportion z we are rational1 ( pursu+ ends :i* we judge to be good4 ,if su* judgem5ts reveal ,god's judgem5ts1 ,god mu/ be suppos$ to aim likewise at an ideal ( good--! same ideal :i* is reveal$ to u by our moral judgem5ts4 ,9 ^! judgem5ts !n we h a revelation1 ! only possible revelation1 ( ! "* ( ,god4 ,! argum5t :i* ,i h sugge/$ is simply a some:at exact] /atem5t ( ! popul> idea t ,consci5ce is ! voice ( ,god4 ,fur!r to v9dicate ! idea ( ! exi/5ce1 au?ority1 objective validity ( ,consci5ce w\ld lead u too f> away into ! region ( ,moral ,philosophy = our pres5t subject4 ,i w only attempt v briefly to gu>d aga9/ "s possible misund]/&+s1 & to meet "s obvi\s objections3 7#a7 ,x ne$ h>dly be po9t$ out t ! ass]tion ( ! exi/5ce ( ! ,moral ,consci\sness is n 9 ! slighte/ degree inconsi/5t ) recognis+ its gradual gr[? & developm5t4 ,! #fd moral faculty1 l e o!r faculty or aspect or activity ( ! human s\l1 has gr[n gradually4 ,no rational man d\bts ! validity--no ,ideali/ d\bts ! a priori "*--( our ma!matical judgem5ts because probably monkeys & possibly primitive m5 _c c\nt1 & c]ta9ly _c p]=m m ?an ! v simple/ ari?metical op]ations4 ,/ill less d we d\bt ! validity ( ma!matical reason+ because n only *ildr5 & savages1 b sometimes ev5 di/+ui%$ classical s*ol>s--a ,macaulay1 a ,mat!w ,arnold1 a ,t4 ,s4 ,evans1--7 :olly incapable ( und]/&+ v simple ma!matical argum5ts4 ,equally little d we d5y a real diff]5ce betwe5 h>mony & discord because p may be f\nd :o see no diff]5ce betwe5 ',god save ! ,k+' & ',pop goes ! ,weasel4' ,self-evid5t tru? does n mean tru? :i* is evid5t to ev]ybody4 7#b7 ,x is n d\bt$ t ! gradual evolution ( our actual moral ideas--our actual ideas ab\t :at is "r or wrong 9 p>ticul> cases--has be5 l>gely influ5c$ by education1 environm5t1 association1 social pressure1 sup]/ition1 p]haps natural selection--9 %ort1 all ! ag5cies by :i* naturali/ic ,morali/s try to acc\nt = ! exi/5ce ( ,morality4 ,ev5 ,euclid1 or :atev] 8 mod]n sub/itute may be1 has to be taught2 b t does n %[ t ,geometry is an arbitr>y sy/em #fe inv5t$ by ! +5i\s & int]e/$ devices ( ^? :o want to get money by tea*+ x4 ,ari?metic 0 inv5t$ l>gely z an in/rum5t ( comm]ce2 b x c\ld n h be5 inv5t$ if !re 7 really no su* ?+s z numb] & quantity1 or if ! human m9d _h no orig9al capacity = recogniz+ !m4 ,our sci5tific ideas1 our political ideas1 our ideas ^u a ?\s& subjects h be5 p>tly develop$1 p>tly ?w>t$ & di/ort$ 9 _! gr[?1 by simil> influ5ces4 ,b1 h[ev] great ! difficulty ( gett+ rid ( ^! di/ort+ influ5ces & fac+ su* que/ions 9 a p]fectly dry light1 nobody sugge/s t objective tru? on su* matt]s is non-exi/5t or = ev] unatta9able4 ,a claim = objective validity = ! moral judgem5t does n mean a claim = infallibility on behalf ( any individual ,consci5ce4 ,we may make mi/akes 9 ,morals j z we may make mi/akes 9 ,sci5ce1 or ev5 9 pure ,ma!matics4 ,if a class ( =ty small boys are ask$ to d a sum1 !y w probably n all br+ out ! same answ]3 b nobody d\bts t "o answ] alone is "r1 ?\gh ari?metical capacity is a v>iable quantity4 ,:at is meant is m]ely t1 if ,i am "r 9 affirm+ t ?is is good1 y _c be likewise "r 9 say+ t x is bad3 & t we h "s capacity--?\gh d\btless a v>iable capacity--( judg+ :i* is ! true #ff view4 ,h5ce our moral judgem5ts1 9 s f> z !y are true judgem5ts1 mu/ be tak5 to be reproductions 9 u ( ! ?\ght ( ,god4 ,to %[ t an idea has be5 gradually develop$1 tells u no?+ z to its tru? or falsehood--"o way or ! o!r4 7#c7 ,9 comp>+ ! self-evid5ce ( moral to t ( ma!matical judgem5ts1 x is n sugge/$ t our moral judgem5ts 9 detail are z c]ta91 z cle> & %>ply def9$1 z ma!matical judgem5ts1 or t !y c claim s univ]sal a cons5sus among ! compet5t4 ,:at is meant is m]ely 7a7 t ! notion ( good 9 g5]al is an ultimate category ( ?\ght2 t x conta9s a mean+ intelligible n p]haps to e individual human s\l1 b to ! normal1 develop$1 human consci\sness2 & 7b7 t ! ultimate tru? ( morals1 if x is se5 at all1 mu/ be se5 imm$iately4 ,an ultimate moral tru? _c be d$uc$ f1 or prov$ by1 any o!r tru?4 ,y _c prove t pleasure is bett] ?an pa91 or t virtue is bett] ?an pleasure1 to any "o :o judges diff]5tly4 ,x does n foll[ t all m5 h an equally cle> & delicate moral consci\sness4 ,! p[] ( discrim9at+ moral values diff]s z widely z ! p[] ( di/+ui%+ musical s\nds1 or ( appreciat+ :at is excell5t 9 music4 ,"s m5 may be almo/ or altoge!r )\t su* a p[] ( moral discrim9ation1 j z "s m5 are :olly #fg de/itute ( an e> = music2 :ile ! high] degrees ( moral appreciation are ! possession ( ! few r ?an ( ! _m4 ,moral insight is n possess$ by all m5 9 equal measure4 ,moral g5ius is z r>e z any o!r k9d ( g5ius4 7#d7 ,:5 we attribute ,morality to ,god1 x is n meant t ! conduct :i* is "r = m5 9 detail ought to be or c\ld possibly 9 all cases be practis$ by ,god4 ,x is a *ildi% objection 7?\gh x is sometimes made by mod]n philosoph]s :o %\ld "k bett]7 to allege ) ,ari/otle t ,god _c be suppos$ to make or keep contracts4 ,& 9 ! same way1 :5 we claim univ]sal validity = our moral judgem5ts1 we d n mean t ! rules suitable = human conduct w\ld be ! same = be+s diff]5tly organiz$ & con/itut$4 ,our rules ( sexual ,morality are cle>ly applicable only to sexually con/itut$ be+s4 ,:at is meant 9 ass]t+ t ^! rules are univ]sally & objectively valid is t ^! are ! rules :i* e rational intellig5ce1 9 proportion z x is rational1 w recognize z be+ suitable1 or conducive to ! ideal life1 9 be+s con/itut$ z we are4 ,! tru? t p]man5t monogam\s m>riage repres5ts ! true type ( sexual relations = human be+s w be none ! less an objectively valid e?ical tru?1 because ! l[] animals are bel[ x1 :ile sup]ior be+s1 #fh x may be1 are above x4 ,univ]sal love is none ! less ! absolute moral ideal because x w\ld be absurd to say t bea/s ( prey d wrong 9 dev\r+ o!r creatures1 or because w> is sometimes necess>y z a means to ! end ( love at our pres5t imp]fect /age ( social & intellectual developm5t4 ,! means to ! highe/ good v>y ) circum/ances2 ! am\nt ( good t is atta9able 9 su* & su* circum/ances v>ies also2 consequ5tly ! "r c\rse ( conduct w be diff]5t = be+s diff]5tly con/itut$ or plac$ "u diff]5t circum/ances3 b ! pr9ciples :i*1 9 ! view ( a p]fect intellig5ce1 w\ld det]m9e :at is ! "r c\rse = diff]5t be+s 9 diff]5t circum/ances w be always ! same4 ,! ultimate pr9ciples ( our moral judgem5t1 e4g4 t love is bett] ?an hate1 are j z applicable to ,god z !y are to u4 ,our conception ( ! highe/ good may be inadequate2 b we c]ta9ly %all n atta9 to great] adequacy1 or a ne>] approa* to ultimate tru?1 by flatly contradict+ our own moral judgem5ts4 ,x w\ld be j z reasonable to argue t because ! law ( gravitation might be prov$1 f ! po9t ( view ( ! highe/ k1 to be an inadequate /atem5t ( ! tru?1 & all inadequacy involves "s error1 !re=e we _h bett] assume t f ! po9t ( view ( ,god !re is no diff]5ce :atev] #fi betwe5 attraction & repulsion4 ,all argum5ts = :at is call$ a 'sup]-moral' ,deity or a 'sup]-moral' ,absolute are op5 to ?is fatal objection3 moral judgem5ts _c possibly re/ ^u any?+ b ! moral consci\sness1 & yet ^! doctr9es contradict ! moral consci\sness4 ,! idea ( good is d]iv$ f ! moral consci\sness4 ,:5 a man decl>es t f ! po9t ( view ( ! ,univ]se all ?+s are v good1 he gets ! idea ( good f 8 own moral consci\sness1 & is assum+ ! objective validity ( its dictates4 ,8 judgem5t is an e?ical judgem5t z mu* z m9e :5 ,i say t to me "s ?+s 9 ?is _w appe> v bad4 ,if he is n entitl$ to assume ! validity ( 8 e?ical judgem5ts1 8 proposition is false or mean+less4 ,if he is entitl$ to assume _! validity1 :y %\ld he di/ru/ t same moral consci\sness :5 x affirms 7z x und\bt$ly does7 t pa9 & s9 are = ev] bad1 & n 7z our 'sup]-moral' ,religioni/s sugge/7 additional arti/ic t\*es :i* only add to ! ae/hetic effect ( ! :ole8 ,i %all n[ proce$ to develop "s ( ! consequ5ces :i* 7z x appe>s to me7 fl[ f ! doctr9e t our belief 9 ! goodness ( ,god is an inf]5ce f our own moral consci\sness3 7#a7 ,x ?r[s light on ! relations betwe5 ,religion & ,morality4 ,! *ampions ( e?ical #gj education z a sub/itute = ,religion & ( e?ical societies z a sub/itute = ,*ur*es are fond ( assum+ t ,religion is n only unnecess>y to1 b actually de/ructive (1 ! intr9sic au?ority ( ! moral law4 ,if we suppos$ ) a few !ologians 9 ! mo/ deg5]ate p]iods ( ,!ology 7) ,william ( ,occam1 "s extreme ,calv9i/s1 & a few eighte5?-c5tury div9es l ,ar*deacon ,paley7 t actions are "r or wrong m]ely because will$ by ,god--mean+ by ,god simply a p[]ful be+ )\t goodness or moral "*1 !n und\bt$ly ! ,secul>i/s w\ld be "r4 ,if a religi\s ,morality implies t ,virtue means m]ely 79 ,paley's words7 '! do+ good to mank9d 9 ob$i5ce to ! w ( ,god & = ! sake ( ev]la/+ happ9ess' 7s t if ,god 7 to w murd] & adult]y1 ^? practices w\ld =?) become m]itori\s71 !n und\bt$ly x w\ld be bett] to tea* ,morality )\t ,religion ?an ) x4 ,b t is a c>icature ( ! true tea*+ ( ,*ri/ or ( any consid]able ,*ri/ian !ologian4 ,und\bt$ly we mu/ ass]t :at is call$ ! 'indep5d5ce' ( ! moral judgem5t4 ,! judgem5t 'to love is bett] ?an to hate' has a mean+ complete 9 itself1 :i* conta9s no ref]5ce :atev] to any !ological presupposition4 ,x is a judgem5t :i* is1 & :i* c intelligibly be1 made by p ( all religions or ( none4 ,b #ga we may /ill raise ! "q :e!r ! validity ( t judgem5t c be def5d$ )\t !ological implications4 ,& ,i am prep>$ mo/ di/9ctly to ma9ta9 t x _c4 ,^! moral judgem5ts claim objective validity4 ,:5 we say '?is is "r1' we d n mean m]ely ',i approve ?is c\rse ( conduct1' '?is conduct gives me a ?rill ( satisfaction1 a feel+ ( approbation1 a pleasure ( ! moral s5se4' ,if t 7 all t 0 meant1 x w\ld be p]fectly possible t ano!r p]son might feel an equally satisfactory gl[ ( approbation at conduct ( a precisely opposite "* )\t ei!r ( !m be+ wrong4 ,a bull-fight fills mo/ ,spani>ds ) feel+s ( lively approbation1 & mo/ ,engli%m5 ) feel+s ( acute disapprobation4 ,if su* moral judgem5ts 7 m]e feel+s1 nei!r ( !m w\ld be wrong4 ,!re c\ld be no "q ( objective rightness or wrongness4 ,mu/>d is n objectively nice or objectively na/y3 x is simply nice to "s p & na/y to o!rs4 ,! mu/>d-lov] has no "r to condemn ! mu/>d-hat]1 or ! mu/>d-hat] ! mu/>d-lov]4 ,if ,morality 7 m]ely a matt] ( feel+ or emotion1 actions w\ld n be objectively "r or objectively wrong2 b simply "r to "s p1 wrong to o!rs4 ,hume w\ld be "r 9 hold+ ! morality ( an action to consi/ simply 9 ! pleasure x gives to ! p]son :o #gb contemplates x4 ,rightness ?us becomes simply a "n = ! fact ( social approbation4#b ,& yet surely ! v he>t ( ! affirmation :i* ! moral consci\sness makes 9 ea* ( u is t "r & wrong are n matt]s ( m]e subjective feel+4 ,:5 ,i ass]t '?is is "r1' ,i d n claim p]sonal infallibility4 ,i may1 inde$1 be wrong1 z ,i may be wrong 9 my political or sci5tific !ories4 ,b ,i d mean t ,i ?9k ,i am "r2 & t1 if ,i am "r1 y _c also be "r :5 y affirm t ?is same action is wrong4 ,?is objective validity is ! v core & c5tre ( ! idea ( ,duty or moral obligation4 ,t is :y x is s important to ass]t t moral judgem5ts are ! "w ( ,reason1 n ( a suppos$ moral s5se or any o!r k9d ( feel+4 ,feel+s may v>y 9 diff]5t m5 )\t any ( !m be+ 9 ! wrong2 r$ really is ! same z gre5 to a col\r-bl9d p]son4 ,:at we mean :5 we talk ab\t ! exi/5ce ( ,duty is t ?+s are "r or wrong1 no matt] :at y or ,i ?9k ab\t !m--t ! laws ( ,morality #gc are q z mu* indep5d5t ( my p]sonal lik+s & dislik+s z ! physical laws ( ,nature4 ,t is :at is meant by ! 'objectivity' ( ! moral law4 ,n[1 ! "q arises--',c su* an objectivity be ass]t$ by ^? :o take a purely mat]iali/ic or naturali/ic view ( ! ,univ]se8' ,:atev] our metaphysical !ories ab\t ! nature ( ,reality may be1 we c 9 practice h no difficulty 9 ! region ( ,physical ,sci5ce ab\t recogniz+ an objective reality ( "s k9d :i* is o!r ?an my m]e ?9k+ ab\t x4 ,t fire w burn :e!r ,i ?9k s or n is practically recogniz$ by p]sons ( all metaphysical p]suasions4 ,if ,i say ',i c cloy ! hungry edge ( appetite by b>e imag9ation ( a fea/1' ,i try ! exp]im5t1 & ,i fail4 ,i imag9e ! fea/1 b ,i am hungry /ill3 & if ,i p]si/ 9 ! exp]im5t1 ,i die4 ,b :at d we mean :5 we say t ?+s are "r or wrong :e!r ,i ?9k !m s or n1 t ! ,moral ,law exi/s outside me & indep5d5tly ( my ?9k+ ab\t x8 ,:]e & h[ does ?is moral law exi/8 ,! physical laws ( ,nature may be suppos$ by ! ,mat]iali/ or ! ,reali/ someh[ to exi/ 9 matt]3 to ! ,metaphysician !re may be difficulties 9 su* a view1 b ! difficulties are n obvi\s to common-s5se4 ,b surely 7:atev] may be ?\ght ab\t physical laws7 ! moral law1 #gd :i* expresses n any matt] ( physical fact b :at ought to be ?\ght ( acts1 _c be suppos$ to exi/ 9 a purely mat]ial ,univ]se4 ,an 'ought' c exi/ only 9 & = a m9d4 ,9 :at m9d1 !n1 does ! moral law exi/8 ,z a matt] ( fact1 diff]5t p's moral judgem5ts contradict "o ano!r4 ,& ! consci\sness ( no liv+ man c well be suppos$ to be a flawless reflection ( ! absolute moral ideal4 ,on a non-!i/ic view ( ! ,univ]se1 !n1 ! moral law _c well be ?\ght ( z hav+ any actual exi/5ce4 ,! objective validity ( ! moral law c inde$ be & no d\bt is ass]t$1 believ$ 91 act$ ^u )\t ref]5ce to any !ological cre$2 b x _c be def5d$ or fully ju/ifi$ )\t ! pre-supposition ( ,!ism4 ,:at we mean by an objective law is t ! moral law is a "p ( ! ultimate nature ( ?+s1 on a level ) ! laws ( physical nature1 & x _c be t1 unless we assume t law to be an expression ( ! same m9d 9 :i* physical laws orig9ate4 ,! idea ( duty1 :5 analys$1 implies ! idea ( ,god4 ,:atev] else ,plato meant by ! 'idea ( ! good1' ?is at lea/ 0 "o ( 8 mean+s--t ! moral law has its s\rce 9 ! s\rce ( all ,reality4 ,& !re=e at bottom popul> feel+ is "r 9 hold+ t religi\s belief is necess>y to ,morality4 ,( c\rse ,i d n mean to say t1 7 #ge religi\s belief to disappe> f ! _w1 ,morality w\ld disappe> too4 ,b ,i d ?9k ,morality w\ld become q a diff]5t ?+ f :at x has be5 = ! high] levels ( religi\s ?\ght & feel+4 ,! be/ m5 w\ld no d\bt g on act+ up to _! own highe/ ideal j z if x did possess objective validity1 no matt] h[ unable !y might be to reconcile _! practical ) _! speculative beliefs4 ,b x w\ld n be s = ! _m--or p]haps ev5 = ! few 9 _! mom5ts ( weakness & temptation1 :5 once ! consequ5ces ( purely naturali/ic ,e?ics 7 ?or\ghly admitt$ & realiz$4 ,! only k9d ( objective validity :i* c be recogniz$ on a purely naturali/ic view ( ,e?ics is con=mity to public op9ion4 ,! t5d5cy ( all naturali/ic ,e?ics is to make a ,god ( public op9ion4 ,& if no o!r deity 7 recogniz$1 su* a ,god w\ld assur$ly n be )\t wor%ipp]s4 ,& yet ! /ronge/ temptation to mo/ ( u is ! temptation to foll[ a debas$ public op9ion--! op9ion ( our age1 our class1 our p>ty4 ,ap>t f fai? 9 a p]fectly righte\s ,god ^: comm&s are1 h[ev] imp]fectly1 reveal$ 9 ! individual ,consci5ce1 we c f9d no really valid reason :y ! individual %\ld act on 8 own s5se ( :at is intr9sically "r1 ev5 :5 he f9ds himself an ',a?anasius contra mundum1' & :5 8 own p]sonal lik+s & incl9ations #gf & int]e/s are on ! side ( ! _w4 ,kant 0 at bottom "r1 ?\gh p]haps he did n give ! /ronge/ reasons = 8 position1 9 mak+ ! idea ( ,god a po/ulate ( ,morality4 ,f a m directly practical po9t ( view ,i ne$ h>dly po9t out h[ mu* easi] x is to feel t[>ds ! moral law ! rev]5ce t we ought to feel :5 we believe t t law is embodi$ 9 a p]sonal ,w4 ,n only is religi\s ,morality n oppos$ to ! idea ( duty = duty's sake3 x is speculatively ! only reasonable basis ( x2 practically & emotionally ! great safegu>d ( x4 ,& :atev] may be ?\ght ( ! possibility ( a speculative def5ce ( su* an idea )\t ,!ism1 ! practical difficulty ( tea*+ x--especially to *ildr51 un$ucat$ & unreflective p]sons--seems to be q insup]able4#c ,9 m ?an "o c\ntry 9 :i* religi\s education has be5 bani%$ f ! prim>y s*ools1 grave obs]v]s compla9 t ! idea ( ,duty seems to be suff]+ an eclipse 9 ! m9ds ( ! ris+ #gg g5]ation2 "s ( !m add t 9 ^? l&s crime is /eadily on ! increase4 ,cate*isms ( civil duty & ! l h n hi!rto prov$ v satisfactory sub/itutes = ! old tea*+ ab\t ! fe> ( ,god4 ,w\ld t x 7 m frequ5tly rememb]$ on bo? sides ( our educational squabbles t ! supreme object ( all religi\s education %\ld be to in/il into *ildr5's m9ds 9 ! close/ possible connexion ! tw9 ideas ( ,god & ( ,duty6 7#b7 ,i h tri$ to %[ t ! e?ical importance ( ! idea ( ,god is prior to & indep5d5t ( any belief 9 ! idea ( future rew>ds & puni%m5ts or ( a future life1 h[ev] conceiv$ (4 ,b :5 ! idea ( a righte\s ,god has once be5 accept$1 ! idea ( ,immortality seems to me to foll[ f x z a sort ( coroll>y4 ,if any "o on a calm review ( ! actual facts ( ! _w's hi/ory c suppose t su* a _w z ours c\ld be ! expression ( ! w ( a rational & moral ,be+ )\t ! assumption ( a future life = :i* ?is is a discipl9e or education or prep>atory /age1 argum5t w\ld be useless ) him4 ,invet]ate ,optimism1 l invet]ate ,scepticism1 admits ( no refutation1 b 9 mo/ m9ds produces no conviction4 ,= ^? :o are conv9c$ t ! _w has a rational end1 & yet t life z we see x 7tak5 by itself7 _c be t end1 ! hypo!sis #gh ( ,immortality becomes a necess>y d$uction f _! belief 9 ,god4 ,i w\ld n disp>age ! educative effect ( ! belief 9 a future life ev5 :5 express$ 9 ! crude & inadequate metaphor ( rew>d & puni%m5t4 ,few ( u1 ,i v5ture to ?9k1 h rea*$ ! moral level at :i* ! belief--n 9 a v9dictive1 retributive1 un5d+ torm5t1 b 9 a discipl9>y or purgatorial education ( s\ls prolong$ aft] dea?--is )\t its value4 ,at ! same "t x is a m]e c>icature ( all high] religi\s beliefs :5 ! religi\s motive is suppos$ to mean simply a fe> ( puni%m5t & hope ( p]sonal rew>d1 ev5 ( ! lea/ s5su\s or mat]ial k9d4 ,love ( goodness = its own sake is = ! ,!i/ id5tical ) ! love ( ,god4 ,love ( a ,p]son is a /rong] =ce ?an devotion to an idea2 & an e?ical conception ( ,god c>ries ) x ! idea ( ,immortality4 ,! wages ( s9 is dea?3 if ! wages ( ,virtue be du/1 ,w\ld %e h he>t to endure = ! life ( ! worm & ! fly8 ,%e desires no isles ( ! ble/1 no quiet seats ( ! j1 ,to re/ 9 a gold5 grove1 or to bask 9 a summ] sky2 ,give h] ! wages ( go+ on1 & n to die4#d ,belief 9 human ,immortality is1 z ,i h sugge/$1 ! po/ulate )\t :i* mo/ ( u _c #gi believe 9 ,god4 ,ev5 = its own sake x is ( ! highe/ e?ical value4 ,! belief 9 ,immortality gives a mean+ to life ev5 :5 x has lo/ all o!r mean+4 ',x is r1' 9 ! noble words ( ! late ,pr(essor ,sidgwick1 'f a dis9t]e/$ av]sion to an univ]se s irrationally con/itut$ t ! wages ( virtue %\ld be du/ ?an f any private reckon+ ab\t 8 own wages1' t ! good man cl+s to ! idea ( ,immortality4 ,& t is n all4 ,! value ( all high] goods ev5 9 ?is life1 ?\gh x does n dep5d :olly ^u _! duration1 does p>tly dep5d ^u x4 ,x w\ld be bett] to be pure & unselfi% = a day ?an to be base & selfi% = a c5tury4 ,& yet we d n hesitate to comm5d ! value ( intellectual & ( all k9ds ( high] enjoym5ts on acc\nt ( _! great] durability4 ,:y1 !n1 %\ld we %r9k f admitt+ t ! value ( "* really is increas$ :5 x is reg>d$ z surviv+ bodily dea?8 ,disbelief 9 ,immortality w\ld1 ,i believe1 9 ! long run & = ! va/ majority ( m51 c>ry ) x an enorm\s enhancem5t ( ! value ( ! c>nal & s5sual ov] ! spiritual & intellectual elem5t 9 life4 7#c7 ,a ?ird consequ5ce :i* foll[s f our det]m9+ to accept ! moral consci\sness z conta9+ ! supreme revelation ( ,god is ?is4 ,f ! po9t ( view ( ! moral consci\sness #hj we _c say t ! ,univ]se is :olly good4 ,we h only "o means ( judg+ :e!r ?