darwin and modern science-第122章

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


nk；　not　what　we　think　we　ought　to　think。　　（G。　Tyrrell；　in　〃Mediaevalism〃；　has　a　chapter　which　is　full　of　the　important　MORAL　element　in　a　scientific　attitude。　　〃The　only　infallible　guardian　of　truth　is　the　spirit　of　truthfulness。〃　　〃Mediaevalism〃　page　182；　London；　1908。）；　truly　scientific　in　its　employment　of　hypothesis　and　verification；　and　in　growing　conviction　of　the　reality　of　its　subject…matter　through　the　repeated　victories　of　a　mastery　which　advances；　like　science；　in　the　Baconian　road　of　obedience。　　It　is　reasonable　to　hope　that　progress　in　this　respect　will　be　more　rapid　and　sure　when　religious　study　enlists　more　men　affected　by　scientific　desire　and　endowed　with　scientific　capacity。

The　class　of　investigating　minds　is　a　small　one；　possibly　even　smaller　than　that　of　reflecting　minds。　　Very　few　persons　at　any　period　are　able　to　find　out　anything　whatever。　　There　are　few　observers；　few　discoverers；　few　who　even　wish　to　discover　truth。　　In　how　many　societies　the　problems　of　philology　which　face　every　person　who　speaks　English　are　left　unattempted！　And　if　the　inquiring　or　the　successfully　inquiring　class　of　minds　is　small；　much　smaller；　of　course；　is　the　class　of　those　possessing　the　scientific　aptitude　in　an　eminent　degree。　　During　the　last　age　this　most　distinguished　class　was　to　a　very　great　extent　absorbed　in　the　study　of　phenomena；　a　study　which　had　fallen　into　arrears。　　For　we　stood　possessed；　in　rudiment；　of　means　of　observation；　means　for　travelling　and　acquisition；　qualifying　men　for　a　larger　knowledge　than　had　yet　been　attempted。　　These　were　now　to　be　directed　with　new　accuracy　and　ardour　upon　the　fabric　and　behaviour　of　the　world　of　sense。　　Our　debt　to　the　great　masters　in　physical　science　who　overtook　and　almost　out…stripped　the　task　cannot　be　measured；　and；　under　the　honourable　leadership　of　Ruskin；　we　may　all　well　do　penance　if　we　have　failed　〃in　the　respect　due　to　their　great　powers　of　thought；　or　in　the　admiration　due　to　the　far　scope　of　their　discovery。〃　　（〃Queen　of　the　Air〃；　Preface；　page　vii。　　London；　1906。）　　With　what　miraculous　mental　energy　and　divine　good　fortuneas　Romans　said　of　their　soldiersdid　our　men　of　curiosity　face　the　apparently　impenetrable　mysteries　of　nature！　　And　how　natural　it　was　that　immense　accessions　of　knowledge；　unrelated　to　the　spiritual　facts　of　life；　should　discredit　Christian　faith；　by　the　apparent　superiority　of　the　new　work　to　the　feeble　and　unprogressive　knowledge　of　Christian　believers！　　The　day　is　coming　when　men　of　this　mental　character　and　rank；　of　this　curiosity；　this　energy　and　this　good　fortune　in　investigation；　will　be　employed　in　opening　mysteries　of　a　spiritual　nature。　　They　will　silence　with　masterful　witness　the　over…confident　denials　of　naturalism。　　They　will　be　in　danger　of　the　widespread　recognition　which　thirty　years　ago　accompanied　every　utterance　of　Huxley；　Tyndall；　Spencer。　　They　will　contribute；　in　spite　of　adulation；　to　the　advance　of　sober　religious　and　moral　science。

And　this　result　will　be　due　to　Darwin；　first　because　by　raising　the　dignity　of　natural　science；　he　encouraged　the　development　of　the　scientific　mind；　secondly　because　he　gave　to　religious　students　the　example　of　patient　and　ardent　investigation；　and　thirdly　because　by　the　pressure　of　naturalistic　criticism　the　religious　have　been　driven　to　ascertain　the　causes　of　their　own　convictions；　a　work　in　which　they　were　not　without　the　sympathy　of　men　of　science。　　（The　scientific　rank　of　its　writer　justifies　the　insertion　of　the　following　letter　from　the　late　Sir　John　Burdon…Sanderson　to　me。　　In　the　lecture　referred　to　I　had　described　the　methods　of　Professor　Moseley　in　teaching　Biology　as　affording　a　suggestion　of　the　scientific　treatment　of　religion。

Oxford；　April　30；　1902。

Dear　Sir；

I　feel　that　I　must　express　to　you　my　thanks　for　the　discourse　which　I　had　the　pleasure　of　listening　to　yesterday　afternoon。

I　do　not　mean　to　say　that　I　was　able　to　follow　all　that　you　said　as　to　the　identity　of　Method　in　the　two　fields　of　Science　and　Religion；　but　I　recognise　that　the　〃mysticism〃　of　which　you　spoke　gives　us　the　only　way　by　which　the　two　fields　can　be　brought　into　relation。

Among　much　that　was　memorable；　nothing　interested　me　more　than　what　you　said　of　Moseley。

No　one；　I　am　sure；　knew　better　than　you　the　value　of　his　teaching　and　in