+s are good or bad3 ! idea ( value is :olly d]iv$ f our own e?ical judgem5ts or judgem5ts ( value4 ,if we di/ru/ ^! judgem5ts1 !re is no high] c\rt to :i* we c appeal4 ,& if we di/ru/ our mo/ ultimate judgem5ts ( value1 ,i d n "k :y we %\ld tru/ any judgem5ts :atev]4 ,ev5 if we grant t f "s v transc5d5tal metaphysical height--! height1 = in/ance1 ( ,mr4 ,bradley's ,philosophy--x may be cont5d$ t none ( our judgem5ts are :olly true or fully adequate to express ! true nature ( ,reality1 we at all ev5ts _c get ne>] to ,reality ?an we are conduct$ by ! judgem5ts :i* pres5t !mselves to u z imm$iate & self-evid5t4 ,n[1 if we d apply ^! judgem5ts ( value to ! ,univ]se z we "k x1 c we say t ev]y?+ 9 x seems to be v good8 ,= my own "p1 ,i unhesitat+ly say1 ',pa9 is an evil1 & s9 is a worse evil1 & no?+ on e>? c ev] make !m good4' ,h[ !n are we to acc\nt = su* evils 9 a ,univ]se :i* we believe to express ! ?\ght & w ( a p]fectly righte\s ,be+8 ,9 only "o way t ,i "k (--by suppos+ !y are means to a great] good4 ,t is really ! sub/ance & sub/ratum ( all ! ,!odicies ( all ! ,philosoph]s & all ! #ha ,!ologians except ^? :o frankly trample on or ?r[ ov] ! ,moral ,consci\sness1 & decl>e t1 = ^? :o see truly1 pa9 & s9 are only additional s\rces ( ae/hetic int]e/ 9 a great _w-drama produc$ = 8 own ent]ta9m5t by a ,deity n an?ropomorphic en\gh to love b /ill an?ropomorphic en\gh to be amus$4 ,i %all be told no d\bt t ?is is limit+ ,god4 ,a human be+ may1 x w be urg$1 )\t loss ( goodness1 d ?+s 9 !mselves evil1 z a means to a great] good3 z a surgeon1 he may cause excruciat+ pa92 z a /atesman or a soldi]1 he may doom ?\s&s to a cruel dea?2 z a wise adm9i/rator ( ! poor law1 he may refuse to relieve mu* suff]+1 9 ord] t he may n cause m suff]+4 ,b ?is is because 8 p[] is limit$2 he has to "w ^u a _w :i* has a nature ( its own indep5d5t ( 8 volition4 ,to apply ! same explanation to ! evil :i* ,god causes1 is to make ,him f9ite in/ead ( ,inf9ite1 limit$ 9 p[] in/ead ( ,omnipot5t4 ,n[ 9 a s5se ,i admit t ?is is s4 ,i am n w$d$ to ! words ',inf9ite' or ',omnipot5t4' ,b ,i w\ld prote/ aga9/ a p]si/5t misrepres5tation ( ! po9t ( view :i* ,i def5d4 ,x is sugge/$ t ! limit to ! p[] ( ,god mu/ necess>ily spr+ f ! exi/5ce ( "s o!r ?+ or be+ outside ( ,him1 n creat$ by ,him or "u ,8 #hb control4 ,i mu/ prote/ t t is n s4 ,ev]ybody admits t ,god _c *ange ! pa/2 few ,philosoph]s consid] x necess>y to ma9ta9 t ,god c\ld con/ruct triangles ) _! angles n toge!r equal to two "r angles1 or ?9k x any d]ogation f 8 ,omnipot5ce to say t ,he c\ld n make ! sum ( two & two to be o!r ?an f\r4 ,few ,!ologians pu% _! idea ( ,freewill s f> z to insi/ t ,god c\ld w ,himself to be unju/ or unlov+1 or t1 be+ j & lov+1 he c\ld d unju/ or unlov+ acts4 ,!re are necessities to :i* ev5 ,god mu/ submit4 ,b !y are n impos$ ^u ,him f )\t3 !y are p>ts ( ,8 own ess5tial nature4 ,! limitation by :i* ,god _c atta9 ,8 ends )\t caus+ "s evil is a limitation ( exactly ! same nature4 ,if y say t x is no limitation ( ,god n to be able to *ange ! pa/1 = ! ?+ is really unmean+1 !n ,i submit t 9 ! same way x may be no limitation t ,he %\ld n be able to evolve highly organiz$ be+s )\t a /ruggle = exi/5ce1 or to tra9 human be+s 9 unselfi%ness )\t all[+ ! exi/5ce bo? ( s9 & ( pa94 ,f ! po9t ( view ( p]fect k1 ^! ?+s might turn out to be j z unmean+ z = ,god to *ange ! pa/4 ,! popul> idea ( ,omnipot5ce is "o :i* really does n be> look+ into4 ,if we suppos$ ! _w #hc to conta9 no evil at all1 /ill !re w\ld be 9 x a def9ite am\nt ( good4 ,twice su* a _w w\ld be twice z good4 ,:y is !re n twice t am\nt ( good8 ,a be+ :o delib]ately creat$ only a good _w ( limit$ quantity--a def9ite numb] ( spirits 7= in/ance7 enjoy+ s mu* pleasure & s mu* virtue--:5 he c\ld h creat$ twice t numb] ( spirits1 & consequ5tly twice t am\nt ( good1 w\ld n be p]fectly good or lov+4 ,& s on ad inf9itum1 no matt] h[ mu* good y suppose him to h creat$4 ,! only s5se :i* we c intelligibly give to ! idea ( a div9e ,omnipot5ce is ?is--t ,god possesses all ! p[] !re is1 t ,he c d all ?+s t are 9 _! own nature possible4#e ,b !re is a m =midable objection :i* ,i h yet to meet4 ,x has be5 urg$ by c]ta9 ,philosoph]s ( great em95ce t1 if we suppose ,god n to be unlimit$ 9 p[]1 we h no gu>antee t ! _w is ev5 good on ! :ole2 we %\ld n be au?oriz$ to inf] any?+ z to a future life or ! ultimate de/9y ( ,humanity f ! fact ( ,god's goodness4 ,a limit$ ,god might be a defeat$ ,god4 ,i admit ! difficulty4 ,?is is ! 'greate/ wave' ( all 9 ! !i/ic #hd argum5t4 ,9 reply1 ,i w\ld simply appeal to ! reasons :i* ,i h giv5 = suppos+ t ! _w is really will$ by ,god4 ,a rational be+ does n w evil except z a means to a great] good4 ,if ,god be rational1 we h a "r to suppose t ! _w mu/ conta9 m good ?an evil1 or x w\ld n be will$ at all4 ,a be+ :o 0 oblig$ to create a _w :i* did n seem to him good w\ld be a bl9d =ce1 z =ce is und]/ood by ! pure ,mat]iali/1 n a rational ,w4 ,t mu* we h a "r to claim z a matt] ( /rict ,logic2 & t w\ld to my own m9d be a suffici5t reason = assum+ t1 at lea/ = ! high] ord] ( spirits1 su* a life z ours mu/ be int5d$ z ! preface to a bett] life ?an ?is4 ,b ,i %\ld g fur!r4 ,to me x appe>s t su* evils z s9 & pa9 are s enorm\sly worse ?an ! m]e abs5ce ( good1 t ,i c\ld n reg>d z rational a ,univ]se 9 :i* ! good did n v greatly pr$om9ate ov] ! evil4 ,m ?an t ,i d n ?9k we are entitl$ to say4 ,& yet ,ju/ice is s great a good t x is rational to hope t = e individual consci\s be+--at lea/ ea* individual capable ( any high degree ( good--!re mu/ be a pr$om9ance ( good on ! :ole4 ,be+s ( v small capacity might conceivably be creat$ *iefly or entirely z a means to a va/ly great] good ?an any t !y #he !mselves enjoy3 ! high] a _s is 9 ! scale ( be+1 ! m difficult x becomes to suppose t x has be5 br\ght into exi/5ce m]ely z a means to ano!r's good1 or t x w n ultimately enjoy a good :i* w make x on ! :ole good t x %\ld h be5 born4 ,i c\ld wi% myself t1 9 popul> religi\s tea*+1 !re 0 a frank] conception ( ?is position--a position :i*1 z ,i h said1 is really impli$ 9 ! ,!odicies ( all ! ,div9es4 ,popul> unbelief--& sometimes ! unbelief ( m cultivat$ p]sons--re/s ma9ly ^u ! exi/5ce ( evil4 ,we %\ld cut at ! roots ( x by tea*+ frankly t ?is is ! be/ ( all possible ,univ]ses1 ?\gh n ! be/ ( all imag9able ,univ]ses--su* ,univ]ses z we c con/ruct 9 our own imag9ation by pictur+ to ourselves all ! good t !re is 9 ! _w )\t any ( ! evil4 ,we may /ill say1 if we please1 t ,god is inf9ite because ,he is limit$ by no?+ outside ,8 own nature1 except :at ,he has ,himself caus$4 ,we c /ill call ,him ,omnipot5t 9 ! s5se t ,he possesses all ! p[] !re is4 ,& 9 _m ways su* a belief is f> m practically consolatory & /imulat+ ?an a belief 9 a ,god :o c d all ?+s by any means & :o consequ5tly does n ne$ our help4 ,9 our view1 we are engag$ n 9 a %am w>f>e ) an evil t is really #hf good1 b 9 a real w>f>e ) a real evil1 a /ruggle 9 :i* we h ! ultimate p[] 9 ! ,univ]se on our side1 b "o 9 :i* ! victory _c be won )\t our help1 a real /ruggle 9 :i* we are call$ ^u to be lit]ally fell[-work]s ) ,god4 ,,lit]ature ,! subject is m or less explicitly dealt ) 9 mo/ ( ! works m5tion$ at ! end ( ! la/ two lectures1 & also 9 books on ,moral ,philosophy too num]\s to m5tion4 ,classical v9dications ( ! au?ority ( ! ,moral ,consci\sness are ,bi%op ,butl]'s ,s]mons1 & ,kant's ,fundam5tal ,pr9ciples ( ! ,metaphysic ( ,morals & o!r e?ical writ+s 7translat$ by ,t4 ,k4 ,abbott74 ,i h express$ my own views on ! subject ) "s fullness 9 ! ?ird book ( my ,!ory ( ,good & ,evil4 #a ,see especially ,book ,,ii4 ,lect4 iii4 #b ',we d n inf] a "* to be virtu\s1 because x pleases3 b 9 feel+ t x pleases aft] su* a p>ticul> mann]1 we 9 effect feel t x is virtu\s4' 7,treatise1 ,"p ,i1 ,section ii41 ed4 ,gre5 & ,grose1 vol4 ii4 p4 #bdg47 ',! di/9ction ( moral good & evil is f\nd$ 9 ! pleasure or pa91 :i* results f ! view ( any s5tim5t1 or "*2 & z t pleasure or pa9 _c be unkn[n to ! p]son :o feels x1 x foll[s t !re is j s mu* virtue 9 any "* z e "o places 9 x1 & t 'tis impossible 9 ?is p>ticul> we c ev] be mi/ak54' 7,ibid4 vol4 ii4 p4 #caa47 #c ,!re are no d\bt ways ( mak+ ,morality ! law ( ! ,univ]se )\t :at mo/ ( u und]/& by ,!ism1 ?\gh n )\t ,religion1 & a ,religion ( a highly metaphysical "*2 b because su* non-!i/ic modes ( religi\s ?\ght exi/ 9 ,buddhism1 = in/ance1 x does n foll[ t !y are reasonable1 &1 at all ev5ts1 !y are h>dly intelligible to mo/ ,we/]n m9ds4 ,su* non-!i/ic ,religions imply a ,metaphysic q z mu* z ,*ri/ianity or ,buddhism4 ,!re h be5 ,religions )\t ! idea ( a p]sonal ,god1 b nev] )\t ,metaphysic1 i4e4 a !ory ab\t ! ultimate nature ( ?+s4 #d ,t5nyson's ,wages4 #e ,! doctr9e ( ,/4 ,?omas ,aqu9as is ',cum possit ,deus omnia effic]e quae esae possunt1 non autem quae contradictionem implicant1 omnipot5s m]ito dicitur4' 7,summa ,!ol41 ,p>s ,i4 ,q4 xxv4 art4 #h47 #hg ,,lecture ,,iv ,,difficulties ,,& ,,objections ,9 ! pres5t lecture ,i %all try to deal ) "s ( ! difficulties :i* w probably h be5 aris+ 9 y\r m9ds 9 ! c\rse ( ! la/ ?ree2 & 9 meet+ !m1 to cle> up to "s ext5t v>i\s po9ts :i* h be5 left obscure4 7#a7 ,creation4 ,i h endeav\r$ to %[ t ! _w mu/ be ?\ght ( z ultimately an exp]i5ce 9 ! m9d ( ,god1 p>ts ( :i* are progressively communicat$ to less] m9ds su* z ours4 ,?is exp]i5ce--bo? ! complete exp]i5ce :i* is 9 ,8 own m9d & also ! measure ( x :i* is communicat$ to ! less] m9ds--mu/ be ?\ght ( z will$ by ,god4 ,at ! same "t ,i sugge/$ z an alt]native view t1 ev5 if we ?9k ( ?+s z hav+ an exi/5ce :i* is n simply 9 & = m9ds1 ! ?+s mu/ be caus$ to exi/ by a rational ,w4 ,n[ ! _w1 z we "k x1 consi/s ( a numb] ( *anges tak+ place 9 "t1 *anges :i* are und\bt$ly repres5t$ 9 ?\ght z *anges happ5+ to1 or #hh accid5ts (1 a p]man5t sub/ance1 :e!r 7) ! ,ideali/7 we suppose t ?is sub/ance is m]ely ! object ( ,m9d's contemplation1 or :e!r 7) ! ,reali/7 we ?9k ( x z hav+ "s sort ( be+ indep5d5t ( ,m9d4 ,b :at ( ! fir/ ( ^! ev5ts--! beg9n+ ( ! :ole s]ies8 ,are we to ?9k ( ! s]ies ( ev5ts 9 "t z hav+ a beg9n+ & possibly an end1 or z be+ )\t beg9n+ or end8 ,:at 9 fact are we to make ( ! !ological idea ( ,creation1 (t5 fur!r def9$ z ,creation out ( no?+8 ,x is (t5 sugge/$ bo? by ,ideali/s & by ,reali/s t ! idea ( a creation or absolute beg9n+ ( ! _w is un?9kable4 ,su* a view seems to me to be a piece ( unw>rantable a priori dogmatism--q z mu* s z ! closely connect$ idea t ! ,uni=mity ( ,nature is an a priori necessity ( ?\ght4 ,no d\bt ! notion ( an absolute beg9n+ ( all ?+s is un?9kable en\gh3 if we ?9k ( ,god z creat+ ! _w at a def9ite po9t ( "t1 !n we mu/ suppose ,god ,himself to h exi/$ be=e t creation4 ,we _c ?9k ( an ev5t 9 "t )\t ?9k+ ( a "t be=e x2 & "t _c be ?\ght ( z m]ely empty "t4 ,ev5ts ( "s k9d !re mu/ necess>ily h be51 ev5 ?\gh ^? ev5ts are ?\ght ( z m]ely subjective exp]i5ces involv+ no relation to space4 ,a beg9n+ ( exi/5ce is1 #hi inde$1 un?9kable4 ,b !re is no difficulty 9 suppos+ t ?is p>ticul> s]ies ( ph5om5a :i* con/itutes our physical ,univ]se may h _h a beg9n+ 9 "t4 ,on ! o!r h& !re is no positive evid5ce1 = ^? :o _c reg>d ! e>ly *apt]s ( ,g5esis z repres5t+ on su* a matt] any?+ b a primitive leg5d edit$ by a lat] ,jewi% ?9k]1 t x _h su* a beg9n+4 ,x is no d\bt m difficult to repres5t to ourselves a beg9n+ ( space2 & ! notion ( an empty space1 et]nally ?\ght b n et]nally fill$ up by any s]ies ( ph5om5a ( ! space-occupy+ k9d1 repres5ts a r difficult1 ?\gh n 7z x seems to me7 an absolutely impossible conception4 ,! "q1 !re=e1 :e!r !re 0 a beg9n+ ( ! s]ies ( ev5ts :i* con/itute ! hi/ory ( our physical _w mu/ 7s f> z ,i c see7 be left an op5 "o4 ,( c\rse if ! argum5t ( ,"l ,kelv9 be accept$1 if he is ju/ifi$ 9 argu+ on purely physical gr\nds t ! pres5t di/ribution ( en]gy 9 ! ,univ]se is su* t x _c h result$ f an inf9ite s]ies ( previ\s physical *anges1 if ,sci5ce c prove t ! s]ies is a f9ite "o1 ! conclusions ( ,sci5ce mu/ be accept$4#a ,metaphysic has no?+ to say = or aga9/ su* a view4 ,t is a "q ( ,physics on :i* #ij ( c\rse ,i d n v5ture to express any op9ion :atev]4 7#b7 ,! "t-s]ies4 ,i am incompet5t to pron\nce an op9ion on ! validity ( su* argum5ts z ,"l ,kelv9's4 ,b1 h[ev] we decide ?is "q1 !re w /ill rema9 ! fur!r & h>d] "q1 ',is ! s]ies ( all ev5ts or exp]i5ces1 physical or psy*ical 7n m]ely ! p>ticul> s]ies :i* con/itutes our physical ,univ]se71 to be ?\ght ( z f9ite or inf9ite8 ,on ! "o h& x involves a contradiction to talk ( a "t-s]ies :i* has a beg9n+3 a "t :i* has no "t be=e x is n "t at all2 any m ?an space ) an end to x w\ld be space4 ,on ! o!r h&1 we f9d equally1 or almo/ equally1 un?9kable ! hypo!sis ( an endless s]ies ( ev5ts 9 "t3 a s]ies ( ev5ts1 :i* no possible enum]ation ( its memb]s w make any small]1 pres5ts itself to u z un?9kable1 directly we reg>d x z express+ ! true nature ( a positive reality1 & n z a m]e result ( ma!matical ab/raction4 ,"h !n we are pres5t$ ) an ant9omy--an app>5t contradiction 9 our ?\ght--:i* we c nei!r avoid nor ov]come4 ,x is "o ( ! classical ant9omies recogniz$ by ! ,kantian ,philosophy--! only "o1 ,i may add1 :i* nei!r ,kant himself nor any ( 8 successors has done any?+ to att5uate or to remove4 #ia ,kant's own attempt$ solution ( x involv$ ! impossible supposition t ! pa/ has no exi/5ce at all except 9 s f> z x is ?\ght by "s f9ite m9d 9 ! pres5t4 ,! way out ( ?is difficulty :i* is popul> ) po/-,kantian ,ideali/s is to say t ,god is ,himself out ( "t1 & et]nally sees ! :ole s]ies at once4 ,b1 9 ! fir/ place1 t does n get ov] ! difficulty3 ev5 if ,god does see ! :ole s]ies at once1 ,he mu/ see x ei!r z limit$ or z endless1 & ! old ant9omy breaks out aga9 :5 we attempt to ?9k ei!r alt]native4 ,& secondly1 :5 y treat a temporal s]ies z "o :i* is all really pres5t toge!r--( c\rse x may all be kn[n toge!r z ev5 we "k ! pa/ & ! future--b :5 y try to ?9k ( ,god z contemplat+ ! :ole s]ies z really pres5t altoge!r1 ! s]ies is no long] a "t-s]ies4 ,y h turn$ x into "s o!r k9d ( s]ies--practically 7we may say7 into a spacial s]ies4 ,y h cut ! knot1 in/ead ( unravell+ x4 ,i h no d\bt t ! exi/5ce ( ?is ant9omy does po9t to ! fact t !re is "s way ( ?9k+ ab\t "t f :i* ! difficulty disappe>s3 b we are1 s f> z ,i c see1 incompet5t s to resolve x4 ,philosoph]s res5t ! idea ( an insoluble problem4 ,by all means let !m g on try+ to solve x4 ,i c only say t ,i f9d no difficulty 9 %[+ ! futility #ib ( any solution ( ! "t-difficulty :i* ,i h s f> se54 ,= ! pres5t at lea/--,i /rongly suspect = ev]--we mu/ acquiesce on ?is matt] 9 a rev]5t ,agno/icism4 ,we c %[ ! absurdity ( reg>d+ "t z m]ely subjective2 we c %[ t x belongs to ! v ess5ce ( ! ,univ]se we "k2 we c %[ t x is z 'objective' z any?+ else )9 our k4 ,b h[ to reconcile ?is objectivity ) ! difficulty ( ?9k+ ( an endless succession no ,philosoph] has done mu* to expla94 ,= religi\s purposes x seems en\gh to believe t ea* memb] ( ! "t-s]ies--no matt] h[ _m su* ev5ts !re may be1 no matt] :e!r ! s]ies be endless or n--is caus$ by ,god4 ,! m reflect+ ,!ologians h g5]ally admitt$ t ! act ( div9e ,cons]vation is ess5tially ! same z t ( ,creation4 ,a ,god :o c be repres5t$ z 'uphold+ all ?+s by ! p[] ( 8 ^w' is a creative ,deity :e!r ! act ( creation be 9 "t1 or et]nally cont9u\s1 or 7if !re 7 any mean+ 9 t phrase7 out ( "t altoge!r4#b #ic 7#c7 ,! creation ( spirits4 ,x may seem to "s ( y t ,i may h s f> left out1 or too easily dispos$ (1 an important l9k 9 our argum5t4 ,i h giv5 reasons = ?9k+ t ! mat]ial _w _c be expla9$ )\t ! assumption ( a univ]sal ,consci\sness :i* bo? ?9ks & wills x4 ,i h assum$ r ?an prov$ t ! less] m9ds1 9 :i* ! div9e exp]i5ce is p>tially reproduc$1 are also caus$ to exi/ & kept 9 exi/5ce by ! same div9e ,w4 ,b h[1 x may be said1 d we "k t ^? m9ds did n exi/ be=e ! bir? ( ! organisms ) :i* ^u ?is planet !y are connect$8 ,! consid]ations :i* =bid our ?9k+ ( matt] z some?+ capable ( exi/+ by itself d n apply to m9ds4 ,a consci\sness1 unlike a ?+1 exi/s '= itself1' n m]ely '= ano!r'3 a m9d is n made :at x is by be+ kn[n or o!rwise exp]i5c$ by ano!r m9d3 its v be+ consi/s 9 be+ itself consci\s3 x is :at x is = itself4 ,x is und\bt$ly impossible positively to disprove ! hypo!sis ( et]nally pre-exi/5t s\ls4 ,sometimes t hypo!sis is comb9$ ) ,!ism4 ,x #id is suppos$ t ,god is ! supreme & incomp>ably ! mo/ p[]ful1 b n ! only1 self-exi/5t & et]nal ,_s4 ,?is hypo!sis--sometimes spok5 ( z ,pluralism#c--;has _m attractions3 f ! "t ( ,orig5 onw>ds ! idea ( ,pre-exi/5ce has seem$ to _m to facilitate ! explanation ( evil by mak+ x possible to reg>d ! suff]+s ( our pres5t /ate z a discipl9>y process = gett+ rid ( an orig9al or a pre-natal s9fulness4 ,x is a !ory n incapable ( satisfy+ ! dem&s ( ! religi\s ,consci\sness1 & may ev5 =m an elem5t 9 an ess5tially ,*ri/ian !ory ( ! ,univ]se3 b to my m9d x is oppos$ to all ! obvi\s indications ( exp]i5ce4 ,! connexion betwe5 s\l & body is su* t ! laws ( ! s\l's developm5t obvi\sly =m "p ( ! same sy/em ) ! laws ( physical nature4 ,if "o "p ( t sy/em is ref]r$ to ! div9e ,w1 s mu/ ! :ole ( x be4 ,! s\ls1 :5 !y h ent]$ animal bodies1 mu/ be suppos$ to be subject to a sy/em ( laws :i* is ( "o piece ) ! sy/em ( physical laws4 ,if ! physical "p ( ! _w-ord] is ref]r$ to ! div9e ,w1 ! psy*ical "p ( x mu/ be equally ref]r$ to #ie t ,w4 ,! s\ls might1 inde$1 conceivably h an indep5d5t & orig9al nature ( _! own capable ( (f]+ resi/ance to ! div9e int5tions4 ,b we see1 to say ! lea/1 no indications ( a /ruggle go+ on betwe5 an outside div9e ,w & indep5d5t be+s n =m+ a "p ( ! div9e s*eme4 ,at all ev5ts1 ! result ( ?is /ruggle1 if /ruggle !re be1 is 7s f> z we c obs]ve7 a sy/em1 complete & ord]ly1 )9 ! psy*ical sph]e z mu* z )9 ! purely physical sph]e4 ,& 9 p>ticul> ! body is exactly fitt$ to ! s\l t is to inhabit x4 ,we nev] f9d ! intellect ( a ,%akespe>e 9 connexion ) ! facial angle ( a negro2 bodies :i* resemble ! bodies ( _! p>5ts are connect$ ) s\ls betwe5 :i* a simil> resemblance c be trac$4 ,if ! s\ls exi/$ be=e bir?1 we mu/ suppose ^? s\ls to be kept wait+ 9 a limbo ( "s k9d till a body is prep>$ suitable = _! reception4 ,we mu/ suppose t among ! wait+ s\ls1 "o is f "t to "t select$ to be ! (fspr+ ( su* & su* a matrimonial union1 s z to pres5t 7z x 77 a col\rable appe>ance ( be+ really ! fruit ( t union4 ,fur!r1 be=e bir? ! s\ls mu/ be /eep$ 9 ! wat]s ( ,le!1 or some?+ ( ! k9d1 s z to rid !m ( all memory ( _! previ\s exp]i5ces4 ,su* a conception seems to #if me to belong to ! region ( ,my?ology r ?an ( sob] philosophical ?\ght4 ,i d n d5y t ,my?ology may sometimes be a means ( pictorially or symbolically envisag+ tru?s to :i* ,philosophy vaguely po9ts b :i* x _c express 9 cle>ly appreh5sible detail4 ,b su* a ,my?ology z ?is seems to be intellectually unmotiv$ & unhelpful4 ,x is n want$ to expla9 ! facts3 !re is no?+ 9 our exp]i5ce to sugge/ x1 & mu* :i* is prima facie oppos$ to x4 ,x really removes no s+le difficulty3 = "o difficulty :i* x pres5ts "s appe>ance ( remov+1 x creates a doz5 great] ones4 ,x is a hypo!sis :i* we %all d well to dismiss z otiose4 7#d7 ,non-!i/ic ,idealism4 ,some:at less unmotiv$1 if we look ^u x f a m]ely intellectual po9t ( view1 is ! !ory ( pre-exi/5t s\ls )\t a p]sonal ,god4 ,_m1 if n mo/1 ( y probably possess m or less acqua9tance ) ! views ( my fri5d1 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart4 ,i _c "h und]take a full exposition or criticism ( "o ( ! able/ ?9k]s ( our day--"o ( ! v few ,engli% ?9k]s :o is ! au?or ( a truly orig9al metaphysical sy/em4 ,i c only t\*--& t mo/ inadequately--^u ! p>ticul> side ( x :i* directly be>s ^u our pres5t enquiry4 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart is an ,ideali/2 he recognizes ! #ig impossibility ( matt] )\t m9d4 ,= him no?+ exi/s b spirits1 b he does n recognize ! necessity = any "o all-embrac+ or controll+ ,_s3 ! only spirits 9 8 ,univ]se are limit$ m9ds l ^? ( m5 & animals4 ,he diff]s1 !n1 f ! ,plurali/ ( ! type j m5tion$ 9 gett+ rid ( ! hypo!sis ( a p]sonal ,god side by side ) & yet controll+ ! uncreat$ spirits4 ,& he diff]s fur!r f all ,plurali/s 9 n treat+ ! sep>ate spirits z s _m c5tres ( consci\sness q indep5d5t (1 & possibly at w> )1 all ! re/3 ! spirits =m "p ( an ord]$ sy/em3 ! _w is a unity1 ?\gh t unity is n ! unity :i* belongs to self-consci\sness4 ,he recognizes1 9 ! traditional language ( ,philosophy1 an ,absolute1 b ?is ,absolute is n a s+le spiritual ,be+ b a ,society3 or1 if x is to be call$ a s+le spiritual ,be+1 x is a ,be+ :i* exi/s or manife/s itself only 9 a plurality ( limit$ consci\snesses4 ,?is s*eme is1 ,i admit1 m reasonable ?an ,pluralism4 ,x does1 nom9ally at lea/1 recognize ! _w z an ord]$ sy/em4 ,x gets rid ( ! difficulty ( acc\nt+ = ! app>5t ord] ( ! ,cosmos z ! result ( a /ruggle betwe5 indep5d5t wills4 ,x is n1 ^u its au?or's pre-suppositions1 a gratuit\s !ory3 = a m9d :i* accepts ,idealism & rejects ,!ism x is ! only #ih intelligible alt]native4 ,b ,i mu/ confess t x seems to me op5 to mo/ ( ! difficulties :i* ,i h endeav\r$ to po9t out 9 ,pluralism1 & to "s o!rs4 ,9 ! fir/ place1 !re is "o1 to my m9d1 great & insup]able difficulty ab\t x4 ,z an ,ideali/1 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart has to admit t ! :ole physical _w1 9 s f> z x exi/s at all1 mu/ exi/ 9 & = "s consci\sness4 ,n[1 n only is !re1 accord+ to him1 no s+le m9d 9 :i* ! sy/em c exi/ z a :ole1 b ev5 all ! m9ds toge!r d n app>5tly "k ! :ole ( x1 or 7s f> z our k goes7 ev] w4 ,! undiscov]$ & unkn[n "p ( ! ,univ]se is !n non-exi/5t4 ,& yet1 be x notic$1 ! kn[n "p ( ! _w does n make a p]fectly articulat$ or 7if y l ! phrase7 organic sy/em )\t ! unkn[n "p4 ,x is only on ! assumption ( relations betwe5 :at we "k & :at we don't "k t we c reg>d x z an ord]ly1 intelligible sy/em at all4 ,!re=e1 if "p ( ! sy/em is non-exi/5t1 ! :ole sy/em--! sy/em z a :ole--mu/ be treat$ z non-exi/5t4 ,! _w is1 we are told1 a sy/em2 & yet z a sy/em x has 7^u ! hypo!sis7 no real exi/5ce4 ,! sy/ematic :ole does n exi/ 9 matt]1 = to ,dr4 ,mc,taggart matt] is m]ely ! exp]i5ce ( ,m9d4 ,:at sort ( exi/5ce1 !n1 c an undiscov]$ planet possess till x is #ii discov]$8 ,= ,dr4 ,mc,taggart has n provid$ any m9d or m9ds 9 & = :i* x is to exi/4 ,at "o "t1 inde$1 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart seem$ dispos$ to accept a sugge/ion ( m9e t1 on 8 view1 ea* s\l mu/ be omnisci5t2 & to admit t1 :ile 9 its temporal aspect1 ea* s\l is limit$ & fallible 9 its k1 x is at ! same "t sup]temporally omnisci5t4 ,t is a conception difficult beyond all ! difficulties ( ! mo/ arbitr>y & self-contradict+ ( or?odox patri/ic or s*ola/ic speculations4 ,b1 z ,dr4 ,mc,taggart does n n[ seem dispos$ to insi/ ^u t po9t1 ,i w say no m ab\t x except t to my m9d x is a !ory :i* defies all intellectual grasp4 ,x c be /at$2 x _c be ?\ght4 ,fur!r1 ,i w\ld rem9d y1 ! !ory is op5 to all ! objections :i* ,i urg$ aga9/ ! ,pre-exi/5ce !ory 9 its plurali/ic =m4 ,i h sugge/$ ! difficulties involv$ 9 ! facts ( h]$ity--! difficulty ( und]/&+ h[ s\ls ^: real intellectual & moral *>act]i/ics are uncaus$ & et]nal %\ld be assign$ to p>5ts s f> resembl+ !m z to lead almo/ inevitably to ! inf]5ce t ! *>act]i/ics ( ! *ildr5 are to "s ext5t causally connect$ ) ^? ( ! p>5ts4#d ,n[ ! ,plurali/ c #ajj at lea/ urge t = ?is purpose +5i\s arrangem5ts are contriv$ by ,god--by ! ,"o ,_s :om he reg>ds z incomp>ably ! wise/ & mo/ p[]ful 9 ! ,univ]se4 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart recognizes no intellig5ce capable ( grappl+ ) su* a problem or succession ( problems4 ,b ?is p>ticul> matt] ( ! assignm5t ( s\ls to bodies is only a p>ticul> application ( a wid] difficulty4 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart cont5ds t ! ,univ]se con/itutes n m]ely a physical b a moral ord]4 ,he w\ld n d5y t ! ,univ]se means some?+2 t ! s]ies ( ev5ts t5ds t[>ds an end1 an end :i* is also a good2 t x has a purpose & a f9al cause4 ,& yet ?is purpose exi/s 9 no m9d :atev]1 & is due to no w :atev]--except to ! v small ext5t to :i* ! processes ( physical nature c be consci\sly direct$ to an end by ! volitions ( m5 & simil>ly limit$ intellig5ces4 ,z a :ole1 ! ,univ]se is purpos$ & will$ by no s+le w or comb9ation ( wills4 ,i confess ,i d n und]/& ! idea ( a purpose :i* op]ates1 b is n ! purpose ( a ,m9d :i* is also a ,w4 ,all ! consid]ations ^u :i* ,i dwelt to %[ ! necessity ( su* a ,w to acc\nt = ! ,univ]se :i* we "k1 are s _m argum5ts aga9/ ,dr4 ,mc,taggart's s*eme4 ,! ev5ts ( ,dr4 ,mc,taggart's ,univ]se are1 ^u ! view ( ,causality :i* ,i #aja attempt$ to def5d 9 my second lecture1 uncaus$ ev5ts4 ,nev]!less1 z a ,philosoph]1 ,i am deeply grateful to ,dr4 ,mc,taggart4 ,n only does 8 s*eme on its practical side seem to me pref]able to _m sy/ems :i* s\nd m or?odox--sy/ems ( vague pan!i/ic ,!ism 9 :i* ,morality is treat$ z m]e 'appe>ance' & p]sonal ,immortality delib]ately reject$--b x has done mu* intellectually to cle> ! air4 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart seems to me "r 9 hold+ t1 if ,god or ! ,absolute is to include 9 itself all o!r spirits1 & yet ! p]sonality or self-consci\sness ( ^? spirits is n to be d5i$1 !n ?is ,absolute 9 :i* !y are to be includ$ _c reasonably be ?\ght ( z a consci\s be+1 or inve/$ ) ! o!r attributes usually impli$ by ! t]m ,god4 ,& ?is leads me to say a few words m 9 explanation ( my own view ( ! relation betwe5 ,god & human or o!r s\ls4 ,to me1 z ,i h already intimat$1 x seems simply mean+less to speak ( "o consci\sness z includ$ 9 ano!r consci\sness4 ,! ess5ce ( a consci\sness is to be = itself3 :e!r x be a ?\ght1 a feel+1 or an emotion1 ! ess5ce ( t consci\sness is :at x is = me4 ,e mom5t ( consci\sness is unique4 ,ano!r be+ may h a #ajb simil> feel+3 9 t case !re are two feel+s1 & n "o4 ,ano!r m9d may "k :at ,i feel1 b ! k ( ano!r's agony is 7=tunately7 a v diff]5t ?+ f ! agony itself4 ,x is fa%ionable 9 "s qu>t]s to ridicule ! idea ( 'imp5etrable' s\ls4 ,if 'imp5etrable' means t ano!r s\l _c "k :at goes on 9 my s\l1 ,i d n ass]t t ! s\l is imp5etrable4 ,i believe t ,god kn[s :at occurs 9 my s\l 9 an inf9itely complet] way ?an t 9 :i* any human be+ c "k x4 ,fur!r1 ,i believe t e s\l is kept 9 exi/5ce f mom5t to mom5t by a cont9u\s act ( ! div9e ,w1 & s is altoge!r dep5d5t ^u t ,w1 & =ms "p ( "o sy/em ) ,him4 ,on ! o!r h& ,i believe t 7?r\gh ! analogy ( my own m9d & ! guidance ( ! moral consci\sness7 ,i d "k1 imp]fectly & inadequately1 'z 9 a mirror d>kly1' :at goes on 9 ,god's ,m9d4 ,b1 if p5etrability is to mean id5tity1 ! !ory t s\ls are p5etrable seems to me ma9ly un9telligible4 ,! acceptance :i* x meets ) 9 "s qu>t]s is due1 ,i believe1 :olly to ! influ5ce ( t mo/ f]tile s\rce ( philosophical confusion--misappli$ spacial metaphor4#e ,x seems easy to talk ab\t a m9d be+ #ajc some?+ 9 itself1 & yet "p ( ano!r m9d1 because we are famili> ) ! idea ( ?+s 9 space =m+ "p ( l>g] ?+s 9 space--,*9ese boxes1 = in/ance1 %ut up 9 bigg] ones4 ,su* a mode ( ?\ght is :olly inapplicable to m9ds :i* are n 9 space at all4 ,space is 9 ! m9d3 ! m9d is n 9 space4 ,a m9d is n a ?+ :i* c be r\nd or squ>e3 y c't say t ! intellect ( ,kant or ( ,"l ,kelv9 measures s _m in*es by s _m3 equally impossible is x to talk ab\t su* an intellect be+ a "p ( a m ext5sive intellect4 ,! !ory ( an all-inclusive ,deity has rec5tly be5 adopt$ & popul>iz$ by ,mr4 ,campbell1#f :o has done all t rhetorical skill comb9$ ) g5u9e religi\s e>ne/ness c d to pres5t x 9 an attractive & edify+ dress4 ,& yet ! same ,logic :i* leads to ! ass]tion t ! ,sa9t is "p ( ,god1 leads also to ! ass]tion t ,caes> ,borgia & ,napoleon ,buonap>te & all ! wick$ ,popes :o h ev] be5 :ite-wa%$ by episcopal or o!r hi/orians are also p>ts ( ,god4 ,h[ c ,i wor%ip1 h[ c ,i /rive to be l1 h[ c ,i be ! bett] = believ+ 9 or rev]+ #ajd a ,be+ ( :om ,caes> ,borgia is a "p z completely & entirely z ,/4 ,paul or our ,"l himself8 ,h9doo ,!ology is consi/5t 9 ?is matt]4 ,x wor%ips ! de/ructive & ! vici\s aspects ( ,brahma z mu* z ! k9dly & ! moral ones3 x does n pret5d t ,god is reveal$ 9 ! ,moral ,consci\sness1 or is 9 any exclusive or "o-sid$ way a ,god ( ,love4 ,if x be an 'e?ical obsession' 7z has be5 sugge/$7 to object to treat ,immorality z no less a revelation ( ,god ?an ,morality1 ,i mu/ plead guilty to su* an obsession4 ,& yet )\t su* an 'obsession' ,i confess ,i d n see :at is left ( ,*ri/ianity4 ,!re is only "o way out ( ! difficulty4 ,if we are all p>ts ( ,god1 we c only call ,god good or p]fect by ma9ta9+ t ! deliv]ances ( our moral consci\sness h no validity = ,god1 & !re=e c tell u no?+ ab\t him4 ,t has be5 done delib]ately & explicitly by "s ,philosoph]s3#g ! di/+ui%$ ,!ologians :o e*o ! language ( ?is ,philosophy h =tunately = _! own religi\s life & exp]i5ce1 b un=tunately = _! philosophical consi/5cy1 decl9$ to foll[ 9 _! /eps4 ,a ,god :o is 'beyond good & evil1' c be no fitt+ object ( #aje wor%ip to m5 :o wi% to become good1 j1 m]ciful4 ,if ! cosmic process be indiff]5t to ^! e?ical consid]ations1 we _h bett] 7) hone/ ,agno/ics l ,pr(essor ,huxley7 make up our m9ds to defy x1 :e!r x call itself ,god or n4 ,b x is n s mu* on acc\nt ( its consequ5ces z on acc\nt ( its ess5tial unmean+ness & intellectual un9telligibility t ,i w\ld invite y to reject ?is =mula ',god is all4' ,c]ta9ly1 ! ,univ]se is an ord]$ sy/em3 !re is no?+ 9 x t is n done by ! ,w ( ,god4 ,& "s p>ts ( ?is ,univ]se--! spiritual p>ts ( x & p>ticul>ly ! high] spirits--are n m]e creations ( ,god's w4 ,!y h a resemblance ( nature to ,him4 ,i d n object to y\r say+ t at bottom !re is b "o ,sub/ance 9 ! ,univ]se1 if y w only keep cle> ( ! mat]iali/ic & spacial association ( ! ^w ,sub/ance3 b x is a ,sub/ance :i* reveals itself 9 _m diff]5t consci\snesses4 ,! !ory ( an all-inclusive ,consci\sness is n necess>y to make possible ! idea ( close & intimate communion betwe5 ,god & m51 or ( ! revelation 9 & to ,humanity ( ! ?\ght ( ,god4 ,on ! contr>y1 x is ! idea ( ,id5tity :i* de/roys ! possibility ( communion4 ,communion implies two m9ds3 a m9d _c h communion ) itself or ) "p ( itself4 ,! two may also 9 a #ajf s5se be "o2 ( c\rse all be+s are ultimately "p ( "o ,univ]se or ,reality3 b t ,reality is n "o ,consci\sness4 ,! ,univ]se is a unity1 b ! unity is n ( ! k9d :i* con/itutes a p]son or a self-consci\sness4 ,x is 7z ,dr4 ,mc,taggart holds7 ! unity ( a ,society1 b ( a ,society 7z ,i h attempt$ to argue7 :i* emanates f1 & is controll$ by & guid$ to a preconceiv$ end by1 a s+le rational ,w4#h 7#e7 ,! intuitive !ory ( religi\s k4 ,9 o!r qu>t]s objection w probably be tak5 to my n hav+ recogniz$ ! possibility ( an imm$iate k ( ,god1 & left ! idea ( ,god to be inf]r$ by intellectual processes :i*1 :5 fully ?\ght out1 am\nt to a ,metaphysic4 ,x w be sugge/$ t to make religi\s belief dep5d5t ^u ,reason is to make x impossible to any b tra9$ ,philosoph]s or ,!ologians4 ,n[ !re is no d\bt a great attractiv5ess 9 ! !ory :i* makes belief 9 ,god dep5d simply ^u ! imm$iate affirmation ( ! individual's own consci\sness4 ,x w\ld be m difficult to argue aga9/ su* a !ory ( imm$iate k or intuition if we f\nd t ! consci\sness ( all or mo/ individuals does actually reveal to !m #ajg ! exi/5ce ( ,god3 ?\gh aft] all ! fact t a numb] ( m5 draw ! same inf]5ce f giv5 facts does n %[ t x is n an inf]5ce4 ,y w sometimes f9d ,metaphysicians cont5d+ t nobody is really an ,a!i/1 s9ce ev]ybody necess>ily supposes himself to be 9 contact ) an ,o!r ( :i* he is nev]!less a "p4 ,i d n d5y t1 if y wat] d[n ! idea ( ,god to ! notion ( a vague 'some?+ n ourselves1' y may possibly make out t ev]ybody is explicitly or implicitly a believ] 9 su* a ,deity4 ,i %\ld pref] myself to say t1 if t is all y mean by ,god1 x does n mu* matt] :e!r we believe 9 ,him or n4 ,9 ! s5se 9 :i* ,god is und]/ood by ,*ri/ianity or ,judaism or any o!r !i/ic ,religion x is un=tunately impossible to cont5d t ev]ybody is a ,!i/4 ,&1 if !re is an imm$iate k ( ,god 9 e human s\l1 ?is w\ld be difficult to acc\nt =4 ,nei!r ! cultivat$ nor ! uncultivat$ ,*9aman has app>5tly any su* belief4 ,! ignorant ,*9aman believes 9 a sort ( luck or de/9y--possibly 9 a plurality ( limit$ b m or less mis*iev\s spirits2 ! educat$ ,*9aman1 we are told1 is = ! mo/ "p a pure ,agno/ic4 ,& ,*9am5 are believ$ to be "o-fif? ( ! human race4 ,! task ( ! ,mission>y w\ld be an easi] "o if he c\ld #ajh appeal to any su* widely diffus$ intuitions ( ,god4 ,! ,mission>y1 f ! days ( ,/4 ,paul at ,a!ns d[n to ! pres5t1 has to beg9 by argu+ ) 8 oppon5ts 9 fav\r ( ,!ism1 & !n to g on to argue f ,!ism to ,*ri/ianity4 ,i d n d5y--on ! contr>y ,i /rongly cont5d--t ! rational consid]ations :i* lead up to ,mono!ism are s manifold1 & lie s ne> at h&1 t at a c]ta9 /age ( m5tal developm5t we f9d t belief indep5d5tly ass]t+ itself ) m or less fullness 9 widely di/ant regions ( "t & space2 :ile traces ( x are f\nd almo/ ev]y:]e--ev5 among savages--side by side ) o!r & inconsi/5t beliefs4 ,b ev5 among !i/ic nations an imm$iate k ( ,god is claim$ by v few4 ,if !re is a t5d5cy on ! "p ( ! m /rongly religi\s m9ds to claim x1 x is explicitly disclaim$ by o!rs--by mo/ ( ! great ,s*oolm51 & 9 mod]n times by pr(\ndly religi\s m9ds su* z ,newman or ,m>t9eau4 ,its exi/5ce is 9 fact d5i$ by mo/ ( ! great !ological sy/ems--,ca?olic1 ,prote/ant1 ,anglican4 ,!ologians always beg9 by argu+ 9 fav\r ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god4 ,& ev5 among ! religi\s m9ds )\t philosophical tra9+ :i* d claim su* imm$iate k1 _! cre$ is mo/ (t5 due 7z is obvi\s to ! outside obs]v]7 to ! influ5ce ( environm5t1 ( education1 ( social #aji tradition4 ,= ! religi\s p]son :o claims su* k ( ,god does n g5]ally /op at ! b>e affirmation ( ,god's exi/5ce3 he goes on to claim an imm$iate k ( all sorts ( o!r ?+s--ideas cle>ly d]iv$ f ! traditional tea*+ ( 8 religi\s community4 ,! ,prote/ant ( a c]ta9 type w claim imm$iate consci\sness ( ideas ab\t ! =giv5ess ( s9s :i* are palpably due to ! tea*+ ( ,lu!r or ,/4 ,augu/9e1 & to ! influ5ce ( ?is or t prea*] :o has transmitt$ ^? ideas to him or to 8 "m3 :ile ! ,ca?olic1 ?\gh 8 tra9+ disc\rages su* claims1 w sometimes see visions :i* convey to him an imm$iate assurance ( ! tru? ( ! ,immaculate ,conception4 ,ev5 among ,anglicans we f9d educat$ m5 :o claim to "k by imm$iate intuition ! tru? ( hi/orical facts alleg$ to h occurr$ 9 ! fir/ c5tury1 or dogmatic tru?s su* z ! complicat$ niceties ( ! ,a?anasian ,cre$4 ,^! claims to imm$iate insight ?us refute !mselves by ! inconsi/5t "* ( ! k claim$4 ,an attempt may be made to extract f all ^! imm$iate c]ta9ties a residual elem5t :i* is said to be common to all ( !m4 ,! attempt has be5 made by ,pr(essor ,james 9 t r pa9ful "w1 ! ,v>ieties ( ,religi\s ,exp]i5ce4 ,& ! residuum turns out to be some?+ s vague t1 if n #aaj absolutely wor?less1 x is almo/ incapable ( be+ express$ 9 articulate language1 & con/itutes a v prec>i\s f\ndation = a work+ religi\s cre$4 ,! tru? is t ! un$ucat$--or r ! unanalytical1 p]haps ,i ought to say ! metaphysically untra9$--human m9d has a t5d5cy to reg>d z an imm$iate c]ta9ty any tru? :i* x /rongly believes & reg>ds z v important4 ,su* m9ds d n "k ! psy*ological causes :i* h l$ to _! own belief1 :5 !y are due to psy*ological causes3 !y h n analys$ ! processes ( ?\ght by :i* !y h be5 l$ to ^? beliefs :i* are really due to ! work+ ( _! own m9ds4 ,mo/ uncultivat$ p]sons w\ld probably be v mu* surpris$ to he> t ! exi/5ce ( ! fri5d ) ^: body !y are 9 physical contact is aft] all only an inf]5ce4#i ,b surely1 9 ! man :o has discov]$ t su* is ! case1 ! w>m? ( fri5d%ip 0 nev] dimm$ by ! reflection t 8 k ( 8 fri5d is n imm$iate b m$iate4 ,x is a m]e prejudice to suppose t m$iate k is 9 any #aaa way less c]ta91 less intimate1 less tru/wor?y or less satisfy+ ?an imm$iate k4 ,if we claim = man ! possibility ( j su* a k ( ,god z a man may possess ( 8 bro!r man1 surely t is all t is want$ to make possible ! close/ religi\s communion4 ,x is f ! exi/5ce ( my own self t ,i inf] ! exi/5ce ( o!r selves1 :om ,i obs]ve to behave 9 a mann] resembl+ my own behavi\r4 ,x is by an only slightly m difficult & complicat$ inf]5ce f my own consci\sness t ,i rise to t conception ( a univ]sal ,consci\sness :i* supplies me ) at once ! simple/ & ! mo/ natural explanation bo? ( my own exi/5ce & ( ! exi/5ce ( ! ,nature :i* ,i see ar\nd me4 7#f7 ,religion & ,psy*ology4 ,i d n d5y t ! /udy ( religi\s hi/ory1 by exhibit+ ! naturalness & univ]sality ( religi\s ideas & religi\s emotions1 may rationally create a pre-disposition to f9d "s measure ( tru? 9 e =m ( religi\s belief4 ,b ,i w\ld v5ture to add a ^w ( caution aga9/ ! t5d5cy fa%ionable 9 _m qu>t]s to talk ( bas+ religi\s belief ^u ,psy*ology4 ,! bus9ess ( ,psy*ology is to tell u :at actually goes on 9 ! human m9d4 ,x _c possibly tell u :e!r ! beliefs :i* are f\nd !re are true or false4 ,an errone\s #aab belief is z mu* a psy*ological fact z a true "o4 ,a !ory :i* goes on1 by inf]5ce f :at we obs]ve 9 our own m9ds1 to con/ruct a !ory ( ! ,univ]se necess>ily involves a ,metaphysic1 consci\s or unconsci\s4 ,x may be urg$ t ! reality ( religi\s exp]i5ce is unaffect$ by ! "q :e!r ! beliefs associat$ ) x are true or false4 ,t is ! case1 s long z ! beliefs are suppos$ to be true by ! p]son 9 "q4 ,b1 :5 once ! _s ( enquiry is ar\s$1 a man _c be--& ,i v5ture to ?9k ought n to be--satisfi$ z to ! tru? ( 8 belief simply by be+ told t ! beliefs are actually !re4 ,x may be cont5d$1 no d\bt1 t religi\s exp]i5ce does n mean m]ely a /ate ( intellectual belief1 b c]ta9 emotions1 aspirations1 p]haps 7to take "o p>ticul> type ( religi\s exp]i5ce7 a consci\sness ( love met by answ]+ love4 ,to _m :o und]go su* exp]i5ces1 !y seem to c>ry ) !m an imm$iate assurance ( ! exi/5ce ( ! ,be+ ) :om !y feel !mselves to be 9 communion4 ,t1 on ! intellectual presuppositions ( ! p>ticul> p]son1 seems to be ! natural--x may be ! only possible--way ( expla9+ ! feel+4 ,b ev5 !re ! belief is n really imm$iate3 x is an inf]5ce f :at is actually matt] ( exp]i5ce4 ,& x is1 unhappily1 no less a matt] ( well-asc]ta9$ #aac psy*ological fact t1 :5 intellectual d\bt is once ar\s$1 su* exp]i5ces no long] c>ry ) !m ?is conviction ( _! own objective basis4 ,! p]son 0 really "u ! influ5ce ( an intellectual !ory all along1 :e!r ! !ory 0 acquir$ by h]$it>y tradition1 by ! influ5ce ( ano!r's m9d1 or by p]sonal ?\ght & reflection4 ,:5 ! intellectual !ory alt]s1 ! same k9d ( exp]i5ce is no long] possible4 ,i w n attempt to say h[ f> x is desirable t p]sons :o are p]fectly satisfi$ ) a cre$ :i* !y h nev] exam9$ %\ld 7z x 77 pull up ! roots ( _! own fai? to see h[ deep !y g4 ,i m]ely want to po9t out t ! occurr5ce ( c]ta9 emotional exp]i5ces1 ?\gh und\bt$ly !y may con/itute "p ( ! data ( a religi\s argum5t1 _c be held to con/itute 9 & by !mselves suffici5t evid5ce = ! tru? ( ! intellectual !ory connect$ ) !m 9 ! m9d ( ! p]son to :om !y occur4 ,!y d n always pres5t !mselves z suffici5t evid5ce = _! tru? ev5 to ! p]son exp]i5c+ !m--/ill less c !y d s to o!rs4 ,equally unreasonable is x to ma9ta91 ) a c]ta9 class ( religi\s philosoph]s1 t ! religi\s exp]i5ce by itself is all we want2 & to assume t we may ?r[ to ! w9ds all ! !ological or o!r beliefs :i* h actually be5 associat$ #aad ) ! v>i\s types ( religi\s exp]i5ce1 & yet cont9ue to h ^? exp]i5ces & f9d !m no less valuable & no less satisfy+4 ,if !re is "o ?+ :i* ! /udy ( religi\s ,psy*ology te/ifies to1 x is ! fact t ! "* ( ! religi\s exp]i5ce 7?\gh !re may be c]ta9 common elem5ts 9 x7 v>ies v widely ) ! "* ( ! !oretical belief ) :i* x is associat$--a belief ( :i* x is sometimes ! cause1 sometimes ! effect1 b f :i* x is always insep>able4 ,! ,buddhi/'s religi\s exp]i5ces are n possible to ^? :o hold ! ,*ri/ian's view ( ! ,univ]se3 ! ,*ri/ian's religi\s exp]i5ces are n possible to "o :o holds ! ,buddhi/ !ory ( ! ,univ]se4 ,y _c h an exp]i5ce ( communion ) a liv+ ,be+ :5 y disbelieve 9 ! exi/5ce ( su* a ,be+4 ,& a man's !ories ( ! ,univ]se always at bottom imply a ,metaphysic ( "s k9d--consci\s or unconsci\s4 ,sometimes ! !ory ( a ,religion :i* %all be purely psy*ological spr+s f pure ignorance z to ! mean+ ( ! t]ms actually employ$ by ! g5]al usage ( philosoph]s4 ,^? :o talk 9 ?is way mean by ,psy*ology :at1 accord+ to ! ord9>y philosophic usage1 is really ,metaphysic4 ,= ,metaphysic is simply ! sci5ce :i* deals ) ! ultimate nature ( ! ,univ]se4 #aae ,at o!r times attempts are made by p ( m or less philosophical culture to ju/ify _! !ory4 ,! mo/ widely influ5tial ( su* attempts is ! "o made by ,m4 ,augu/e ,sabati]4#aj ,?is attempt has at lea/ ?is mu* 9 its fav\r--t x is n s mu* to ! ord9>y exp]i5ce ( av]age m5 & wom5 t ,m4 ,sabati] appeals z to ! exceptional exp]i5ces ( ! great religi\s m9ds4 ,he lays ! *ief /ress ^u ^? exceptional mom5ts ( religi\s hi/ory :5 a new religi\s idea ent]$ into ! m9d ( "s prophet or tea*]1 e4g4 ! unity ( ,god1 ! ,fa!rhood ( ,god1 ! bro!rhood ( ,man4 ,"h1 j because ! idea 0 new1 x _c 7he cont5ds7 be acc\nt$ = by education or environm5t or any o!r ( ! psy*ological causes :i* obvi\sly det]m9e ! traditional beliefs ( ! great majority4 ,^! new ideas1 !re=e1 he assumes to be due to imm$iate revelation or inspiration f ,god4 ,n[ x is obvi\s t1 ev5 if ?is inf]5ce 7 well gr\nd$1 x assumes t we h someh[ arriv$ indep5d5tly at a conception ( ,god to :i* su* inspirations c be ref]r$4 ,! ,psy*ology ( ! human m9d _c assume ! exi/5ce ( su* a ,be+3 if we inf] su* a ,be+ f our own m5tal exp]i5ce1 t is n imm$iate b #aaf m$iate k4 ,x is a belief bas$ on inf]5ce1 & a belief :i* is1 prop]ly speak+1 metaphysical4 ,! idea ( a ,religion :i* is m]ely bas$ ^u ,psy*ology & involves no?+ else is a delusion3 all ! great ,religions ( ! _w h be51 among o!r ?+s1 metaphysical sy/ems4 ,we h no means ( asc]ta9+ _! tru? b ,reason1 :e!r x assume ! =m ( a r\gh common-s5se or ( elaborate reason+ :i* n only is ,metaphysic b kn[s itself to be s4 ,reason is !n ! organ ( religi\s tru?4 ,b !n1 let me rem9d y1 ,reason includes our moral ,reason4 ,t really is a faculty ( imm$iate k2 & x is a faculty :i*1 9 a high] or l[] /ate ( developm5t1 is actually f\nd 9 practically all human be+s4 ,! "o elem5t ( tru? :i* ,i recognize 9 ! !ory ( an imm$iate k ( ,god is ! tru? t ! mo/ important data ^u :i* we base ! inf]5ce :i* leads to ! k ( ,god are ^? suppli$ by ! imm$iate judgem5ts or intuitions ( ! ,moral ,consci\sness4 ,& "h let me caution y aga9/ a v preval5t misund]/&+ ab\t ! ^w ,reason4 ,x is assum$ v (t5 t ,reason means no?+ b inf]5ce4 ,t is n :at we mean :5 we ref] moral judgem5ts to ! ,reason4 ,we d n mean t we c prove t ?+s are "r or #aag wrong3 we mean precisely ! opposite--t ultimate moral tru? is imm$iate1 l ! tru? t two & two make f\r4 ,x might1 ( c\rse1 be cont5d$ t ! same ,reason :i* assures me t goodness is wor? hav+ & t ! :ole is great] ?an ! "p1 assures u no less imm$iately ( ! exi/5ce ( ,god4 ,i c only say t ,i am sure ,i h no su* imm$iate k1 & t = ! mo/ "p t k is nev] claim$ by p :o und]/& cle>ly ! diff]5ce betwe5 imm$iate k & inf]5ce4 ,! idea ( ,god is a complex conception1 bas$1 n ^u ?is or t isolat$ judgem5t or mom5t>y exp]i5ce1 b ^u ! :ole ( our exp]i5ce tak5 toge!r4 ,x is a hypo!sis sugge/$ by1 & necess>y to1 ! explanation ( our exp]i5ce z a :ole4 ,"s m9ds may lay mo/ /ress ^u ! religi\s emotions !mselves2 o!rs ^u ! exp]i5ce ( ! out] _w1 ^u ! appe>ances ( design1 or ^u ! metaphysical argum5t :i* %[s !m ! inconceivability ( matt] )\t m9d2 o!rs1 aga91 may be mo/ impress$ by ! impossibility ( acc\nt+ 9 any way = ! imm$iate consci\sness ( duty & ! conviction ( objective validity or au?ority :i* t consci\sness c>ries ) x4 ,b 9 any case ! k1 :5 x is a reasonable belief & n bas$ m]ely ^u au?ority1 involves #aah inf]5ce--j l our k ( our fri5d's exi/5ce4 ,! fact t my fri5d is kn[n to me by exp]i5ce does n prev5t 8 communicat+ 8 m9d to me4 ,i %all try to %[ y 9 my next lecture t to admit t our k ( ,god is bas$ ^u inf]5ce is n incompatible ) ! belief t ,god has spok5 to man face to face1 z a man speake? to 8 fri5d4 ,at ?is po9t x may p]haps be well1 = ! sake ( cle>ness1 to summ>ize ! position to :i* ,i h tri$ to lead y4 ,i h tri$ to %[ t ! mat]ial ,univ]se _c reasonably be ?\ght ( z hav+ any exi/5ce outside1 or indep5d5tly (1 ,m9d4 ,x c]ta9ly does n exi/ m]ely 9 any or all ( ! human & simil> m9ds ^: k is fleet+1 & :i* h1 !re is e reason to believe1 a beg9n+ 9 "t4 ,we are b\nd !n to inf] ! exi/5ce ( a s+le ,m9d or ,consci\sness1 :i* mu/ be ?\ght ( z conta9+ all ! elem5ts ( our own ,consci\sness--,reason or ,?\ght1 ,feel+1 & ,w--?\gh no d\bt 9 ,him ^? elem5ts or aspects ( ,consci\sness are comb9$ 9 a mann] ( :i* our own m9ds c give u b a v fa9t & analogical idea4 ,! _w mu/ be ?\ght ( z ultimately ! ?\ght or exp]i5ce ( ?is ,m9d1 :i* we call ,god4 ,& ?is ,m9d mu/ be ?\ght #aai ( z n only a ,?9k]1 b also z a ,cause or a ,w4 ,our own & all o!r m9ds1 no less ?an ! ev5ts ( ! mat]ial ,univ]se1 owe _! beg9n+ & cont9uance to ?is div9e ,w3 9 !m ! ?\ght or exp]i5ce ( ! div9e ,m9d is reproduc$ 9 v>i\s degrees2 & to all ( !m is communicat$ "s portion ( t causality or activity ( :i* ,god is ! ultimate s\rce1 s t _! acts mu/ be reg>d$ z due m$iately to !m1 ultimately to ,god4 ,b1 ?\gh ^! m9ds are :olly dep5d5t ^u & 9 intimate connexion ) ! div9e ,m9d1 !y _c be reg>d$ z p>ts ( ! div9e ,consci\sness4 ,reality consi/s ( ,god & all ! m9ds t ,he wills to exi/1 toge!r ) ! _w ( ,nature :i* exi/s 9 & = ^? m9ds4 ,reality is ! sy/em or society ( spirits & _! exp]i5ce4 ,! "* & ultimate purpose ( ! div9e ,m9d is reveal$ to u1 h[ev] inadequately or imp]fectly1 9 ! moral consci\sness2 & ! moral ideal :i* is ?us communicat$ to u makes x reasonable = u to expect1 = at lea/ ! high] ( ! dep5d5t or creat$ m9ds1 a cont9uance1 ( _! individual exi/5ce1 aft] physical dea?4 ,pa91 s91 & o!r evils mu/ be reg>d$ z necess>y incid5ts 9 ! process by :i* ! div9e ,w is br++ ab\t ! greate/ atta9able good ( all consci\s be+s4 ,! "q :e!r our mat]ial ,univ]se1 #abj consid]$ z ! object ( ,m9d1 has a beg9n+ & w h an end1 is "o :i* we h no data = decid+4 ,"t-di/9ctions1 ,i ?9k1 mu/ be reg>d$ z objective--t is to say1 z =m+ "p ( ! nature & con/itution ( ! real _w2 b ! ant9omy involv$ ei!r 9 suppos+ an endless succession or a beg9n+ & end ( ! "t-s]ies is "o :i* our intellectual faculties are1 or at lea/ h s f> prov$1 incapable ( solv+4 ,! elem5t ( inadequacy & unc]ta9ty :i* ! admission ( ?is ant9omy introduces into our !ory ( ! ,univ]se is an emphatic rem9d] to u ( ! inadequate & imp]fect "* ( all our k4 ,! k1 h[ev]1 t we possess1 ?\gh inadequate k1 is real k--n a %am k ( m]ely relative or human validity2 & is suffici5t n only = ! guidance ( life b ev5 = ! p>tial1 ?\gh n ! complete1 satisfaction ( "o ( ! noble/ impulses ( ! human m9d--! dis9t]e/$ passion = tru?4 ',n[ we see 9 a mirror d>kly'2 b /ill we see4 ,! view ( ! ,univ]se :i* ,i h endeav\r$ v inadequately to set be=e y is a =m ( ,idealism4 ,inasmu* z x recognizes ! exi/5ce--?\gh n ! sep>ate & indep5d5t exi/5ce--( _m p]sons2 inasmu* z x reg>ds bo? ,god & man z p]sons1 )\t attempt+ #aba to m]ge ! exi/5ce ( ei!r 9 "o all-includ+1 compreh5sive consci\sness1 x may fur!r be describ$ z a =m ( 'p]sonal ,idealism4' ,b1 if any "o f9ds x easi] to ?9k ( mat]ial ,nature z hav+ an exi/5ce :i*1 ?\gh dep5d5t ^u & will$ by ! div9e ,m9d1 is n simply an exi/5ce 9 & = m9d1 su* a view ( ! ,univ]se w s]ve equally well z a basis ( ,religion4 ,= religi\s purposes x makes no diff]5ce :e!r we ?9k ( ,nature z exi/+ 9 ! ,m9d ( ,god1 or z simply creat$ or br\ght into & kept 9 exi/5ce by t ,m9d4 ,:5 y h subtract$ f ! !i/ic case e argum5t t dep5ds = its =ce ^u ! !ory t ! idea ( matt] )\t ,m9d is an un?9kable absurdity1 en\gh w rema9 to %[ ! unreasonabl5ess ( suppos+ t 9 po9t ( fact matt] ev] has exi/$ )\t be+ caus$ & controll$ by ,m9d4 ,! argum5t = ,idealism may1 ,i hope1 h at all ev5ts exhibit$ incid5tally ! gr\ndlessness & improbability ( mat]iali/ic & naturali/ic assumptions1 & left ! way cle> = ! e/abli%m5t ( ,!ism by ! argum5ts :i* re/ ^u ! discov]y t ,causality implies volition2 ^u ! appe>ances ( intellig5ce 9 organic life2 ^u ! exi/5ce ( ! moral consci\sness2 & m g5]ally ^u ! enorm\s probability t ! ultimate ,s\rce ( ,reality %\ld resemble r #abb ! highe/ ?an ! l[e/ k9d ( exi/5ce ( :i* we h exp]i5ce4 ,t ,reality z a :ole may be mo/ reasonably int]pret$ by ,reality at its highe/ is aft] all ! sum & sub/ance ( all !i/ic argum5ts4 ,if anybody f9ds x easi] to ?9k ( matt] z uncreat$ b z always guid$ & controll$ by ,m9d1 ,i d n ?9k !re w be any religi\s objection to su* a position2 ?\gh x is1 z x seems to me1 intellectually a less unassailable position ?an is af=d$ by an ,idealism ( ! type :i* ,i h mo/ inadequately sket*$4 ,mr4 ,bradley 9 a cynical mom5t has def9$ ,metaphysics z ! 'f9d+ ( bad reasons = :at we believe ^u in/9ct4' ,i d n = myself accept t def9ition1 :i* ,mr4 ,bradley himself w\ld n ( c\rse reg>d z express+ ! :ole tru? ( ! matt]4 ,b1 ?\gh ,i am firmly conv9c$ t x is possible to f9d good reasons = ! religi\s beliefs & hopes :i* h 9 fact inspir$ ! noble/ lives1 ,i /ill feel t ! greate/ s]vice :i* ev5 a little acqua9tance ) ,philosophy may r5d] to _m :o h n ! "t = any pr(\nd] /udy ( x1 w be to give !m great] boldness & confid5ce 9 accept+ a view ( ! ,univ]se :i* satisfies ! in/9ctive or unanalys$ dem&s ( _! moral1 intellectual1 & spiritual nature4 #abc ,,note ,,on ,,non-,,!i/ic ,,idealism ,x may p]haps be well = ! sake ( great] cle>ness to summ>ize my objections--^? already m5tion$ & "s o!rs--to ! sy/em ( ,dr4 ,mc,taggart1 :i* ,i admit to be1 = "o :o has accept$ ! ideali/ic position t matt] does n exi/ ap>t f ,m9d1 ! only intelligible alt]native to ,!ism4 ,8 !ory is1 x w be rememb]$1 t ultimate ,reality consi/s ( a sy/em ( selves or spirits1 uncreat$ & et]nal1 =m+ toge!r a ,unity1 b n a consci\s ,unity1 s t consci\sness exi/s only 9 ! sep>ate selves1 n 9 ! :ole3 7#a7 ,x is admitt$ t ! mat]ial _w exi/s only 9 & = ,m9d4 ,!re is no reason to ?9k t any human m9d1 or any ( ! o!r m9ds ( :i* ,dr4 ,mc,taggart's ,univ]se is compos$1 kn[s ! :ole ( ?is _w4 ,:at k9d ( exi/5ce !n h ! p>ts ( ! ,univ]se :i* are n kn[n to any m9d8 ,x seems to me t ,dr4 ,mc,taggart w\ld be compell$ to admit t !y d n exi/ at all4 ,! _w po/ulat$ by ,sci5ce w\ld ?us be admitt$ to be a delusion4 ,?is repres5ts a subjective ,idealism ( an extreme & /agg]+ k9d :i* _c meet ! objections commonly urg$ aga9/ all ,idealism4 7#b7 ,moreov]1 ! _w is n su* an intellectually complete sy/em z ,dr4 ,mc,taggart insi/s t x mu/ be1 ap>t f ! relations ( its kn[n p>ts to its unkn[n p>ts4 ,if !re are p>ts :i* are unkn[n to any m9d1 & :i* !re=e d n exi/ at all1 x is n a sy/em at all4 7#c7 ,if x be said t all ! spirits betwe5 !m "k ! _w--"o kn[+ "o "p1 ano!r ano!r--?is is a m]e hypo!sis1 oppos$ to all ! probabilities sugge/$ by exp]i5ce1 & aft] all w\ld be a v inadequate answ] to our difficulties4 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart insi/s #abd t ! _w ( exi/+ ?+s exi/s z a sy/em4 ,su* exi/5ce to an ,ideali/ mu/ mean exi/5ce = a m9d2 a sy/em n kn[n z a sy/em to any m9d :atev] c\ld h>dly be said to exi/ at all4 7#d7 ,if x be sugge/$ 7z ,dr4 ,mc,taggart 0 at "o "t incl9$ to sugge/7 t e m9d consid]$ z a timeless ,n\m5on is omnisci5t1 ?\gh 9 its ph5om5al & temporal aspect its k is int]mitt5t & always limit$1 ,i reply 7a7 ! !ory seems to me n only gratuit\s b un9telligible1 & 7b7 x is op5 to all ! difficulties & objections ( ! !ory t "t & *ange are m]ely subjective delusions4 ,?is is too l>ge a "q to discuss "h3 ,i c only ref] to ! treatm5t ( ! subject by su* writ]s z ,lotze 7see above7 & ,m4 ,b]gson4 ,i may also ref] to ,mr4 ,bradley's argum5t 7,appe>ance & ,reality1 p4 #ej sq47 aga9/ ! !ory t ! individual ,ego is out ( "t4 7#e7 ,! !ory ( pre-exi/5t s\ls is oppos$ to all ! probabilities sugge/$ by exp]i5ce4 ,s\l & organism are connect$ 9 su* a way t ! pre-exi/5ce ( "o elem5t 9 :at pres5ts itself & works 9 our _w z a unity is an extremely difficult supposition1 & involves assumptions :i* r$uce to a m9imum ! am\nt ( id5tity or cont9uity t c\ld be claim$ = ! ,ego ?r\gh\t its successive lives4 ,a s\l :i* has =gott5 all its previ\s exp]i5ces may h "s id5tity ) its previ\s /ate1 b n mu*4 ,moreov]1 we %\ld h to suppose t ! correspond5ce ( a c]ta9 type ( body ) a c]ta9 k9d ( s\l1 z well z ! resemblance betwe5 ! individual & 8 p>5ts1 implies no k9d ( causal connexion1 b is due to m]e accid5t2 or1 if x is n to accid5t1 to a v arbitr>y k9d ( pre-e/abli%$ h>mony :i* !re is no?+ 9 exp]i5ce to sugge/1 & :i* 7^u ,dr4 ,mc,taggart's !ory7 !re is no creative intellig5ce to pre-e/abli%4 ,! !ory _c be absolutely refut$1 b all ,dr4 ,mc,taggart's +5uity has n--to my own m9d1 #abe & 7,i feel sure7 to mo/ m9ds--made x seem o!rwise ?an extremely difficult & improbable4 ,its sole recomm5dation is t x makes possible an ,idealism )\t ,!ism3 b1 if ,!ism be an easi] & m def5sible !ory1 t is no recomm5dation at all4 7#f7 ,dr4 ,mc,taggart's :ole !ory seems to me to wav] betwe5 two inconsi/5t views ( ,reality4 ,:5 he insi/s t ! _w consi/s ( a sy/em or ,unity1 he t5ds t[>ds a view ( ?+s :i* makes ! sy/em ( intellectual relations con/itut+ k or ,sci5ce to be ! v reality ( ?+s3 on su* a view !re is no impossibility ( an ultimate ,reality n kn[n to any "o m9d4 ,b ,dr4 ,mc,taggart has too /rong a hold on ! conviction ( ! supremely real "* ( consci\s m9d & ! unreality ( m]e ab/ractions to be satisfi$ ) ?is view4 ,if !re is no m9d :i* bo? kn[s & wills ! exi/5ce & ! mutual relations ( ! spirits1 ! supreme reality mu/ be f\nd 9 ! individual spirits !mselves2 yet ! sy/em1 if kn[n to none ( !m1 seems to fall outside ! reality4 ,! natural t5d5cy ( a sy/em :i* f9ds ! sole reality 9 et]nally self-exi/5t s\ls is t[>ds ,pluralism--a !ory ( :olly indep5d5t ',reals' or ',monads4' ,dr4 ,mc,taggnrt is too mu* ( a ,hegelian to acquiesce 9 su* a view4 ,! gulf betwe5 ! two t5d5cies seems to me--) all respect--to be awkw>dly bridg$ ov] by ! assumption t ! sep>ate selves =m an intelligible sy/em1 :i* nev]!less no "o really exi/5t _s actually und]/&s4 ,if a sy/em ( relations c be ,reality1 !re is no gr\nd = assum+ ! pre-exi/5ce or et]nity ( individual s\ls3 if on ! o!r h& ,reality is 'exp]i5ce1' an unexp]i5c$ 'sy/em' _c be real1 & ! 'unity' disappe>s4 ,?is is a l9e ( objection :i* x w\ld require a mu* m ?or\gh discussion to develope4 7#g7 ,on ! view :i* ,i myself hold z to ! nature ( ,causality1 ! only intelligible cause ( ev5ts is a ,w4 ,! ev5ts ( ,dr4 ,mc,taggart's _w 7putt+ aside ! v #abf small proportion :i* are due1 9 "p at lea/1 to ! volunt>y action ( m5 or spirits7 are n caus$ at all4 ,8 !ory is !re=e op5 to all--& m ?an all--! objections :i* ,i h urg$ 9 ,lecture ,,ii4 aga9/ ! !ory :i* expla9s ! ,univ]se z ! ?\ght ( a ,m9d b n z caus$ by t ,m9d4 7#h7 ,x is j possible t "s "o might sugge/ t ! fir/ ( my objections might be met by ! allegation t !re is no?+ 9 ! s*eme :i* =bids u to suppose t ! :ole ( ,nature is kn[n to m ?an "o ( ! spirits :i* make up ,reality1 ?\gh n to all1 or inde$ any1 ( ! human & non-human spirits kn[n to u4 ,i %\ld reply 7a7 t ! consid]ations :i* lead to ! hypo!sis ( "o omnisci5t ,be+ d n require m ?an "o su* _s1 & entia non sunt multiplic&a praet] necessitatem2 7b7 su* a s*eme w\ld /ill be op5 to ,objection #g4 ,if x is a speculative possibility t all ,nature may exi/ 9 ! k ( m ?an "o _s1 x _c well be ?\ght ( z will$ by m ?an "o _s4 ,if ! ,univ]se1 admitt$ to =m an ord]$ sy/em1 is caus$ by rational w at all1 x mu/ surely be caus$ by "o ,w4 ,b p]haps a s]i\s discussion ( a poly!i/ic s*eme su* z ?is may be po/pon$ till x is s]i\sly ma9ta9$4 ,x has n be5 sugge/$1 s f> z ,i am aw>e1 by ,dr4 ,mc,taggart himself4 7#i7 ,! real /r5g? ( ,dr4 ,mc,taggart's sy/em mu/ be measur$ by ! validity ( 8 objections to a ,!ism su* z ,i h def5d$4 ,i h attempt$ to reply to ^? objections 9 ! c\rse ( ^! ,lectures1 & m at l5g? 9 a review ( 8 ,"s ,dogmas ( ,religion 9 ,m9d 7,n4,s471 vol4 xv41 #aijf4 #a ,cf4 ,fl9t's ,!ism1 ,ed4 v41 p4 #aag & ,app4 xi4 #b ,! mo/ illum9at+ discussion ( "t & ! mo/ conv9c+ argum5t = its 'objectivity' :i* ,i "k1 is to be f\nd 9 ,lotze's ,metaphysic1 ,book ,,ii4 *ap4 iii41 b x _c be recomm5d$ to ! beg9n] 9 ,metaphysic4 ,a brilliant exposition ( ! view ( ! ,univ]se :i* reg>ds "t & *ange z belong+ to ! v reality ( ! ,univ]se1 has rec5tly appe>$ 9 ,m4 ,b]gson's ,l',evolution ,creatrice1 b he has h>dly attempt$ to deal ) ! metaphysical difficulties indicat$ above4 ,! book1 h[ev]1 seems to me ! mo/ important philosophical "w t has appe>$ s9ce ,mr4 ,bradley's ,appe>ance & ,reality1 & ?\gh ! writ] has h>dly =mulat$ 8 ,natural ,!ology1 x con/itutes a v important contribution to ! !i/ic argum5t4 ,be+ bas$ ^u a pr(\nd /udy ( biological ,evolution1 x may be specially comm5d$ to sci5tific read]s4 #c ,su* a view is exp\nd$ 9 ,dr4 ,s*ill]'s e>ly "w ,! ,riddles ( ! ,sph9x & 9 ,pr(essor ,h[ison's ,! ,limits ( ,evolution4 ,! v di/+ui%$ ,fr5* ?9k] ,*>les ,r5\vi] 7,la ,n\velle ,monadologie1 etc471 l ,orig51 believ$ t s\ls 7 pre-exi/5t b creat$4 #d ,i use ! ^w 'causally connect$' 9 ! popul> or sci5tific s5se ( ! ^w1 to indicate m]ely an actually obs]v$ psy*o-physical law4 #e ,9 "p1 p]haps1 also to a mi/ak5 !ory ( pr$ication1 :i* assumes t1 because e fact 9 ! _w c be repres5t$ z logically a pr$icate ( ,reality at l>ge1 !re=e !re is b "o ,sub/ance or 7metaphysically7 ,real ,be+ 9 ! _w1 ( :i* all o!r exi/5ces are really m]e 'attributes4' ,b ?is !ory _c be discuss$ "h4 #f ,9 ,! ,new ,!ology4 #g ,e4g4 by ,mr4 ,bradley 9 ,appe>ance & ,reality & /ill m uncompromis+ly by ,pr(essor ,a4 ,e4 ,taylor 9 ,! ,problem ( ,conduct1 b ,i rejoice to f9d t ! latt] v able writ] has rec5tly giv5 up ?is !ory ( a 'sup]-moral' ,absolute4 #h ,i ?9k x desirable to m5tion "h t ,pr(essor ,watson's acc\nt ( my views 9 8 ,philosophical ,basis ( ,religion completely misrepres5ts my real position4 ,i h repli$ to 8 criticisms 9 ,m9d1 ,n4,s4 ,no4 #fi 7,jan4 #aiji74 #i ,?is is sometimes d5i$ by ,philosoph]s1 b ,i h nev] be5 able to und]/& on :at gr\nds4 ,if ,i "k a priori ! exi/5ce ( o!r m51 ,i ought to be able to say a priori h[ _m !y are & to say some?+ ab\t !m4 ,& ?is is m ?an any "o claims4 #aj ,9 ,esquisse d'une ,philosophie de la ,religion d'apres ,la ,psy*ologie et l'hi/oire4 #abg ,,lecture ,v ,,revelation ,i h tri$ 9 previ\s lectures to %[ t ! appreh5sion ( religi\s tru? does n dep5d ^u "s special k9d ( intuition2 t x is n due to "s special faculty sup]ior to & diff]5t 9 k9d f our ord9>y intellectual activities1 b to an ex]cise ( ! same intellectual faculties by :i* we atta9 to tru? 9 o!r matt]s--includ+1 h[ev]1 especially ! :olly unique faculty ( imm$iately disc]n+ values or pron\nc+ moral judgem5ts4 ,! ^w 'fai?' %\ld1 z x seems to me1 be us$ to express n a my/]i\s capacity = atta9+ to k )\t ?\ght or )\t evid5ce1 b to indicate "s ( ! manifold *>act]i/ics by :i* our religi\s k is di/+ui%$ f ! k ei!r ( common life or ( ! physical ,sci5ces4 ,if ,i _h "t !re w\ld be mu* to be said ab\t ^! *>act]i/ics1 & ,i ?9k ,i c\ld %[ t ! popul> di/9ction betwe5 k & religi\s #abh fai? f9ds :atev] real ju/ification x possesses 9 ^! *>act]i/ics ( religi\s k4 ,i might insi/ on ! frequ5tly implicit & unanalys$ "* ( religi\s ?9k+2 ^u ! incomplet5ess & inadequacy ( ev5 ! fulle/ acc\nt t ! mature/ & acute/ ,philosoph] c give ( ultimate ,reality2 ^u ! m]ely probable & analogical "* ( mu* ( ! reason+ :i* is necess>ily employ$ bo? 9 ! mo/ popul> & 9 ! mo/ philosophical k9ds ( reason+ ab\t su* matt]s2 & above all ^u ! prom95t place :i* moral judgem5ts occupy 9 religi\s ?\ght1 moral judgem5ts :i*1 on acc\nt ( _! imm$iate "* & _! emotional sett+1 are (t5 n recogniz$ 9 _! true "* z judgem5ts ( ! ,reason4 ,mo/ ( ! mi/akes into :i* popul> ?9k+ has fall5 9 ?is matt]--! mi/akes :i* culm9ate 9 ! fam\s exam9ation-pap] def9ition ( fai? z 'a means ( believ+ t :i* we "k n to be true'--w\ld be avoid$ if we w\ld only rememb]1 ) ,/4 ,paul & mo/ ( ! great] religi\s ?9k]s1 t ! true anti!sis is n betwe5 fai? & reason b betwe5 fai? & sight4 ,all religi\s belief implies a belief 9 some?+ :i* _c be t\*$ or ta/$ or h&l$1 & :i* _c be e/abli%$ by any m]e logical d$uction f :at c be t\*$ or ta/$ or h&l$4 ,s f> f imply+ #abi scepticism z to ! p[] ( ,reason1 ?is opposition betwe5 fai? & sight actually ass]ts ! possibility ( atta9+ by ?\ght to a k ( realities :i* _c be t\*$ or ta/$ or h&l$--a k ( equal validity & tru/wor?9ess ) t :i* is popul>ly said to be due to ! s5ses1 ?\gh ,plato has taught u once = all#a t ! s5ses by !mselves nev] give u real k1 & t 9 ! appreh5sion ( ! mo/ ord9>y matt] ( fact !re is impli$ ! action ( ! self-same intellect by :i* alone we c rea* ! k ( ,god4 ,x may fur!r be po9t$ out t1 ?\gh nei!r religi\s k nor moral k are m]e emotion1 !y are bo? ( !m v closely connect$ ) c]ta9 emotions4 ,great moral discov]ies are made1 n s mu* by sup]ior intellectual p[]1 z by sup]ior int]e/ 9 ! subject-matt] ( ,morality4 ,v ord9>y intellig5ce c see1 :5 x is really br\ght to be> ^u ! matt]1 ! irrationality or immorality ( bad cu/oms1 oppressions1 social inju/ices2 b ! p :o h l$ ! revolt aga9/ ^! ?+s h g5]ally be5 ! p :o h felt int5sely ab\t !m4 ,s x is ) ! m di/9ctly religi\s k4 ,religi\s ?\ght & insight are l>gely dep5d5t ^u ! emotions to :i* religi\s #acj ideas & beliefs appeal4 ,! abs5ce ( religi\s ?\ght & def9ite religi\s belief is v (t5 7,i am f> f say+ always7 due to a want ( int]e/ 9 ,religion2 b t does n prove t religi\s ?\ght is n ! "w ( ! intellect1 any m ?an ! fact t a man is ignorant ( ,politics because he takes no int]e/ 9 ,politics proves t political tru? is a m]e matt] ( emotion1 & has no?+ to d ) ! und]/&+4 ,?\ght is always guid$ by int]e/--a tru? :i* mu/ n be di/ort$ ) a c]ta9 mod]n s*ool ( ?\ght1 if inde$ x c prop]ly be call$ ?\ght1 into ! ass]tion t ?9k+ is no?+ b will+1 & t !re=e we are at lib]ty to ?9k j :at we please4 ,& t leads on to a fur!r po9t4 ,emotion & desire are v closely connect$ ) ! w4 ,a man's moral insight & ! developm5t ( 8 ?\ght ab\t moral que/ions dep5d v l>gely ^u ! ext5t to :i* he acts up to :atev] light he has4 ,vice1 z ,ari/otle put x1 is ph?>tike ar*es--de/ructive ( moral fir/ pr9ciples4 ,moral insight is l>gely dep5d5t ^u "*4 ,& s is religi\s insight4 ,?us x is q true to say t religi\s belief dep5ds 9 "p ^u ! /ate ( ! w4 ,?is doctr9e has be5 s sc&al\sly abus$ by _m ,!ologians & ,apologi/s t ,i use x ) great hesitation4 ,i h no sympa?y #aca ) ! idea t we are ju/ifi$ 9 believ+ a religi\s doctr9e m]ely because we wi% x to be true1 or ) ! ins9uation t non-belief 9 a religi\s tru? is always or necess>ily due to moral obliquity4 ,b /ill x is und5iable t a man's e?ical & religi\s beliefs are to "s ext5t affect$ by ! /ate ( 8 w4 ,t is s ) all k to "s ext5t2 = progress 9 k requires att5tion1 & is l>gely dep5d5t ^u int]e/4 ,if ,i take no int]e/ 9 ! prop]ties ( curves or ! squ>e root ( -#a1 ,i am n v likely to make a good ma!matician4 ,?is connexion ( k ) int]e/ applies 9 an exceptional degree to religi\s k3 & t is "o ( ! po9ts :i* ,i ?9k _m religi\s ?9k]s h int5d$ to emphasize by _! too h>d & fa/ di/9ctions betwe5 fai? & k4 ,belief itself is ?us to "s ext5t affect$ by ! /ate ( ! w2 & /ill m emphatically does ! ext5t to :i* belief affects action dep5d ^u ! w4 ,_m beliefs :i* we q s9c]ely hold are :at h be5 call$ 'otiose beliefs'2 we d n by an ef=t ( ! w realize !m suffici5tly /rongly = !m to affect action4 ,_m a man kn[s p]fectly t 8 c\rse ( life w injure or de/roy 8 physical heal?2 x is n ?r\gh intellectual scepticism t he disobeys 8 #acb physician's prescriptions1 b because o!r desires & incl9ations prev5t 8 att5d+ to !m & act+ ^u !m4 ,x is obvi\s t to m5 l ,/4 ,paul & ,lu!r fai? meant mu* m ?an a m]e /ate ( ! intellect2 x includ$ a c]ta9 emotional & a c]ta9 volitional attitude2 x includ$ love & x includ$ ob$i5ce4 ,:e!r our intellectual beliefs ab\t ,religion are en]getic en\gh to influ5ce action1 does to an enorm\s ext5t dep5d ^u our wills4 ,fai? is1 !n1 us$1 & almo/ inevitably us$1 9 su* a great v>iety ( s5ses t ,i d n l to lay d[n "o def9ite & exclusive def9ition ( x2 b x w\ld be safe to say t1 = _m purposes & 9 _m connexions1 religi\s fai? means ! delib]ate adoption by an ef=t ( ! w1 z practically c]ta9 = purposes ( action & ( feel+1 ( a religi\s belief :i* to ! intellect is1 or may be1 m]ely probable4 ,= purposes ( life x is entirely reasonable to treat probabilities z c]ta9ties4 ,if a man has reason to ?9k 8 fri5d is tru/wor?y1 he w d well to tru/ him :olly & implicitly4 ,if a man has reason to ?9k t a c]ta9 view ( ! ,univ]se is ! mo/ probable "o1 he w d well habitually to all[ t conviction to dom9ate n m]ely 8 actions1 b ! habitual t5\r ( 8 emotional & spiritual life4 ,we %\ld n love a human be+ mu* if we all[$ ourselves habitually to #acc contemplate ! logical possibility t ! lov$ "o 0 unwor?y (1 or irresponsive to1 our affection4 ,we c\ld n love ,god if we habitually contemplat$ ! fact t ,8 exi/5ce re/s = u ^u judgem5ts 9 :i* !re is m or less possibility ( error1 ?\gh !re is no reason :y we %\ld1 9 our speculative mom5ts1 claim a great] c]ta9ty = !m ?an seems to be reasonable4 ,! doctr9e t 'probability is ! guide ( life' is "o on :i* e s5sible man habitually acts 9 all o!r relations ( life3 ,bi%op ,butl] 0 "r 9 cont5d+ t x %\ld be appli$ no less unhesitat+ly to ! matt] ( religi\s belief & religi\s aspiration4 ,! view :i* ,i h tak5 ( ! nature ( fai? may be illu/rat$ by ! position ( ,clem5t ( ,alex&ria4 ,x is cle> f 8 writ+s t by fai? he meant a k9d ( conviction fall+ %ort ( demon/ration or imm$iate intellectual insight1 & dep5d5t 9 "p ^u ! /ate ( ! w & ! he>t4 ,clem5t did n disp>age k 9 ! int]e/s ( fai?3 fai? 0 to him a m elem5t>y k9d ( k re/+ l>gely ^u moral conviction1 & ! f\ndation ( t high] /ate ( intellectual appreh5sion :i* he call$ ,gnosis4 ,i d n mean1 ( c\rse1 to adopt ,clem5t's ,philosophy z a :ole2 ,i m]ely ref] to x z illu/rat+ ! po9t t1 prop]ly consid]$1 fai? is1 or r includes1 a p>ticul> k9d or /age #acd ( k1 & is n a totally diff]5t & ev5 opposite /ate ( m9d4 ,x w\ld be easy to %[ t ?is has be5 fully recogniz$ by _m1 if n mo/1 ( ! great ,*ri/ian ?9k]s4 ,"o la/ po9t4 ,x is ( ! utmo/ importance to di/+ui% betwe5 ! process by :i* psy*ologically a man arrives at a religi\s or o!r tru? & ! reasons :i* make x true4 ,because ,i d5y t ! tru? ( ,god's exi/5ce c reasonably be accept$ on ! basis ( an imm$iate judgem5t or intuition1 ,i d n d5y = "o mom5t t an app>5tly intuitive conviction ( ! tru? ( ,*ri/ianity1 z ( o!r religions1 actually exi/s4 ,! religi\s belief ( ! va/ majority ( p]sons has always re/$1 & mu/ always re/1 v l>gely ^u tradition1 education1 environm5t1 au?ority ( "o k9d or ano!r--au?ority support$ or confirm$ by a v>y+ measure ( indep5d5t reflection or exp]i5ce4 ,&1 j :]e ! influ5ce ( au?ority is mo/ complete & ov]:elm+1 x is lea/ felt to be au?ority4 ,! p]son ^: beliefs are mo/ entirely produc$ by education or environm5t is v (t5 mo/ conv9c$ t 8 op9ions are due solely to 8 own imm$iate insight4 ,b ev5 :]e ?is is n ! case--ev5 :]e ! religi\s man is tak+ a new dep>ture1 revolt+ aga9/ 8 environm5t & adopt+ a religi\s belief absolutely at v>iance ) ! e/abli%$ #ace belief ( 8 society--,i d n cont5d t su* new religi\s ideas are always due to unobs]v$ & unanalys$ processes ( reason+4 ,t 9 mo/ cases1 :5 a p]son adopts a new cre$1 he w\ld himself give "s reason = 8 *ange ( fai? is obvi\s1 ?\gh ! reason :i* he w\ld allege w\ld n 9 all cases be ! "o :i* really caus$ ! *ange ( religion4 ,!re may be o!r psy*ological influ5ces :i* cause belief besides ! influ5ce ( environm5t3 9 "s cases ! psy*ological causes ( su* beliefs are altoge!r beyond analysis4 ,b1 ?\gh ,i d n ?9k ,m4 ,augu/e ,sabati] ju/ifi$ 9 assum+ t a belief is true1 & mu/ come directly f ,god1 simply because we _c easily expla9 its g5esis by ! individual's environm5t & psy*ological antec$5ts1 x is ( extreme importance to insi/ t x is n prov$ to be false because x 0 n adopt$ prim>ily1 or at all1 on adequate !oretical gr\nds4 ,a belief :i* arose at fir/ entirely )\t logical ju/ification1 or x may be on intellectual gr\nds subsequ5tly discov]$ to be inadequate or false1 may nev]!less be "o :i* c & does ju/ify itself to ! reflective intellect ( ! p]son himself or ( o!r p]sons4 ,& _m new1 true1 & valuable beliefs h und\bt$ly aris5 9 ?is way4 ,ev5 9 physical ,sci5ce we all "k t !re is no ,logic ( discov]y4 ,x #acf is a famili> criticism ^u ! ,logic ( ,bacon t he ignor$ or "u-e/imat$ ! "p t is play$ 9 sci5tific ?9k+ by hypo!sis1 & ! consequ5t ne$ ( sci5tific imag9ation4 ,v (t5 ! new sci5tific idea comes into ! discov]]'s m9d1 he kn[s n h[ or :y4 ,"s great man ( ,sci5ce--,i ?9k1 ,helmholtz--said ( a brilliant discov]y ( 81 ',x 0 giv5 to me4' ,b x 0 n true because x came to ,helmholtz 9 ?is way1 b because x 0 subsequ5tly v]ifi$ & prov$4 ,n[1 und\bt$ly1 religi\s beliefs1 new & old1 (t5 d pres5t !mselves to ! m9ds ( individuals 9 an intuitive & unacc\ntable way4 ,!y may subsequ5tly be ju/ifi$ at ! b> ( ,reason3 & yet ,reason might nev] h discov]$ !m = itself4 ,!y w\ld nev] h come into ! _w unless !y _h pres5t$ !mselves at fir/ to "s m9d or o!r z intuitions1 inspirations1 imm$iate ,revelations3 & yet 7once aga97 ! fact t !y s pres5t !mselves does n by itself prove !m to be true4 ,i may p]haps illu/rate :at ,i mean by ! analogy ( ,poetry4 ,i suppose few p w pu% ! s\nd-)\t-s5se view ( ,poetry to ! l5g? ( d5y+ t poets d sometimes see & tea* u tru?s4 ,no "o--lea/ ( all "o :o is n ev5 a v]se-mak] himself--c1 ,i suppose1 analyse ! intellectual process by :i* a poet #acg gets at 8 tru?s4 ,! insight by :i* he arrives at !m is closely connect$ ) emotions ( v>i\s k9ds3 & yet ! tru?s are n !mselves emotions1 nor d !y 9 all cases m]ely /ate ! fact t ! poet has felt su* & su* emotions4 ,!y are propositions ab\t ! nature ( ?+s1 n m]ely ab\t ! poet's m5tal /ates4 ,& yet ! tru?s are n true because ! poet feels !m1 z he w\ld say--no matt] h[ passionately he feels !m4 ,!re is no sep>ate organ ( poetic tru?3 & n all ! ?+s t poets h passionately felt are true4 ,"s highly poetical ?\ghts h be5 v false ?\ghts4 ,b1 if !y are true1 !y mu/ be true = good logical reasons1 :i* a philosophical critic may ev5 9 "s cases by subsequ5t reflection be able to dis5tangle & set =?4 ,yet ! poet did n get at ^? tru?s by way ( philosophical reflection3 or1 if he 0 l$ to !m by any logical process1 he c\ld n h analys$ 8 own reason+4 ,! poet c\ld n h produc$ ! argum5ts ( ! philosoph]3 ! philosoph] )\t ! poet's lead might nev] h se5 ! tru?4 ,i am afraid ,i mu/ n /ay to def5d or illu/rate ?is position3 ,i w only say t ! poets ,i %\ld mo/ naturally g to = illu/ration w\ld be su* poets z ,wordswor?1 ,t5nyson1 & ,br[n+1 ?\gh p]haps all ?ree are a little #ach too consci\sly philosophic to supply ! ideal illu/ration4 ,i d n ?9k x w be difficult to apply ^! reflections to ! case ( religi\s & e?ical tru?4 ,all religi\s tru?1 z ,i hold1 dep5ds logically ^u inf]5ce2 inf]5ce f ! :ole body ( our exp]i5ces1 among :i* ! mo/ important place is held by our imm$iate moral judgem5ts4 ,! tru? ( ,!ism is 9 t s5se a tru? disc]nible by ,reason4 ,b x does n foll[ t1 :5 x 0 fir/ discov]$1 x 0 arriv$ at by ! inf]5ces :i* ,i h endeav\r$ to "s ext5t to analyse1 or by "o ( ! _m l9es ( ?\ght :i* may lead to ! same conclusions4 ,x 0 n ! ,greek philosoph]s s mu* z ! ,jewi% prophets :o taught ! _w true ,mono!ism4 ,hosea1 ,amos1 ! two ,isaiahs probably arriv$ at _! ,mono!ism l>gely by intuition2 or 79 s f> z x 0 by inf]5tial processes7 ! premisses ( _! argum5t 7 v probably inh]it$ beliefs ( e>li] ,judaism :i* w\ld n comm5d !mselves )\t qualification to a mod]n ?9k]4 ,9 its ess5tials ! ,mono!ism ( ,isaiah is a reasonable belief2 we accept x because x is reasonable1 n because ,isaiah _h an intuition t x 0 true2 = we h reject$ _m ?+s :i* to ,isaiah probably seem$ no less self-evid5tly true4 ,& yet x w\ld be a pr(\nd mi/ake to assume t #aci ! philosoph]s :o n[ def5d ,isaiah's cre$ w\ld ev] h arriv$ at x )\t ,isaiah's aid4 ,i hope t by ?is "t y w h se5 to "s ext5t ! _s 9 :i* ,i am approa*+ ! special subject ( to-day's lecture--! "q ( ,revelation4 ,9 "s ( ! s5ses t h be5 giv5 to x1 ! idea ( ,revelation is "o :i* h>dly any "o tra9$ 9 ! s*ool--t is to say1 any s*ool--( mod]n ,philosophy is likely to accept4 ,! idea t pieces ( in=mation h be5 sup]naturally & )\t any employm5t ( _! own intellectual faculties communicat$ at v>i\s times to p>ticul> p]sons1 _! tru? be+ gu>ante$ by miracles--9 ! s5se ( int]ruptions ( ! ord9>y c\rse ( nature by an extraord9>y fiat ( creative p[]--is "o :i* is already reject$ by mo/ mod]n !ologians1 ev5 among ^? :o w\ld g5]ally be call$ r cons]vative !ologians4 ,i w n n[ argue ! "q :e!r any miracul\s ev5t1 h[ev] well atte/$1 c\ld possibly be suffici5t evid5ce = ! tru? ( spiritual tea*+ giv5 9 atte/ation ( x4 ,i w m]ely rem>k t to any "o :o has really appreciat$ ! mean+ ( biblical criticism1 x is sc>cely conceivable t ! evid5ce = miracles c\ld seem suffici5tly cog5t to con/itute su* an atte/ation4 ,9 pro( ( t ,i w m]ely appeal to ! mode/1 apologetic1 t5tative tone 9 :i* #adj s*ol>ly & sob]-m9d$ !ologians :o w\ld usually be class$ among ! def5d]s ( miracles--m5 l ! ,bi%op ( ,ely or ,pr(essor ,s&ay ( ,ox=d--are cont5t to speak ( su* evid5ces4 ,!y admit ! difficulty ( prov+ t su* miracul\s ev5ts really happ5$ ?\s&s ( ye>s ago on ! /r5g? ( n>ratives writt5 at ! v e>lie/ fifty ye>s aft] ! alleg$ ev5t1 & !y invite u r to believe 9 ! miracles on ! evid5ce ( a ,revelation already accept$ ?an to accept ! revelation on ! evid5ce ( ! miracles4 ,i %all h a ^w to say on ?is "q ( miracles next "t2 b = ! pres5t ,i want to e/abli%1 or r )\t mu* argum5t to put be=e y = y\r consid]ation1 ?is position2 t ! idea ( revelation _c be admitt$ 9 ! s5se ( a communication ( tru? by ,god1 claim+ to be accept$ n on acc\nt ( its own intr9sic reasonabl5ess or ( ! intellectual or spiritual insight ( ! p]son to :om x is made1 b on acc\nt ( ! hi/orical evid5ce = miracul\s occurr5ces said to h tak5 place 9 connexion ) su* communication4 ,! mo/ t c reasonably be cont5d$ = is t sup]-normal occurr5ces ( ?is k9d may possess a c]ta9 corroborative value 9 support ( a ,revelation claim+ to be accept$ on o!r gr\nds4 ,:at place !n is left = ! idea ( ,revelation8 #ada ,i w ask y to g back = a mom5t to ! conclusions ( our fir/ lecture4 ,we saw t f ! ideali/ic po9t ( view all k may be look$ ^u z a p>tial communication to ! human s\l ( ! ?\ghts or exp]i5ces ( ! div9e ,m9d4 ,!re is a s5se !n 9 :i* all tru? is reveal$ tru?4 ,9 a m important s5se1 & a s5se m ne>ly alli$ to t ( ord9>y usage1 all moral & spiritual tru? may be reg>d$ z reveal$ tru?4 ,& 9 p>ticul> ^? imm$iate judgem5ts ab\t good & evil 9 :i* we h f\nd ! sole means ( kn[+ ! div9e "* & purposes mu/ be look$ on z div9ely implant$ k--none ! less div9ely implant$ because x is1 9 ! ord9>y s5se ( ! words1 q natural1 normal1 & consi/5t ) law4 ,nobody b an ,a!i/ ought to talk ab\t ! unassi/$ human intellect3 no "o :o acquiesces 9 ! old doctr9e t ,consci5ce is ! voice ( ,god ought ei!r on ! "o h& to d5y ! exi/5ce ( ,revelation1 or on ! o!r to speak ( ,revelation z if x 7 conf9$ to ! ,bible4 ,b because we ascribe "s intr9sic p[] ( judg+ ab\t spiritual & moral matt]s to ! ord9>y human intellect1 x w\ld be a griev\s mi/ake to assume t all m5 h an equal measure ( ?is p[]4 ,because we ass]t t all moral & spiritual tru? comes to m5 by #adb ,revelation1 x does n foll[ t !re are n degrees ( ,revelation4 ,& x is "o ( ! special *>act]i/ics ( religi\s & moral tru? t x is 9 a peculi> degree dep5d5t ^u ! sup]ior insight ( ^? exceptional m5 to :om h be5 accord$ extraord9>y degrees ( moral & spiritual insight4 ,ev5 9 ,sci5ce1 z we h se51 we _c disp5se ) g5ius3 v ord9>y m5 c satisfy !mselves ( ! tru? ( a hypo!sis :5 x is once sugge/$1 ?\gh !y w\ld h be5 q incompet5t to discov] t hypo!sis = !mselves4 ,/ill m unque/ionably are !re moral & spiritual tru?s :i*1 :5 once discov]$1 c be se5 to be true by m5 ( v commonplace intellect & commonplace "*4 ,! tru?s are se5 & pass$ on to o!rs1 :o accept !m p>tly on au?ority1 by way ( social inh]itance & tradition2 p>tly because !y are confirm$ 9 v>i\s degrees by _! own indep5d5t judgem5t & exp]i5ce4 ,"h !n--9 ! discov]y ( new spiritual tru?--we enc\nt] t high] & exceptional degree ( spiritual & e?ical insight :i* 9 a special & pre-em95t s5se we ought to reg>d z ,revelation or ,inspiration4 ,"h !re is room1 9 ! evolution ( ,religion & ,morality1 = ! influ5ce ( ! m5 ( moral or religi\s g5ius--! ,prophets1 ! ,apo/les1 ! ,f\nd]s & ,re=m]s ( ,religions3 &1 s9ce #adc moral & spiritual insight are v closely connect$ ) "*1 = ! moral h]o1 ! lead] ( m51 ! ,sa9t4 ,especially to ! new dep>tures1 ! turn+-po9ts1 ! epo*-mak+ discov]ies 9 e?ical & religi\s progress connect$ ) ! appe>ance ( su* m51 we may apply ! t]m ,revelation 9 a supreme or culm9at+ s5se4 ,x is1 z x seems to me1 extremely important t we %\ld n altoge!r divorce ! idea ( ,revelation f ^? k9ds ( moral & religi\s tru? :i* are arriv$ at by ! ord9>y work+ ( ! human intellect4 ,! ultimate moral judgem5ts no d\bt mu/ be intuitive or imm$iate1 b 9 our d$uctions f !m--9 _! application bo? to practical life & to !ories ab\t ,god & ! ,univ]se--!re is room = mu* intellectual "w ( ! k9d :i* we commonly associate r ) ! philosoph] ?an ) ! prophet4 ,b ! philosoph] may be also a prophet4 ,! philosophically tra9$ ,greek ,fa!rs 7 surely "r 9 recogniz+ t m5 l ,socrates & ,plato 7 to be numb]$ among ^? to :om ! ,_s ( ,god _h spok5 9 an exceptional degree4 ,!y too spoke 9 ! p[] ( ! indwell+ ,logos4 ,b /ill x is q natural t we %\ld associate ! idea ( ,revelation or ,inspiration m p>ticul>ly ) t k9d ( moral & intellectual discov]y :i* comes to exceptional m5 by way #add ( app>5t intuition or imm$iate insight4 ,we associate ! idea ( inspiration r ) ! poet ?an ) ! man ( ,sci5ce1 & ) ! prophet r ?an ) ! sy/ematic philosoph]4 ,x is q natural1 !re=e1 t we %\ld associate ! idea ( ,revelation m especially ) religi\s tea*]s ( ! intuitive ord] l ! ,jewi% prophets ?an ) ev5 ^? philosoph]s :o h also be5 great practical tea*]s ( ,e?ics & ,religion4 ,b x is mo/ important to recognize t !re is no h>d & fa/ l9e to be drawn betwe5 ! two classes4 ,! ,jewi% prophets did n arrive at _! ideas ab\t ,god )\t a great deal ( h>d ?9k+1 ?\gh ! ?9k+ is = ! mo/ "p unexplicit & ! mode ( expression poetic4 ',_! idols are silv] & gold2 ev5 ! "w ( m5's h&s4 4 4 4 ,!y h h&s & h&le n2 feet h !y & walk n3 nei!r speak !y ?r\gh _! ?roat4' ,!re is real h>d reason+ und]ly+ su* noble rhetoric1 ?\gh ! ,psalmi/ c\ld n p]haps h r$uc$ 8 argum5t aga9/ ,poly!ism & ,idolatry to ! =m ( a dialectical argum5t l ,plato or ,/4 ,?omas ,aqu9as4 ,9 ! highe/ in/ance ( all--! case ( our ,"l ,jesus ,*ri/ himself--a natural in/9ct ( rev]5ce is apt to det] u f analys+ h[ he came by ! tru? t he communicat$ to m52 b1 ?\gh ,i w\ld n d5y t ! deepe/ #ade tru? came to him *iefly by a supreme gift ( intuition1 !re are obvi\s indications ( pr(\nd intellectual ?\ght 9 8 tea*+4 ,recall = a mom5t 8 argum5ts aga9/ ! misuse ( ! ,sabba?1 aga9/ ! sup]/ition ( unclean meats1 aga9/ ! ,sadducean objection to ! ,resurrection4 ,i want to avoid at pres5t dogmatic phraseology2 s ,i w only submit 9 pass+ t ?is is only :at we %\ld expect if ! e>ly ,*ur* 0 "r 9 ?9k+ ( ,*ri/ z ! supreme expression 9 ! moral & religi\s sph]e ( ! ,logos or ,reason ( ,god4 ,! ?\ght ( great religi\s ?9k]s is none ! less ,revelation because x involves ! use ( _! reason+ faculties4 ,b ,i gu>d$ myself aga9/ be+ suppos$1 9 cont5d+ = ! possibility ( a philosophical or metaphysical k ( ,god1 to assume t religi\s tru? _h always come to m5 9 ?is way1 or ev5 t ! greate/ /eps 9 religi\s progress h usually tak5 ! =m ( explicit reason+4 ,once aga91 x is all-important to di/+ui% betwe5 ! way 9 :i* a belief comes to be ent]ta9$ & ! reasons = its be+ true4 ,all sorts ( psy*ological causes h contribut$ to g5]ate religi\s beliefs4 ,& :5 once we h discov]$ gr\nds 9 our own reflection or exp]i5ce = believ+ !m to be true1 !re is no reason :y we %\ld n reg>d all ( !m z #adf pieces ( div9e revelation4 ,visions & dreams1 = in/ance1 _h a %>e 9 ! developm5t ( religi\s ideas4 ,we might ev5 admit ! possibility t ! human race w\ld nev] h be5 l$ to ?9k ( ! immortality ( ! s\l b = primitive ideas ab\t gho/s sugge/$ by ! ph5om5a ( dreams4 ,! tru? ( ! doctr9e is nei!r prov$ nor disprov$ by su* an acc\nt ( its orig92 b1 if t belief is true & dreams h play$ a "p 9 ! process by :i* man has be5 l$ to x1 no ,!i/ surely c refuse to recognize ! div9e guidance !re94 ,& s1 at a high] level1 we are told by ! au?or ( ! ,acts t ,/4 ,pet] 0 l$ to accept ! great pr9ciple ( ,g5tile ,*ri/ianity by ! vision ( a %eet let d[n f heav54 ,!re is no reason :y t acc\nt %\ld n be hi/orically true4 ,! psy*ologi/ may v easily acc\nt = ,/4 ,pet]'s vision by ! work+ 9 8 m9d ( ! lib]al tea*+ ( ,/eph51 ! effect ( 8 fa/1 & s on4 ,b t does n prev5t u recogniz+ t vision z an in/rum5t ( div9e ,revelation4 ,we at ! pres5t day d n believe 9 ?is fundam5tal pr9ciple ( ,*ri/ianity because ( t dream ( ,/4 ,pet]'s2 = we "k t dreams are n always tru? or always edify+4 ,we believe 9 t pr9ciple on o!r gr\nds--! conv9c+ gr\nds 7among o!rs7 :i* ,/4 ,luke puts into ,/4 ,pet]'s m\? #adg on ! foll[+ morn+4 ,b t ne$ n prev5t our recogniz+ t ,god may h communicat$ t tru? to ! m5 ( t g5]ation--& ?r\gh !m to u--p>tly by means ( t dream4 ,! two pr9ciples !n = :i* ,i wi% to cont5d are ^!3 7#a7 t ,revelation is a matt] ( degree2 7#b7 t no ,revelation c be accept$ 9 ! long run m]ely because x came to a p>ticul> p]son 9 a peculi>ly intuitive or imm$iate way4 ,x may be t ,m4 ,augu/e ,sabati] is "r 9 see+ ! mo/ imm$iate contact ( ,god ) ! human s\l 9 ^? intuitive convictions :i* c lea/ easily be acc\nt$ = by ord9>y psy*ological causes2 9 ^? new dep>tures ( religi\s insight1 ^? unacc\ntable com+s ( new ?\ghts into ! m9d1 :i* con/itute ! great crises or turn+-po9ts ( religi\s hi/ory4 ,b1 ?\gh ! com+ ( su* ?\ghts may (t5 be accept$ by ! individual z direct evid5ces ( a div9e orig91 ! ,metaphysician1 on look+ back ^u !m1 _c treat ! fact t ! psy*ologi/ _c acc\nt = !m1 z a conv9c+ pro( ( su* an orig91 ap>t f our judgem5t ^u ! cont5ts ( :at claims to be a revelation4 ,untrue ?\ghts & wick$ ?\ghts sometimes arise equally unacc\ntably3 ! fact t !y d s is ev5 n[ acc\nt$ = by "s z a suffici5t pro( ( direct diabolic sugge/ion4 ,:5 we h judg$ ! #adh ?\ght to be true or ! sugge/ion to be good1 !n we1 :o on o!r gr\nds believe 9 ,god1 may see 9 x a piece ( div9e revelation1 b n till !n4 ,f ?is po9t ( view x is cle> t we are able to recognize v>i\s degrees & v>i\s k9ds ( div9e revelation 9 _m diff]5t ,religions1 philosophies1 sy/ems ( e?ical tea*+4 ,we are able to recognize ! importance to ! _w ( ! great hi/orical ,religions1 9 all ( :i* we c ackn[l$ge a measure ( ,revelation4 ,! fact t ! tru?s :i* !y tea* 79 s f> z !y are true7 c n[ be recogniz$ z true by philosophic ?\ght1 does n %[ t ! _w w\ld ev] h evolv$ ^? ?\ghts1 ap>t f ! influ5ce ( ! great reveal+ p]sonalities4 ,philosophy itself--! ,philosophy ( ! pr(ess$ philosoph]s--has no d\bt contribut$ a v important elem5t to ! cont5t ( ! hi/orical ,religions2 b x is only 9 proportion z !y become "p ( a sy/em ( religi\s tea*+1 & ! possession ( an organiz$ religi\s community1 t ! ideas ( ! philosoph]s really come home to multitudes ( m51 & %ape ! hi/ory ( ! _w4 ,nor 9 _m cases w\ld ! philosoph]s !mselves h se5 :at !y h se5 b = ! great epo*-mak+ ?\ghts ( ! great religion-mak+ p]iods4 ,& ! same consid]ations :i* %[ ! importance ( religi\s movem5ts 9 ! #adi pa/ t5d also to emphasize ! importance ( ! hi/orical ,religion & ( ! religi\s community 9 :i* x is en%r9$ 9 mod]n times4 ,because religi\s tru? c n[ be def5d$ by ! use ( our ord9>y intellectual faculties1 & because all possess ^! faculties 9 "s degree1 x is absurd to suppose t ! ord9>y individual1 if left to himself1 w\ld be likely to evolve a true religi\s sy/em = himself--any m ?an he w\ld be likely to disc]n = himself ! tru?s t 7 fir/ se5 by ,euclid or ,newton if he 7 n taught !m4 ,to "u-e/imate ! importance ( ! great hi/orical ,religions & _! creators has be5 ! besett+ s9 ( te*nical religi\s ,philosophy4 ,metaphysicians h 9 tru? (t5 writt5 ab\t ,religion 9 great ignorance z to ! real facts ( religi\s hi/ory4 ,b because we recognize a measure ( tru? 9 all ! hi/orical ,religions1 x does n foll[ t we c recognize an equal am\nt ( tru? 9 all ( !m4 ,! idea t all ! ,religions tea* mu* ! same ?+--or t1 :ile !y v>y ab\t t unimportant "p ( ,religion :i* is call$ doctr9e or dogma1 !y are all agre$ ab\t ,morality--is an idea :i* c\ld only occur to ! self-complaisant ignorance :i* ( late ye>s has done mo/ ( ! !ological writ+ 9 ! correspond5ce columns ( our newspap]s4 ,! real /ud5t ( comp>ative #aej ,religion kn[s t x is only at a r advanc$ /age 9 ! developm5t ( ,religion t ,religion becomes 9 any important degree an e?ical tea*] at all4 ,ev5 ! highe/ & mo/ e?ical ,religions are n agre$ ei!r 9 _! ,e?ics or 9 _! ,!ology4 ,n only c we recognize high] & l[] ,religions2 b ! highe/ ,religions1 among _m ?+s :i* !y h 9 common1 are at c]ta9 po9ts diametrically antagoni/ic to ea* o!r4 ,x is impossible !re=e reasonably to ma9ta9 t fa%ionable attitude ( m9d t[>ds ^! ,religions :i* my fri5d ,pr(essor ,+e once describ$ z a sort ( honor>y memb]%ip ( all ,religions except "o's own4 ,if we are to reg>d ! hi/orical ,religions z be+ ( any importance to our own p]sonal religi\s life1 we mu/ *oose betwe5 !m4 ,if we put aside ! case ( ,judaism 9 its mo/ cultivat$ mod]n =m1 a =m 9 :i* x has be5 l>gely influ5c$ by ,*ri/ianity1 ,i suppose !re is practically only "o ,religion :i* w\ld be 9 ! lea/ likely to appeal to a mod]n philosophical /ud5t ( ,religion z a possible alt]native to ,*ri/ianity--& t is ,buddhism4 ,b ,buddhi/ ,e?ics are n ! same z ,*ri/ian ,e?ics4 ,buddhi/ ,e?ics are ascetic3 ! ,*ri/ianity :i* ,*ri/ taught 0 anti-ascetic4 ,9 its view ( ! future1 ,buddhism is pessimi/ic2 ,*ri/ianity is optimi/ic4 ,mu* z #aea ,buddhism has done to inculcate ,humanity & ,*>ity1 ! pr9ciple ( ,buddhi/ ,humanity is n ! same z t ( ,*ri/ianity4 ,humanity is enc\rag$ by ! ,buddhi/ 79 s f> z he is really influ5c$ by 8 own =mal cre$7 n f a motive ( dis9t]e/$ affection1 b z a means ( escap+ f ! evils ( p]sonal & individual exi/5ce1 & s w9n+ ,nirvana4 ,we _c at "o & ! same "t adh]e to ! ,e?ics ( ,buddhism & to ^? ( ,*ri/ianity1 ?\gh ,i am f> f say+ t ,*ri/ians h no?+ to le>n ei!r f ,buddhi/ tea*+ or f ,buddhi/ practice4 ,/ill less c we at "o & ! same "t be ,a!i/s ) ! ,buddhi/ & ,!i/s ) ! ,*ri/ian2 look =w>d ) ! ,buddhi/ to ! ext9ction ( p]sonal consci\sness & ) ! ,*ri/ian to a full] & m satisfy+ life4 ,to take an int]e/ 9 comp>ative ,religion is n to be religi\s2 to be religi\s implies a c]ta9 exclusive atta*m5t to "s def9ite =m ( religi\s belief1 ?\gh x may ( c\rse (t5 be a belief to :i* _m hi/orical influ5ces h contribut$4 ,i h be5 try+ to lead y to a view ( ,revelation :i* recognizes ! exi/5ce & ! importance ( ^? exceptional religi\s m9ds to :om is due ! f\ndation & developm5t ( ! great hi/orical ,religions1 :ile at ! same "t we refuse1 9 ! la/ resort1 to recognize any #aeb revelation z true except on ! gr\nd t its tru? c be indep5d5tly v]ifi$4 ,i d n mean to d5y t ! individual mu/ at fir/1 & may q reasonably 9 "s cases ?r\gh\t life1 accept mu* ( 8 religi\s belief on au?ority2 b t is only because he may be ju/ifi$ 9 ?9k+ t su* & su* a p]son1 or m probably su* & su* a religi\s community1 is m likely to be "r ?an himself4 ,rational submission to au?ority 9 ?is or t individual po/ulates indep5d5t judgem5t on ! "p ( o!rs4 ,i am f> f say+ t e individual is b\nd to satisfy himself by p]sonal enquiry z to ! tru? ( e elem5t 9 8 own ,religion2 b1 if & s f> z he det]m9es to d s1 he _c reasonably accept an alleg$ revelation on any o!r gr\nd ?an t x comes home to him1 t ! cont5t ( t ,religion appeals to him z true1 z satisfy+ ! dem&s ( 8 intellect & ( 8 consci5ce4 ,! "q 9 :i* mo/ ( u1 ,i imag9e1 are mo/ vitally int]e/$ is :e!r ! ,*ri/ian ,religion is a ,religion :i* we c accept on ^! gr\nds4 ,t x possesses "s tru?1 t :atev] 9 x is true comes f ,god--t mu* is likely to be admitt$ by all :o believe 9 any k9d ( ,religion 9 ! s5se 9 :i* we h be5 discuss+ ,religion4 ,! great "q = u is1 ',c we f9d any reason = ! mod]n man #aec id5tify+ himself 9 any exclusive way ) ! hi/orical ,*ri/ian ,religion8 ,grant$ t !re is "s tru? 9 all ,religions1 does ,*ri/ianity conta9 ! mo/ tru?8 ,is x 9 any s5se ! "o absolute1 f9al1 univ]sal ,religion8' ,t w be ! subject = our consid]ation 9 ! next lecture4 ,b mean:ile ,i want to sugge/ to y "o v broad provisional answ] to our problem4 ,*ri/ianity alone ( ! hi/orical ,religions tea*es ^? great tru?s to :i* we h be5 conduct$ by a m]e appeal to ,reason & to ,consci5ce4 ,x tea*es e?ical ,mono!ism2 t is to say1 x ?9ks ( ,god z a ?9k+1 feel+1 will+ ,consci\sness1 & und]/&s ,8 nature 9 ! light ( ! highe/ moral ideal4 ,x tea*es ! belief 9 p]sonal ,immortality1 & x tea*es a ,morality :i* 9 its broad g5]al pr9ciples /ill appeals to ! ,consci5ce ( ,humanity4 ,univ]sal ,love x sets =? z at once ! c5tral po9t 9 its moral ideal & ! mo/ important elem5t 9 its conception ( ,god4 ,9 "o ( ^? metaphors :i* express s mu* m ?an any m exact philosophical =mula1 x is ! ,religion :i* tea*es ! ,fa!rhood ( ,god & ! bro!rhood ( man4 ,& ^! tru?s 7 taught by ! hi/orical ,jesus4 ,no "o up to 8 "t _h ev] taught !m ) equal cle>ness & 9 equal purity1 & ) ! same fre$om f o!r & inconsi/5t tea*+s3 #aed & ?is tea*+ 0 develop$ by 8 fir/ foll[]s4 ,amid all ab]rations & amid all contam9ation by het]og5e\s elem5ts1 ! society or societies :i* look back to ,*ri/ z _! ,f\nd] h nev] 9 ! wor/ times ceas$ altoge!r to tea* ^! tru?s2 & n[ !y m & m t5d to con/itute ! ess5ce ( ,*ri/ianity z x is to-day--all ! m s on acc\nt ( ! ,*ur*'s gradual %uffl+ (f ( s _m adv5titi\s ideas & practices :i* 7 at "o "t associat$ ) !m4 ,*ri/ianity is & rema9s ! only "o ( ! great hi/orical ,religions :i* has taught & does tea* ^! great tru?s 9 all _! fullness4#b ,^! consid]ations w\ld by !mselves be suffici5t to put ,*ri/ianity 9 an absolutely unique position among ! ,religions ( ,mank9d4 ,i h s f> be5 reg>d+ our ,"l ,jesus ,*ri/ simply z a tea*] ( religi\s & e?ical tru?4 ,i ?9k x is ( fundam5tal importance t we %\ld beg9 by reg>d+ him 9 ?is light4 #aee ,x 0 9 ?is light t he fir/ pres5t$ himself to 8 fell[-c\ntrym5--ev5 be=e 79 all probability7 he claim$ to be ! fulfill] ( ! ,messianic ideal :i* _h be5 set be=e !m by ! prophets ( _! race4 ,& ,i c\ld n1 )\t a va/ array ( quotation1 give y a suffici5t impression ( ! prom95ce ( ?is aspect ( 8 "w & p]sonality among ! e>li] ,greek ,fa!rs4 ,ev5 aft] ! elaborate doctr9es ( ,ca?olic ,*ri/ianity _h begun to be develop$1 x 0 /ill prim>ily z ! supremely inspir$ ,tea*] t ,jesus 0 mo/ (t5 ?\ght (4 ,:5 ! e>ly ,*ri/ians ?\ght ( him z ! inc>nate ,logos or ,reason ( ,god1 to tea* m5 div9e tru? 0 /ill look$ ^u z ! supreme function ( ! ,logos & ! purpose ( 8 indwell+ 9 ! hi/orical ,jesus4 ,b f ! fir/ ,jesus appeal$ to m5 z mu* m ?an a tea*]4 ,x is "o ( ! di/9ctive peculi>ities ( religi\s & e?ical k t x is intimately connect$ ) "*3 religi\s & moral tea*+ ( ! highe/ k9d is 9 a peculi> degree insep>able f ! p]sonality ( ! tea*]4 ,jesus impress$ 8 contempor>ies1 & he has impress$ successive ages z hav+ n only set be=e man ! highe/ religi\s & moral ideal1 b z hav+ 9 a unique mann] realiz$ t ideal 9 8 own life4 ,ev5 ! ^w 'example' #aef does n fully express ! impression :i* he made on 8 foll[]s1 or d ju/ice to ! insep>ability ( 8 p]sonality f 8 tea*+4 ,9 ! religi\s consci\sness ( ,*ri/ m5 saw realiz$ ! ideal relation ( man n m]ely to 8 fell[-man b also to 8 heav5ly ,fa!r4 ,f ! fir/ an en?usia/ic rev]5ce = its ,f\nd] has be5 an ess5tial "p ( ! ,*ri/ian ,religion amid all ! v>iety ( ! phases :i* x has assum$4 ,! doctr9e ( ! ,*ri/ian ,*ur* 0 9 its orig9 an attempt to express 9 ! philosophical language ( ! "t its s5se ( ?is supreme value ( ,*ri/ = ! religi\s & moral life ( man4 ,z to ! hi/orical success & ! pres5t usefulness ( ^! attempts1 ,i %all h a ^w to say next "t4 ,mean:ile1 ,i w\ld leave ) y ?is "o ?\ght4 ,! claim ( ,*ri/ianity to be ! supreme1 ! univ]sal1 9 a s5se ! f9al ,religion1 mu/ re/ ma9ly1 9 ! la/ resort1 ^u ! appeal :i* ,*ri/ & 8 ,religion make to ! moral & religi\s consci\sness ( ! pres5t4 ,,lit]ature ,see ! works m5tion$ at ! end ( ! next ,lecture1 to :i*1 z deal+ m specially ) ! subject ( ,lecture v41 may be add$ ,pr(essor ,s&ay's ,inspiration1 & ,pr(essor ,w5dt's ,revelation & ,*ri/ianity4 #a ,?r\gh\t 8 writ+s1 b pre-em95tly 9 ! ,!oetetus4 #b ,if x be said t ,judaism or any o!r ,religion does n[ tea* ^! tru?s z fully z ,*ri/ianity1 ?is may possibly apply to ! cre$ ( individual memb]s ( ^! ,religions1 b x c h>dly be claim$ = ! hi/orical ,religions !mselves4 ,i %\ld c]ta9ly be prep>$ to cont5d t ev5 su* individuals lose some?+ by n plac+ 9 ! c5tre ( _! ,religion ! p]sonality ( him by :om !y 7 fir/ taught1 & ! communities :i* h be5 ! great transmitt]s ( !m4 ,b 9 ?is c\rse ( lectures ,i am *iefly conc]n$ ) giv+ reasons :y ,*ri/ians %\ld rema9 ,*ri/ians1 r ?an ) giv+ reasons :y o!rs :o are n s %\ld become ,*ri/ians4 #aeg ,,lecture ,,vi ,,*ri/ianity ,9 my la/ lecture ,i tri$ to effect a transition f ! idea ( religi\s tru? z some?+ believ$ by ! individual1 & accept$ by him on ! evid5ce ( 8 own ,reason & ,consci5ce to ! idea ( a ,religion consid]$ z a body ( religi\s tru? h&$ d[n by tradition 9 an organiz$ society4 ,! high] ,religions--^? :i* h pass$ beyond ! /age ( m]ely tribal or national ,religion--are bas$ ^u ! idea t religi\s tru? ( endur+ value has be5 f "t to "t reveal$ to p>ticul> p]sons1 ! ,f\nd]s or ,apo/les or ,re=m]s ( su* religions4 ,we recogniz$ ! validity ( ?is idea ( ,revelation1 & ! supreme importance to ! moral & religi\s life ( su* hi/orical revelations1 on "o condition--t ! claim ( any hi/orical ,religion to ! allegiance ( its foll[]s mu/ be held to re/ 9 ! la/ resort ^u ! appeal :i* x makes to _! ,reason & ,consci5ce3 ?\gh ! individual may (t5 be #aeh q ju/ifi$ 9 accept+ & rely+ ^u ! ,reason & ,consci5ce ( ! religi\s ,society r ?an ^u 8 own4 ,! view :i* ,i h tak5 ( ,revelation makes x q indep5d5t ( :at are commonly call$ miracles4 ,all t ,i h said is q consi/5t ) ! unqualifi$ acceptance or ) ! unqualifi$ rejection ( miracles4 ,b "s ( y may p]haps expect me to expla9 a little m fully my own attitude t[>ds t "q4 ,& !re=e ,i w say ?is mu*--t1 if we reg>d a miracle z imply+ a susp5sion ( a law ( nature1 ,i d n ?9k we c call su* a susp5sion a priori incr$ible2 b ! enorm\s exp]i5ce :i* we h ( ! actual regul>ity ( ! laws ( nature1 & ( ! causes :i* 9 c]ta9 /ates ( ! human m9d lead to ! belief 9 miracles1 makes su* an ev5t 9 ! highe/ degree improbable4 ,to me at lea/ x w\ld seem practically impossible to get suffici5t evid5ce = ! occurr5ce ( su* an ev5t 9 ! di/ant pa/3 all our hi/orical reason+ presupposes ! reign ( law4 ,b x is be+ m & m admitt$ by !ologians :o are reg>d$ z q or?odox & r cons]vative1 t ! idea ( a miracle ne$ n necess>ily imply su* a susp5sion ( natural law4 ,& on ! o!r h&1 decid$ly critical & lib]al !ologians are m & m dispos$ to admit #aei t _m ( ! abnormal ev5ts commonly call$ miracul\s may v well h occurr$ )\t involv+ any real susp5sion ( natural law4 ,rec5t advances 9 psy*ological k h wid5$ our conception ( ! possible influ5ce ( m9d ov] matt] & ( m9d ov] m9d4 ,:e!r an alleg$ miracul\s ev5t is to be accept$ or n mu/1 z x seems to me1 dep5d p>tly ^u ! am\nt ( critically sift$ hi/orical evid5ce :i* c be produc$ = x1 p>tly ^u ! nature ( ! ev5t itself--^u ! "q :e!r x is or is n ( su* a k9d t we c ) any probability suppose t x might be acc\nt$ = ei!r by kn[n laws or by laws at pres5t imp]fectly und]/ood4 ,to apply ^! pr9ciples 9 detail to ! ,new ,te/am5t n>ratives w\ld involve critical discussions :i* are outside ! purpose ( ^! lectures4 ,i w only say t few critical s*ol>s w\ld d5y t "s record$ miracles ev5 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t are unhi/orical4 ,:5 !y f9d an incid5t l ! heal+ ( ,mal*us's e> omitt$ 9 ! e>li]1 & ins]t$ 9 ! lat] r$action ( a common orig9al1 !y _c b recognize ! probability ( traditional amplification4 ,at ! same "t few lib]al !ologians w be dispos$ to d\bt ! g5]al fact t our ,"l did cure "s diseases by spiritual influ5ce1 or t an appe>ance ( our ,"l to ! disciples--( :atev] nature--actually #afj did occur1 & 0 ! means ( assur+ !m ( 8 cont9u$ life & p[]4 ,at all ev5ts ,i d n myself d\bt ^! two facts4 ,b at lea/ :5 miracles are n reg>d$ z con/itut+ real exceptions to natural law1 x is obvi\s t !y w n prove ! tru? ( any tea*+ :i* may h be5 connect$ ) !m2 :ile1 ev5 if we treat ! ,gospel miracles z real exceptions to law1 ! difficulty ( prov+ !m 9 ! face ( mod]n critical enquiry is s great t ! evid5ce w h>dly come home to any "o n previ\sly conv9c$1 on purely spiritual gr\nds1 ( ! exceptional "* ( our ,"l's p]sonality & mission4 ,?is be+ s1 ,i d n ?9k t our answ] to ! problem ( miracles1 :atev] x be1 c play any v important "p 9 ,*ri/ian ,apologetic4 ,:5 we h become ,*ri/ians on o!r gr\nds1 ! acts ( heal+ may /ill reta9 a c]ta9 value z illu/rat+ ! "* ( ! ,ma/]1 & ! ,resurrection vision z proclaim+ ! tru? ( ,immortality 9 a way :i* w come home to m9ds n easily accessible to ab/ract argum5t4 ,! true f\ndation n m]ely = belief 9 ! tea*+ ( ,*ri/1 b also = ! ,*ri/ian's rev]5ce = 8 ,p]son1 mu/1 z x seems to me1 be f\nd 9 ! appeal :i* 8 words & 8 "* /ill make to ! ,consci5ce & ,reason ( mank9d4 ,?is proposition w\ld be #afa p]haps m g5]ally accept$ if ,i 7 to say t ! claim ( ,*ri/ to allegiance re/s ^u ! way 9 :i* he satisfies ! he>t1 ! aspirations1 ! religi\s ne$s ( mank9d4 ,& ,i %\ld be q will+ to adopt su* language1 if y w only include respect = hi/oric fact & intellectual tru? among ^! religi\s ne$s1 & admit t a reasonable fai? mu/ re/ on some?+ bett] ?an m]e emotion4 ,fully to exhibit ! gr\nds ( ?is claim ( ,*ri/ ^u u w\ld involve an exam9ation ( ! ,gospel n>ratives 9 detail3 x w\ld involve an attempt to pres5t to y :at 0 ?is tea*+1 ?is "*1 ?is religi\s consci\sness :i* has comm&$ ! homage ( mank9d4 ,to attempt su* a task w\ld be out ( place 9 a brief c\rse ( lectures devot$ to a p>ticul> aspect ( ,religion--its relation to ,philosophy4 ,"h ,i mu/ assume t y feel ! spiritual supremacy ( ,*ri/--8 unique position 9 ! religi\s hi/ory ( ! _w & 8 unique importance = ! spiritual life ( ea* "o ( u--2 & g on to ask :at ass]tions su* a conviction w>rants u 9 mak+ ab\t 8 p]son & nature1 :at 9 %ort %\ld be our attitude t[>ds ! traditional doctr9es ( ! ,*ri/ian ,*ur*4 ,y may "k some?+ ( ! position tak5 up 9 ?is matt] by ! dom9ant s*ool ( :at ,i may call believ+ lib]al ,!ology 9 #afb ,g]many--! s*ool :i* takes its "n f ! great !ologian ,rits*l1 b :i* w be be/ kn[n to mo/ ,engli%m5 9 connexion ) ! "n ( ,pr(4 ,h>nack1 ?\gh x may be well to rememb] t ,h>nack is ne>] to ! left ?an to ! "r w+ ( t s*ool4 ,! fundam5tal pr9ciple ( t s*ool is to base ! claims ( ,*ri/ianity ma9ly ^u ! appeal :i* ! picture ( ! life1 tea*+1 "*1 & p]sonality ( ,*ri/ makes to ! moral & religi\s consci\sness ( mank9d4 ,_! tea*+ is ,*ri/o-c5tric 9 ! highe/ possible degree3 b !y are almo/ or entirely indiff]5t to ! dogmatic =mulae :i* may be employ$ to express ?is supreme religi\s importance ( ,*ri/4 ,9 putt+ ! p]sonal & hi/orical ,*ri/1 & n any doctr9e ab\t him1 9 ! c5tre ( ! religi\s life ,i believe !y are "r4 ,b ?is pr9ciple is sometimes ass]t$ 9 an exagg]at$ & "o-sid$ mann]4 ,9 ! fir/ place !y are some:at contemptu\s ( ,philosophy1 & ( philosophic argum5t ev5 = su* fundam5tal tru?s z ! exi/5ce ( ,god4 ,i d n see t ! subjective impression made by ,*ri/ c by itself prove ! fact ( ,god's exi/5ce4 ,we mu/ fir/ believe t !re is a ,god to be reveal$ be=e we c be l$ to believe 9 ,*ri/ z ! supreme ,reveal]4 ,i d n believe t ! mod]n _w w p]man5tly accept a view ( ! ,univ]se #afc :i* does n comm5d itself to its ,reason4 ,! ,rits*lians talk ab\t ! tru? ( ,religion re/+ ^u value-judgem5ts4 ,i c q und]/& t a value-judgem5t may tell u ! supreme value ( ,*ri/'s "* & 8 fitness to be treat$ z ! repres5tative ( ,god to u1 :5 once we believe 9 ,god3 b ,i _c see h[ any value-judgem5t tak5 by itself c assure u ( t exi/5ce4 ,value is "o ?+3 exi/5ce is ano!r4 ,to my m9d a ,*ri/ian ,apologetic %\ld beg91 l ! old ,apologies ( ,ju/9 or ,ari/ides1 ) %[+ ! ess5tial reasonabl5ess ( ,*ri/'s tea*+ ab\t ,god & its ess5tial h>mony ) ! highe/ philosophic tea*+ ab\t duty1 ab\t ! div9e nature1 ab\t ! s\l & its et]nal de/9y4 ,! ,rits*lian is too mu* dispos$ to und]rate ! value ( all previ\s religi\s & e?ical tea*+1 ev5 ( ,judaism at its highe/3 he is n cont5t ) mak+ ,*ri/ ! supreme ,reveal]3 he wants to make him ! only ,reveal]4 ,& :5 we turn to po/-,*ri/ian religi\s hi/ory1 he is apt to treat all ! great developm5ts ( religi\s & e?ical ?\ght f ! "t ( ! ,apo/les to our own day z simply wor?less & ev5 mis*iev\s corruptions ( ! orig9al1 & only g5u9e1 ,*ri/ianity4 ,he t5ds to r$uce ,*ri/ianity to ! ipsissima v]ba ( its ,f\nd]4 ,! ,rits*lian dislikes ,dogma1 n because x may be at times a #afd misdevelopm5t1 b because x is a developm5t2 n because "s ( x may be antiquat$ ,philosophy1 b simply because x is ,philosophy4#a ,9 ord] to treat fairly ?is "q ( doctr9al developm5t1 x mu/ be rememb]$ t :at is commonly call$ dogma is only a "p--p]haps n ! mo/ important "p--( t developm5t4 ,supreme z ,i believe to be ! value ( ,*ri/'s great pr9ciple ( ,bro!rhood1 x is impossible to d5y t1 if we look 9 detail at ! moral ideal ( any educat$ ,*ri/ian at ! pres5t day1 we %all f9d 9 x _m elem5ts :i* _c explicitly be discov]$ 9 ! ipsissima v]ba ( ,*ri/ & /ill less ( 8 ,apo/les4 ,& developm5t 9 ! e?ical ideal always c>ries ) x "s developm5t 9 a man's conception ( ,god & ! ,univ]se4 ,"s ( ^! elem5ts are due to a gradual br++ out into cle> consci\sness1 & an application to new details1 ( pr9ciples lat5t 9 ! actual words ( ,*ri/2 o!rs to an infusion ( ,greek ,philosophy2 o!rs to ! practical exp]i5ce & ! sci5tific discov]ies ( ! mod]n _w4 ,*ri/ianity 9 ! c\rse ( n9ete5 c5turies has gradually absorb$ into itself _m ideas f v>i\s s\rces1 #afe *ri/ianiz+ !m 9 ! process4 ,_m ideas1 mu* ,hell5ic ,philosophy1 _m ,hell5ic ideals ( life1 _m ,roman ideas ( gov]nm5t & organization h ?us1 9 ! excell5t phrase ( ,pr(essor ,g>dn]1 be5 'baptiz$ into ,*ri/4' ,?is capacity ( absorb+ into itself elem5ts ( spiritual life :i* 7 orig9ally indep5d5t ( x is n a defect ( hi/orical ,*ri/ianity1 b "o ( its qualifications = be+ accept$ by ! mod]n _w z a univ]sal1 an absolute1 a f9al ,religion4 ,x does n seem to me possible to recognize ! claim ( any hi/orical ,religion to be f9al & ultimate1 unless x include )9 itself a pr9ciple ( developm5t4 ,let me1 z briefly z ,i c1 illu/rate :at ,i mean4 ,x is mo/ cle>ly & easily se5 9 ! case ( ,morality4 ,if ! idea ( a univ]sal ,religion is to mean t any detail$ code ( ,morals laid d[n at a def9ite mom5t ( hi/ory c s]ve by itself = ! guidance ( all human life 9 all aft] ages1 we may at once dismiss ! notion z a dream4 ,9 no?+ did our ,"l %[ 8 greatness & ! fitness ( 8 ,religion = univ]sality m ?an 9 ab/a9+ f draw+ up su* a code4 ,he conf9$ himself to lay+ d[n a few great pr9ciples1 ) illu/rations applicable to ! circum/ances ( 8 imm$iate he>]s4 ,^? pr9ciples require developm5t & application to ! ne$s & #aff circum/ances ( successive ages be=e !y c suffice to guide u 9 ! details ( conduct4 ,to effect ?is developm5t & application has be5 hi/orically ! "w ( ! ,*ur* :i* owes its orig9 to ! disciples :om he ga!r$ ar\nd him4 ,if we may accept ! tea*+ ( ! f\r? ,gospel z at lea/ hav+ g]ms 9 ! actual utt]ances ( our ,"l1 he himself =esaw ! necessity ( su* a developm5t4 ,at all ev5ts ! belief 9 ! cont9u$ "w ( ,god's ,_s 9 human ,society is an ess5tial pr9ciple ( ! ,*ri/ian ,religion z x 0 taught by ! fir/ foll[]s ( its ,f\nd]4 ,take = in/ance ! case ( slav]y4 ,our ,"l nev] condemn$ slav]y3 x is n c]ta9 t he w\ld h done s1 _h ! case be5 pres5t$ to him4 ,v likely 8 answ] w\ld h be5 ',:o made me a judge or a divid]1' or ',r5d] unto ,caes> ! ?+s t are ,caes>'s4' ,no "o on reflection c n[ fail to see ! ess5tial incompatibility betwe5 slav]y & ! ,*ri/ian _s2 yet x 0 p]haps f\rte5 hundr$ ye>s be=e a s+le ,*ri/ian ?9k] def9itely enunciat$ t incompatibility1 & m ?an eighte5 hundr$ ye>s be=e slav]y 0 actually bani%$ f all nom9ally ,*ri/ian l&s4 ,:o c d\bt t _m features ( our exi/+ social sy/em are equally incompatible ) ! pr9ciples ( ,*ri/'s tea*+1 & t ! #afg accept$ ,*ri/ian morality ( a hundr$ ye>s h5ce w def9itely condemn _m ?+s :i* ! av]age ,*ri/ian ,consci5ce n[ all[s8 ,& !n !re is ano!r k9d ( developm5t 9 ,e?ics :i* is equally necess>y4 ,! ,*ri/ian law ( ,love bids u promote ! true good ( our fell[-m51 bids u reg>d ano!r man's good z equally valuable ) our own or ) ! l good ( any o!r4 ,b :at is ?is good life :i* we are to promote8 ,z to t our ,"l has only laid d[n a few v g5]al pr9ciples--! supreme value ( ,love itself1 ! sup]iority ( ! spiritual to ! c>nal1 ! importance ( sexual purity4 ,^! pr9ciples our consci5ces /ill ackn[l$ge1 & !re are no o!rs ( equal importance4 ,b :at ( ! intellectual life8 ,has t no value8 ,our ,"l nev] depreciat$ x1 z s _m religi\s f\nd]s & re=m]s h done4 ,b he has giv5 u no explicit guidance ab\t x4 ,:5 ! ,*ri/ian ideal embrac$ )9 itself a recognition ( ! value & duty ( ,culture1 x 0 borr[+ f ,greece4 ,& :5 we turn f ,e?ics to ,!ology1 ! actual fact ( developm5t is no less indisputable4 ,e alt]ation ( ! e?ical ideal has br\ght ) x "s alt]ation 9 our idea ( ,god4 ,we c no long] endure !ories ( ! ,atonem5t :i* are oppos$ to mod]n ideas ( ,ju/ice1 ?\gh !y 7 q compatible ) #afh patri/ic or m$ieval ideas ( ,ju/ice4 ,! advances ( ,sci5ce h alt]$ our :ole conception ( ,god's mode ( act+ ^u or gov]n+ ! _w4 ,none ( ^! ?+s are religi\sly s important z ! great pr9ciple ( ! ,fa!rhood ( ,god1 nor h !y 9 any way t5d$ to modify its tru? or its supreme importance4 ,b !y d imply t our ,!ology is n & _c be 9 all po9ts ! same z t ( ! fir/ ,*ri/ians4 ,n[ ) ^! presuppositions let u approa* ! "q ( t great /ructure ( =mal dogma :i* ! ,*ur* has built ^u ! f\ndation ( ,*ri/'s tea*+4 ,a developm5t und\bt$ly x is2 b1 :ile we mu/ n assume t e developm5t :i* has hi/orically tak5 place is necess>ily true or valuable1 x is equally unphilosophical to assume t1 because x is a developm5t1 x is necess>ily false or wor?less4 ,our ,"l himself did1 inde$1 claim to be ! ,messiah2 ! fact ( ,messiah%ip 0 :at 0 prim>ily meant by ! title ',son ( ,god4' ,ev5 9 ! ,synopti/s he exhibits a consci\sness ( a direct div9e mission supremely important = 8 own race2 &1 be=e ! close1 we c p]haps discov] a gr[+ conviction t ! tru? :i* he 0 tea*+ 0 meant = a l>g] _w4 ,/>t+ f & develop+ ^! ideas1 8 foll[]s set !mselves to devise t]ms :i* %\ld express _! own s5se ( _! ,ma/]'s unique #afi religi\s value & importance1 to express :at !y felt he _h be5 to _! own s\ls1 :at !y felt he might be to all :o accept$ 8 message4 ,ev5 to ,/4 ,paul ! t]m ',son ( ,god' /ill meant prim>ily '! ,messiah'3 b 9 ! light ( 8 conception ( ,jesus1 ! ,messianic idea exp&$ till ! ,*ri/ 0 exalt$ to a position f> above any?+ :i* ,jewi% prophecy or ,apocalypse _h ev] claim$ = him4 ,& ! means ( express+ ^! new ideas 7 f\nd naturally & inevitably 9 ! curr5t philosophical t]m9ology ( ! day4 ,) ! f\r? ,gospel1 if n already ) ,/4 ,paul1 !re 0 infus$ into ! tea*+ ( ! ,*ur* a new elem5t4 ,f ! ,jewi%-,alex&rian speculative ,!ology ! au?or borr[$ ! t]m ,logos to express :at he conceiv$ to be ! cosmic importance ( ,*ri/'s position4 ,he accept$ f t speculation--probably f ,philo--! !ory :i* p]sonifi$ or half-p]sonifi$ t ,logos or ,wisdom ( ,god ?r\gh :i* ,god 0 repres5t$ 9 ! ,old ,te/am5t z creat+ ! _w & inspir+ ! prophets4 ,?is ,logos ?r\gh :om ,god _h ?r\gh\t ! ages be5 m & m fully reveal+ ,himself _h at la/ become actually inc>nate 9 ,jesus ,*ri/4 ,?is ,^w ( ,god is also describ$ z truly ,god1 ?\gh 9 ! f\r? ,gospel ! relation ( ! ,fa!r to ! ,^w--at #agj lea/ to ! ,^w be=e ! ,inc>nation--is left :olly vague & undef9$4 ,f ^! comp>atively simple beg9n+s sprang c5turies ( controv]sy culm9at+ 9 t elaborate sy/em ( dogma :i* is (t5 little und]/ood ev5 by its mo/ vigor\s *ampions4 ,y "k 9 a v g5]al way ! result4 ,! ,logos 0 made m & m di/9ct f ,god1 end[$ ) a m & m decid$ly p]sonal exi/5ce4 ,!n1 :5 ! int]e/s ( ,mono!ism seem$ to be endang]$1 ! attempt 0 made to save x by ass]t+ ! subord9ation ( ! ,son to ! ,fa!r4 ,! result 0 t by ,arianism ! ,son 0 r$uc$ to ! position ( an inf]ior ,god4 ,poly!ism _h once m to be av]t$ by ass]t+ 9 ev5 /rong] t]ms n m]ely ! equality ( ! ,son ) ! ,fa!r b also ! ,unity ( ! ,god :o is bo? ,fa!r & ,son4 ,! doctr9e ( ! ,div9ity ( ! ,holy ,gho/ w5t ?r\gh a some:at simil> s]ies ( /ages4 ,at fir/ reg>d$ z id5tical ) ! ,^w1 a di/9ction 0 gradually effect$4 ,! ,^w 0 said to h be5 inc>nate 9 ,jesus2 :ile x 0 ?r\gh ! ,holy ,gho/ t ! subsequ5t "w ( ,god 0 c>ri$ on 9 human he>ts4 ,& by simil> /ages ! equality ( ! ,holy ,gho/ to ,fa!r & to ,son 0 gradually evolv$2 :ile x 0 m & m /rongly ass]t$ t1 9 spite ( ! et]nal di/9ction ( #aga ,p]sons1 x 0 "o & ! same ,god :o reveal$ ,himself 9 all ! activities attribut$ to ea* ( !m4 ,side by side ) ^! controv]sies ab\t ! relation betwe5 ! ,fa!r & ! ,^w1 !re 0 a gradual developm5t ( doctr9e z to ! relation betwe5 ! ,logos & ! human ,jesus 9 :om he took up 8 abode4 ,frequ5tly ! idea ( any real humanity 9 ,jesus 0 all b lo/4 ,t 0 at la/ sav$ by ! ,ca?olic =mula 'p]fect ,god & p]fect man'2 ?\gh x _c be d5i$ t popul> ?\ght 9 all ages has nev] q disc>d$ ! t5d5cy to ?9k ( ,jesus z simply ,god 9 human =m1 & n really man at all4 ,ev5 n[ !re are probably hundr$s ( p :o reg>d !mselves z p>ticul>ly or?odox ,*ur*m5 :o yet d n "k t ! ,*ur* tea*es t our ,"l _h a human s\l & a human w4 ,:at are we to make ( all t va/ /ructure1 ( ! elaboration & complication ( :i* ! ,con/ant9opolitan ,cre$ :i* we miscall ,nic5e & ev5 ! s-call$ ,a?anasian ,cre$ give v little idea to ^? :o d n also "k some?+ ( ! ,c\ncils1 ! ,fa!rs1 & ! ,s*oolm58 ,has x all a mod]n mean+8 ,c x be translat$ into t]ms ( our mod]n ?\ght & spee*8 ,= ,i suppose x h>dly ne$s demon/ration--t su* #agb translation is necess>y1 if x be possible4 ,i d\bt :e!r any man 9 ?is audi5ce :o has n made a special /udy ( ! subject1 w get up & say t ! mean+ ( su* t]ms z 'sub/ance1' 'ess5ce1' 'nature1' 'hypo/asis1' 'p]son1' 'et]nal g5]ation1' 'procession1' 'hypo/atic union1' & ! l is at once evid5t to him by ! light ( nature & an ord9>y mod]n education4 ,& ^? :o "k mo/ ab\t ! matt] w mo/ fully realize ! difficulty ( say+ exactly :at 0 meant by su* phrases at ?is or t p>ticul> mom5t or by ?is or t p>ticul> ?9k]4 ,a ?or\gh discussion ( ?is subject f ! po9t ( view ( "o :o ackn[l$ges ! supreme claims ( ,*ri/ ^u ! mod]n m9d1 & is yet will+ fairly to exam9e ! traditional ,cre$ 9 ! light ( mod]n philosophical culture1 is a task :i* v mu* ne$s to be und]tak54 ,i d\bt if x has be5 satisfactorily p]=m$ yet4 ,ev5 if ,i possess$ a ti! ( ! le>n+ necess>y = t task1 ,i c\ld obvi\sly n und]take x n[4 ,b a few rem>ks on ! subject may be ( use = ! guidance ( our p]sonal religi\s life 9 ?is matt]3 7#a7 ,i %\ld l once m to emphasize ! fact t ! really important ?+1 f ! po9t ( view ( ! spiritual life ( ! individual s\l1 is our p]sonal attitude t[>ds our ,"l himself & 8 tea*+1 & n ! phrases 9 :i* we express #agc x4 ,a man :o believes :at ,*ri/ taught ab\t ,god's ,fa!rhood1 ab\t human bro!rhood & human duty1 ab\t s91 ! ne$ = rep5tance1 ! ,fa!r's read9ess to =give1 ! value ( ,pray]1 ! c]ta9ty ( ,immortality--! man :o f9ds ! ideal ( 8 life 9 ! "* ( ,jesus1 & /rives by ! help :i* he has suppli$ to ?9k ( ,god & feel t[>ds ,god z he did1 to imitate him 9 8 life1 to live 7l him7 9 communion ) ! ,fa!r & 9 ! hope ( ,immortality--he is a ,*ri/ian1 & a ,*ri/ian 9 ! fulle/ s5se ( ! ^w4 ,he w f9d 9 t fai? all t is necess>y 7to use ! old phrase7 = salvation--= p]sonal goodness & p]sonal ,religion4 ,& su* a man w be sav$1 & sav$ ?r\gh ,*ri/2 ev5 ?\gh he has nev] he>d ( ! ,cre$s1 or delib]ately rejects _m ( ! =mulae :i* ! ,*ur* or ! ,*ur*es h 'built ^u' t "o f\ndation4 7#b7 ,at ! same "t1 if we believe 9 ! supreme importance ( ,*ri/ = ! _w1 = ! religi\s life ( ! ,*ur* & ( ! individual1 x is surely conv5i5t to h "s language 9 :i* to express our s5se ( t importance4 ,! actual p]sonal attitude t[>ds ,*ri/ is ! ess5tial ?+3 b z a means t[>ds t attitude x is ( importance to express :at ,*ri/ has actually be5 to o!rs1 & :at he ought to be to ourselves4 ,*ildr5 #agd & adults alike require to h ! claims ( ,*ri/ pres5t$ to !m be=e !y c v]ify !m by _! own exp]i5ce3 & ?is requires articulate language ( "s k9d4 ,religion c only be h&$ d[n1 diffus$1 propagat$ by an organiz$ society3 & a religi\s society mu/ h "s means ( h&+ on its religi\s ideas4 ,x is possible to hold t "u o!r conditions a diff]5t set ( t]ms might h express$ ! tru? z well z ^? :i* h actually be5 en%r9$ 9 ! ,new ,te/am5t1 ! ,liturgies1 & ! ,cre$s4 ,b ! phrases :i* h be5 actually adopt$ surely h a /rong presumption 9 _! fav\r1 ev5 if x 7 m]ely ?r\gh ! difficulty ( *ang+ !m1 & ! importance ( unity1 cont9uity1 corporate life4 ,x is easi] to expla91 or ev5 if ne$ be1 alt] 9 "s measure ! mean+ ( an accept$ =mula ?an to introduce a new "o4 ,religi\s developm5t has at all times tak5 place l>gely 9 ?is way4 ,our ,"l himself entirely trans=m$ ! mean+ ( ,god's ,fa!rhood1 ,messiah%ip1 ! ,k+dom ( ,god1 ! p ( ,god1 ! true ,israel4 ,at all ev5ts we %\ld endeav\r to discov] ! maximum ( tru? t any traditional =mula c be made to yield be=e we disc>d x 9 fav\r ( a new "o4 ,if we want to wor%ip & to "w ) ,*ri/'s ,*ur*1 we mu/ d our be/ to give ! maximum ( mean+ #age to ! language 9 :i* x expresses its fai? & its devotion4 7#c7 ,we mu/ insi/ /rongly ^u ! ?or\ghly human "* ( ,*ri/'s own consci\sness4 ,jesus did n--s ,i believe ! critical /udy ( ! ,gospels leads u to ?9k--himself claim to be ,god1 or to be ,son ( ,god 9 any s5se b t ( ,messiah%ip4 ,he claim$ to speak ) au?ority3 he claim$ a div9e mission3 he claim$ to be a ,reveal] ( div9e tru?4 ,! f\r? ,gospel has be5 ( inf9ite s]vice to spiritual ,*ri/ianity4 ,x has giv5 ! _w a due s5se ( ! spiritual importance ( ,*ri/ z ! ,way1 ! ,tru?1 & ! ,life4 ,p]haps ,*ri/ianity c\ld h>dly h exp&$ into a univ]sal ,religion )\t t ,gospel4 ,b we _c reg>d all t ! ,johann9e ,*ri/ says ab\t himself z ! ipsissima v]ba ( ,jesus4 ,! picture is idealiz$ 9 accordance ) ! writ]'s own conceptions1 ?\gh aft] all its ,!ology is v mu* simpl] ?an ! lat] ,!ology :i* has gr[n out ( x p]mits mo/ p to see4 ,we mu/ n let ^! disc\rses bl9d u to ! human "* ( ,*ri/'s consci\sness4 ,& ?is real humanity mu/ c>ry ) x ! recognition ( ! ?or\ghly human limitations ( 8 k4 ,! ,bi%op ( ,birm+ham has prep>$ ! way = ! union ( a really hi/orical view ( ,*ri/'s life ) a reasonable int]pretation ( ! ,ca?olic #agf doctr9e ab\t him1 by reviv+ ! anci5t view z to ! limitation ( 8 intellectual k2#b b ! pr9ciple mu/ be c>ri$ 9 "s ways fur!r ?an ! ,bi%op himself w\ld be prep>$ to g4 ,! accept$ ,*ri/ology mu/ be di/9ctly recogniz$ z ! ,*ur*'s reflection & comm5t ^u ,*ri/'s "w & its value1 n z ! actual tea*+ ( ! ,ma/] ab\t himself4 7#d7 ,x mu/ likewise be recogniz$ t ! language 9 :i* ! ,*ur* express$ ?is attitude t[>ds ,*ri/ 0 borr[$ f ,greek ,metaphysics1 p>ticul>ly f ,plato & ,neo-,platonism 9 ! patri/ic p]iod1 & f ,ari/otle 9 ! ,middle ,ages4 ,& we _c completely sep>ate language f ?\ght4 ,x 0 n m]ely ,greek te*nical phrases b ,greek ways ( ?9k+ :i* 7 import$ into ,ca?olic ,*ri/ianity4 ,& ! language1 ! categories1 ! ideas ( ,greek ,philosophy 7 to "s ext5t diff]5t f ^? ( mod]n times4 ,! mo/ ,platonically-m9d$ ?9k] ( mod]n times does n really ?9k exactly z ,plato ?\ght3 ! mo/ ,ca?olic-m9d$ ?9k] ( mod]n times1 if he has also brea!d ! atmosph]e ( mod]n ,sci5ce & mod]n ,culture1 _c really ?9k exactly z ,a?anasius or ,basil ?\ght4 ,i #agg d n suppose t any mod]n m9d c ?9k itself back into exactly ! /ate ( m9d :i* an anci5t ,fa!r 0 91 :5 he us$ ! t]m ,logos4 ,?is c5tral idea ( ! ,logos is n a category ( mod]n ?\ght4 ,we _c really ?9k ( a ,be+ :o is z di/9ct f ! ,fa!r z he is repres5t$ z be+ 9 "s ( ! patri/ic utt]ances--,i say advis$ly "s1 = widely diff]5t modes ( ?\ght are f\nd 9 ,fa!rs ( equal au?ority--& yet s f> "o ) him t we c say ',"o ,god1 "o spiritual ,be+1 & n two4' ,nor are we "u any obligation to accept ^! =mulae z repres5t+ pr(\nd my/]ies :i* we _c und]/&3 !y 7 simply pieces ( metaphysical ?9k+1 "s ( !m valuable & successful pieces ( ?9k+1 o!rs less s4 ,we mu/ use !m z helps1 n z fett]s to our ?\ght4 ,b1 ?\gh we _c ?9k ourselves back into exactly ! same intellectual condition z a f\r?- or fif?-c5tury ,fa!r1 !re is no reason :y we %\ld n recognize ! fundam5tal tru? ( ! religi\s idea :i* he 0 try+ to express4 ,a mod]n ,philosoph] w\ld probably express t ?\ght some:at 9 ?is mann]4 ',! :ole _w is a revelation ( ,god 9 a s5se1 & /ill m s is ! human m9d3 all ?r\gh ! ages ,god has gone on reveal+ ,himself m & m 9 human consci\sness1 especially ?r\gh ! prophets & o!r #agh exceptionally inspir$ m54 ,! fulle/ & complete/ revelation ( ,himself 0 made once = all 9 ! p]son & tea*+ ( ,jesus1 9 :om we recognize a revelation ( ,god adequate to all our spiritual ne$s1 :5 develop$ & int]pret$ by ! cont9u$ pres5ce ( ,god's ,_s 9 ! _w & p>ticul>ly 9 ! ,*ur* :i* grew out ( ! little company ( ,jesus' fri5ds4' 7#e7 ,i d n ?9k at ! pres5t day ev5 q or?odox p are mu* conc]n$ ab\t ! te*nicalities ( ! concili> ,!ology1 or ev5 ab\t ! niceties ( ! ,a?anasian ,cre$4 ,!y are ev5 a little suspici\s sometimes t mu* talk ab\t ! doctr9e ( ! ,logos is only int5d$ to evade a pla9 answ] to ! supreme "q ( ! ,div9ity ( ,*ri/4 ,y w expect me p]haps to say some?+ ab\t t "q4 ,i w\ld fir/ obs]ve t ! popul> t]m 'div9ity ( ,*ri/' is apt to give a some:at mislead+ impression ( :at ! or?odox tea*+ on ! subject really is4 ,= "o ?+1 x is apt to sugge/ ! idea ( a pre-exi/5t human consci\sness ( ,jesus1 :i* w\ld be contr>y to ,ca?olic tea*+4 ,! ,logos--! et]nal ,son or ,reason ( ,god--pre-exi/$2 b n ! man ,jesus ,*ri/ :o 0 born at a p>ticul> mom5t ( hi/ory1 & :o is /ill1 accord+ to ,ca?olic ,!ology1 a di/9ct human s\l p]fectly & = ev] unit$ ) ! ,^w4 #agi ,& !n aga91 x is apt to sugge/ ! h]etical idea t ! :ole ,tr9ity 0 inc>nate 9 ,*ri/1 & n m]ely ! ,^w4 ,or?odox ,!ology does n tea* t ,god ! ,fa!r became inc>nate 9 ,*ri/1 & suff]$ ^u ! ,cross4 ,& la/ly1 ! con/ant it]ation ( ! phrase ',div9ity ( ,*ri/' t5ds to ! concealm5t ( ! o!r half ( ! ,ca?olic doctr9e--! real humanity ( ,*ri/4 ,to speak ( ! ,god-manhood ( ,*ri/ or ! indwell+ ( ,god 9 ,*ri/ w\ld be a tru] repres5tation ev5 ( ! /ricte/ or?odox doctr9e1 ap>t f all mod]n re-int]pretations4 ,b ev5 s1 :5 all ?is is borne 9 m9d1 x may be ask$1 ,:at is ! real mean+ ( say+ t a man 0 also ,god8 ,i w\ld answ]1 ',:e!r x is possible to give a mod]n1 intelligible1 philosophically def5sible mean+ to ! idea ( ,*ri/'s ,div9ity dep5ds entirely ^u ! "q :at we conceive to be ! true relation betwe5 ,humanity 9 g5]al & ,god4' ,if 7z ,i h attempt$ to %[7 we are ju/ifi$ 9 ?9k+ ( all human consci\sness z con/itut+ a p>tial reproduction ( ! div9e ,m9d2 if we are ju/ifi$ 9 ?9k+ ( human ,reason1 & p>ticul>ly ( ! human ,consci5ce1 z con/itut+ 9 "s measure & 9 "s s5se a revelation by means ( :i* we c rise to a contemplation ( ! div9e nature2 if ,p]sonality 7z we "k x 9 man7 is ! highe/ category )9 our k2 !n #ahj !re is a real mean+ 9 talk+ ( "o p>ticul> man be+ also div9e2 ( ! div9e ,reason or ,logos z dwell+ aft] a unique1 exceptional1 pre-em95t mann] 9 him4 ,z ,dr4 ,edw>d ,caird has rem>k$1 all ! metaphysical que/ions :i* 7 =m]ly discuss$ z to ! relation betwe5 ! div9e & ! human nature 9 ,*ri/1 are n[ be+ discuss$ aga9 9 ref]5ce to ! relation ( ,humanity 9 g5]al to ,god4 ,we _c say intelligibly t ,god dwells 9 ,*ri/1 unless we h already recogniz$ t 9 a s5se ,god dwells & reveals ,himself 9 ,humanity at l>ge1 & 9 ea* p>ticul> human s\l4 ,b ,i fully recognize t1 if ?is is all t is meant by ! expression 'div9ity ( ,*ri/1' t doctr9e w\ld be evacuat$ ( ne>ly all t makes x preci\s to ! he>ts ( ,*ri/ian p4 ,& !re=e x is all-important t we %\ld g on to insi/ t m5 d n reveal ,god equally4 ,! m develop$ intellect reveals ,god m completely ?an t ( ! *ild or ! savage3 & 7f> m important f a religi\s po9t ( view71 ! high] & m develop$ moral consci\sness reveals ,him m ?an ! l[]1 & above all ! actually bett] man reveals ,god m ?an ! worse man4 ,n[1 if 9 ! life1 tea*+1 & "* ( ,*ri/--9 8 moral & religi\s consci\sness1 & 9 ! life & "* :i* #aha s completely express$ & illu/rat$ t consci\sness--we c discov] ! highe/ revelation ( ! div9e nature1 we c surely atta* a real mean+ to ! language ( ! ,cre$s :i* s+les him out f all ! m5 t ev] liv$ z ! "o 9 :om ! ideal relation ( man to ,god is mo/ completely realiz$4 ,if ,god c only be kn[n z reveal$ 9 ,humanity1 & ,*ri/ is ! highe/ repres5tative ( ,humanity1 we c v significantly say ',*ri/ is ! ,son ( ,god1 v ,god ( v ,god1 ( "o sub/ance ) ! ,fa!r1' ?\gh ! phrase und\bt$ly belongs to a philosophical dialect :i* we d n habitually use4 7#f7 ,beh9d ! doctr9e ( ! ,inc>nation looms ! /ill m te*nical doctr9e ( ! ,tr9ity4 ,yet aft] all1 x is *iefly1 ,i believe1 z a sort ( necess>y backgr\nd or presupposition to ! idea ( ,*ri/'s div9e nature t mod]n religi\s p1 n pr(essionally int]e/$ 9 ,!ology1 atta* importance to t doctr9e4 ,!y accept ! doctr9e 9 s f> z x is impli$ by ! tea*+ ( ,scripture & by ! doctr9e ( our ,"l's ,div9ity1 b !y are n mu* atta*$ to ! te*nicalities ( ! ,a?anasian ,cre$4 ,! great objection to t ,cre$1 ap>t f ! damnatory clauses1 is ! c]ta9ty t x w be misund]/ood by mo/ ( ^? :o ?9k !y und]/& x at all4 ,! #ahb be/ ?+ we c\ld d ) ! ,a?anasian ,cre$ is to drop x altoge!r3 ! next be/ ?+ to x is to expla9 x1 or at lea/ s mu* ( x z really int]e/s ! ord9>y layman--! doctr9e ( ?ree ,p]sons 9 "o ,god4 ,& !re=e x is important to insi/ 9 ! /ronge/ possible way t ! ^w ',p]son' :i* has mo/ un=tunately come to be ! te*nical t]m = :at ! ,greeks m obscurely call$ ! ?ree huo/aseis 9 ! ,godhead does n1 & nev] did1 mean :at we commonly und]/& by ,p]sonality--:e!r 9 ! language ( ord9>y life or ( mod]n ,philosophy4 ,i d n d5y t at c]ta9 p]iods ,!ology did t5d to ?9k ( ! ,logos z a di/9ct be+ f ! ,fa!r1 a di/9ct consci\sness ) ?\ghts1 w1 desires1 emotions n id5tical ) ^? ( ,god ! ,fa!r4 ,! di/9ction 0 at times pu%$ to a po9t :i* meant ei!r %e] ,tri!ism1 or some?+ :i* is incapable ( be+ di/9ctly realiz$ 9 ?\ght at all4 ,b t is sc>cely true ( ! ,!ology :i* 0 f9ally accept$ ei!r by ,ea/ or ,we/4 ,?is is mo/ di/9ctly se5 9 ! ,summa ,!ologica ( ,/4 ,?omas ,aqu9as3 & ,i w\ld rem9d y t y _c be m or?odox ?an ,/4 ,?omas--! s\rce n only ( ! ,!ology pr(ess$ by ! ,pope & taught 9 e ,roman ,sem9>y b ( ! ,!ology embodi$ 9 our own ,articles4 ,/4 ,?omas' explanation ( ! ,tr9ity #ahc is t ,god is at "o & ! same "t ,p[] or ,cause#c 7,fa!r71 ,wisdom 7,son71 ,w 7,holy ,gho/72 or1 s9ce ! ,w ( ,god is always a lov+ ,w1 ,love 7,amor7 is sometimes sub/itut$ = ,w 7,voluntas7 9 explanation ( ! ,holy ,_s4#d ,h[ little #ahd ,/4 ,?omas ?\ght ( ! ',p]sons' z sep>ate consci\snesses1 is be/ se5 f 8 doctr9e 7tak5 f ,augu/9e7 t ! love ( ! ,fa!r = ! ,son is ! ,holy ,_s4 ,! love ( "o ,be+ = himself or = ano!r is n a ,p]son 9 ! natural1 normal1 mod]n s5se ( ! ^w3 & x w\ld be q unor?odox to attribute ,p]sonality to ! ,son 9 any o!r s5se ?an t 9 :i* x is attribut$ to ! ,holy ,gho/4 ,i d n myself atta* any great importance to ^! te*nical phrases4 ,i d n #ahe d5y t ! supremely important tru? t ,god has receiv$ ,8 fulle/ revelation 9 ! hi/orical ,*ri/1 & t ,he goes on reveal+ ,himself 9 ! he>ts ( m51 might h be5 o!rwise1 m simply1 to mod]n m9ds m intelligibly1 express$4 ,!re are detail$ features ( ! patri/ic or ! s*ola/ic v]sion ( ! doctr9e :i* involve conceptions to :i* ! mo/ accompli%$ ,pr(essors ( ,!ology w\ld f9d x difficult or impossible to give a mod]n mean+4 ,i d n "k = in/ance t mu* w\ld h be5 lo/ _h ,!ology 7) ! all b canonical writ]s ,clem5t ( ,rome & ,h]mas1 ) ,ignatius1 ) ,ju/91 ) ! philosophic ,clem5t ( ,alex&ria7 cont9u$ to speak indiff]5tly ( ! ,^w & ! ,_s4 ,yet tak5 by itself ?is ,?omi/ doctr9e ( ! ,tr9ity is "o to :i* x is q possible to give a p]fectly rational mean+1 & a mean+ probably v mu* ne>] to t :i* 0 really int5d$ by its au?or ?an ! mean+ :i* is usually put ^u ! ,tr9it>ian =mula by popul> religi\s ?\ght4 ,t ,god is ,p[]1 & ,wisdom1 & ,love is simply ! ess5ce ( ,*ri/ian ,!ism--n ! less true because few ,unit>ians w\ld repudiate x4 7#g7 ,once m let me briefly rem9d y t any claim = f9ality 9 ! ,*ri/ian ,religion mu/ be bas$ on its p[] ( p]petual developm5t4 #ahf ,belief 9 ! cont9u$ "w ( ! ,holy ,_s 9 ! ,*ur* is an ess5tial elem5t ( ! ,ca?olic ,fai?4 ,we ne$ n1 ) ! ,rits*lian1 contemptu\sly condemn ! :ole /ructure ( ,*ri/ian doctr9e because und\bt$ly x is a developm5t ( :at 0 taught by ,*ri/ himself4 ,only1 if we are to ju/ify ! developm5t ( ! pa/1 we mu/ g on to ass]t ! same "r & duty ( developm5t 9 ,e?ics & 9 ,!ology = ! ,*ur* ( ! future4 ,9 ! pregnant phrase ( ,loisy1 ! developm5t :i* ! ,*ur* is mo/ 9 ne$ ( at ! pres5t mom5t is precisely a developm5t 9 ! idea ( developm5t itself4 ,b h[ c we tell 7x may be ask$71 if we once admit t ! developm5t ( ,religion does n end ) ! tea*+ ( ,*ri/1 :]e ! developm5t w /op8 ,if we are to admit an indef9ite possibility ( gr[? & *ange1 h[ d we "k t ,*ri/ianity itself w n "o day be outgr[n8 ,if we once admit t ! f9al appeal is to ! religi\s consci\sness ( ! pres5t1 we mu/ ackn[l$ge t x is n possible to demon/rate a priori t ! ,*ri/ian ,religion is ! f9al1 univ]sal1 or absolute ,religion4 ,all we c say is t we h no difficulty 9 recogniz+ t ! developm5t :i* has s f> tak5 place1 9 s f> z x is a developm5t :i* we c approve & accept1 seems to u a developm5t :i* leaves ! #ahg ,religion /ill ess5tially ! ,religion ( ,*ri/4 ,9 ! :ole /ructure ( ! mod]n ,*ri/ian's religi\s belief1 t :i* 0 contribut$ by ,*ri/ himself is incomp>ably ! mo/ important "p--! basis ( ! :ole /ructure4 ,! ess5tials ( ,religion & ,morality /ill seem to u to be conta9$ 9 8 tea*+ z !y are conta9$ n[h]e else4 ,all ! re/ t is includ$ 9 an enlight5$ mod]n ,*ri/ian's religi\s cre$ is ei!r a direct work+ out ( ! pr9ciples already conta9$ !re1 or 7if x has come f o!r s\rces7 x has be5 trans=m$ 9 ! process ( adaptation4 ,no?+ has be5 discov]$ 9 ,religion & ,morality :i* t5ds 9 any way to dim9i% ! unique rev]5ce :i* we feel = ! p]son ( ,*ri/1 ! p]fect suffici5cy ( 8 "* to repres5t & inc>nate = u ! "* ( ,god4 ,x is a completely gratuit\s assumption to suppose t x w ev] lose t suffici5cy4 ,ev5 9 ! developm5t ( ,sci5ce1 !re comes a "t :5 its fundam5tals are virtually beyond ! rea* ( reconsid]ation4 ,/ill m 9 practical life1 m]e unmotiv$1 gratuit\s possibilities may be disreg>d$4 ,x weak5s ! hold ( fundam5tal convictions ^u ! m9d to be p]petually contemplat+ ! possibility or probability ( fundam5tal revision4 ,we ought no d\bt to keep ! spiritual e> ev] op5 t we may always be he>+ :at ! ,_s sai? unto #ahh ! ,*ur*es4 ,b to look =w>d to a "t :5 any bett] way w be discov]$ ( ?9k+ ( ,god ?an ,jesus' way ( ?9k+ ( ,him z a lov+ ,fa!r is z gratuit\s z to contemplate ! probability ( some?+ 9 human life at pres5t unkn[n be+ discov]$ ( great] value ?an ,love4 ,until t discov]y is made1 our ,religion w /ill rema9 ! ,religion ( him :o1 by :at he said & by :at he 01 taught ! _w to ?9k ( ,god z ! supreme ,love & ! supreme ,hol9ess1 ! s\rce ( all o!r love & all o!r hol9ess4 ,,lit]ature ,! lit]ature is "h too va/ to m5tion ev5 ! works ( ! v fir/ importance3 ,i c only select a v few books :i* h be5 useful to myself4 ,! late ,sir ,john ,seeley's ,ecce ,homo may be reg>d$ z 9 ! light ( mod]n rese>* a some:at uncritical book1 b x rema9s to my m9d ! mo/ /rik+ expression ( ! appeal :i* ,*ri/ makes to ! ,consci5ce ( ! mod]n _w4 ,x has prov$ a v]itable fif? ,gospel to _m seek]s aft] light4 ,bi%op ,moorh\se's little book1 ,! ,tea*+ ( ,*ri/1 w s]ve z an introduction to ! /udy ( ,*ri/'s life & "w4 ,a m elaborate treatm5t ( ! subject1 ) :i* ,i am v mu* 9 sympa?y1 is ,w5dt's ,tea*+ ( ,jesus4 ,! ideal life ( ,*ri/ p]haps rema9s to be writt54 ,pr(essor ,s&ay's ,article on ',jesus ,*ri/' 9 ,ha/+s' ,diction>y ( ! ,bible may be m5tion$ z a good repres5tative ( mod]ate & s*ol>ly ,cons]vatism or ,lib]al ,cons]vatism4 ,pr(essor ,osc> ,holtzmann's ,life ( ,jesus is bas$ on m radical1 p]haps ov]-radical1 criticism4 ,pr(essor ,h>nack's #ahi ,:at is ,*ri/ianity8 has become ! typical expression ( ! ,rits*lian attitude4 ,! ideas ( extreme ,roman ,ca?olic ',mod]nism' may be ga!r$ f ,loisy's l',evangile et l',eglise & ,aut\r d'un ,petit ,livre4 ,pr(essor ,g>dn]'s ?ree books--,exploratio ,evangelica1 ! %ort] ,an ,hi/oric ,view ( ! ,new ,te/am5t1 & ,! ,gr[? ( ,*ri/ianity--may be especially comm5d$ to ^? :o wi% to satisfy !mselves t a ?or\gh-go+ recognition ( ! results ( hi/orical ,criticism is compatible ) a :ole-he>t$ p]sonal acceptance ( ,*ri/ianity4 ,dr4 ,fairbairn's ,philosophy ( ! ,*ri/ian ,religion & ,b\sset's ,:at is ,religion8 are especially valuable z v9dications ( ! supreme position ( ,*ri/ianity comb9$ ) ! fulle/ recognition ( ! measure ( ,revelation conta9$ 9 all ! great hi/orical ,religions4 ,all5's ,cont9uity ( ,*ri/ian ,?\ght sugge/s :at seems to me ! "r attitude ( ! mod]n ?9k] t[>ds traditional dogma1 ?\gh ! au?or's position is m decid$ly ',hegelian' ?an m9e4 ,i may also m5tion ,pr(essor ,+e's contribution to ,cont5tio ,v]itatis on ',! ,p]sonal ,*ri/1' & "s ( ! ,essays 9 ,lux ,hom9um4 ,?\gh ,i _c always agree ) him1 ,i recognize ! high value ( ! ,bi%op ( ,birm+ham's ,bampton ,lectures on ,! ,div9ity ( ,jesus ,*ri/ ! ,son ( ,god & ! accompany+ volume ( ,diss]tations4 #a ,9 _! ass]tion ( ! necessity ( ,developm5t1 & ( ! religi\s community z ! orig9 ( ,developm5t1 ! tea*+ ( ! ,abbe ,loisy & ! ,roman ,ca?olic ,mod]ni/s seems to me to be complem5t>y to t ( ! ,kits*lians1 ?\gh ,i d n always accept _! r de/ructive critical conclusions4 #b ,9 8 ,essay 9 ,lux ,mundi 7#ahhi74 ,he has s9ce develop$ 8 view 9 8 ,bampton ,lectures on ,! ,inc>nation ( ! ,son ( ,god & a volume ( ,diss]tations on ,subjects connect$ ) ! ,inc>nation4 #c ,i v5ture ?us to translate ',pr9cipium' 7ar*e72 9 ,abel>d & 8 disciple ,pet] ! ,lomb>d1 ! fam\s ,ma/] ( ! ,s5t5ces1 ! ^w is ',pot5tia' 7,l4 ,i4 ,di/4 xxxiv473 & ,/4 ,?omas himself 7,p4 ,i4 ,q4 xli4 ,art4 #d7 expla9s ',pr9cipium' by ',pot5tia g5]&i ,filium4' #d ,?us 9 ,summa ,!ologica1 ,p>s ,i4 ,q4 xxxvii4 ,art4 #a1 ! 'conclusio' is ',amor1 p]sonalit] acceptus1 proprium nom5 e/ ,spiritus sancti1' :i* is expla9$ to mean t !re are 9 ! ,godhead 'duse processiones3 ,una p] modum intellectus1 quae e/ processio ,v]bi2 alia p] modum voluntatis1 quae e/ processio amoris4' ,s aga9 7ibid4 ,q4 xlv4 ,art4 #g73 ',9 creaturis igitur rationalibus1 9 quibus e/ intellectus et voluntas1 inv5itur repraes5tatio ,tr9itatis p] modum imag9is1 inquantum inv5itur 9 eis ,v]bum conceptum1 et amor proc$5s4' ,9 a fri5dly review ( my ,essay 9 ,cont5tio ,v]itatis1 9 :i* ,i endeav\r$ to exp\nd 9 a mod]n =m ?is doctr9e1 ,dr4 ,s&ay 7,j\rnal ( ,!ological ,/udies1 vol4 iv41 #aijc7 wrote3 ',"o ( ! passages t seem to me mo/ op5 to criticism is t on ! doctr9e ( ! ,tr9ity 7p4 #dh74 ,p[]1 ,wisdom1 & ,w surely _c be a s\nd tri*otomy z appli$ ei!r to human nature or ,div9e4 ,surely ,p[] is an expression ( ,w & n co-ord9ate ) x4 ,! common division1 ,p[] 7or ,w71 ,wisdom1 & ,love is m to ! po9t4 ,yet ,dr4 ,ra%dall id5tifies ! two triads by :at ,i mu/ ne$s ?9k a loos5ess ( reason+4' ,! ,m>g>et ,pr(essor ( ,div9ity h>dly seems to recognize t he is criticiz+ ! ,angelical ,doctor & n myself4 ,if ,dr4 ,s&ay _h _h ! =mulation ( ! doctr9e ( ! ,tr9ity1 ! result1 if less metaphysically subtle1 might no d\bt h prov$ m easily intelligible to ! mod]n m9d2 b ! 'id5tification' ( :i* he compla9s happ5s to be "p ( ! traditional doctr9e1 & ,i 0 endeav\r+ m]ely to make ! be/ ( x = mod]n ,*ri/ians4 ,i add ,/4 ,?omas' ju/ification ( x1 :i* is sub/antially :at ,i gave 9 ,cont5tio ,v]itatis & h repeat$ above3 ',cum processiones div9as secundum aliquas actiones necesse e/ accip]e1 secundum bonitatem1 et hujusmodi alia attributa1 non accipiuntur aliae processiones1 nisi ,v]bi et amoris1 secundum quod ,deus suam ess5tiam1 v]itatem et bonitatem intelligit et amat' 7,q4 xxvii4 ,art4 #e74 ,! s\rce ( ! doctr9e is to be f\nd 9 ,/4 ,augu/9e1 :o habitually speaks ( ! ,holy ,_s z ,amor2 b1 :5 he ref]s to ! ',imago ,tr9itatia' 9 man ! ,_s is repres5t$ sometimes by ',amor1' sometimes by ',voluntas' 7de ,tr941 ,l4 xiv4 cap #g74 ,! o!r two memb]s ( ! human triad are ) him ',memoria' 7or ',m5s'7 & ',intellig5tia4' ,) reg>d to ! difficulty ( di/+ui%+ ,p[] f ,w1 ,i 0 p]haps to blame = n giv+ ,/4 ,?omas' own ^w ',pr9cipium4' ,! ^w ',pr9cipium' means ! pege !oteos1 ! ultimate ,cause or ,s\rce ( ,be+3 by ',voluntas' ,/4 ,?omas means t actual putt+ =? ( ,p[] 79 kn[+ & 9 lov+ ! ,^w or ,?\ght et]nally begott5 by ,god ! ,fa!r7 :i* is ! ,holy ,gho/4 ,i am f> f say+ t ! details ( ,/4 ,?omas' doctr9e are n op5 to mu* criticism3 a r\gh correspond5ce betwe5 8 tea*+ & any view ( ,god's ,nature :i* c comm5d itself to a mod]n ,philosoph] is all t ,i endeav\r$ to po9t out4 ,! mod]n ?9k] w\ld no d\bt ) ,dr4 ,s&ay pref] ! triad ',p[]1 ,wisdom1 ,love1' or 7,i w\ld sugge/7 ',feel+1 includ+ ,love z ! highe/ =m ( ,feel+4' ,! reason :y ,/4 ,?omas w n accept su* an int]pretation is t 8 ,ari/otelianism 7"h n v consonant ) ! ,jewi% & ,*ri/ian view ( ,god7 excludes all feel+ or emotion f ! div9e nature2 ',love' has !re=e to be id5tifi$ ) ',w' & n ) ',feel+4' ,i _c b ?9k t ! ,pr(essor might h tak5 a little m tr\ble to und]/& bo? ,/4 ,?omas & myself be=e accus+ ei!r ( u ( 'loos5ess ( reason+4'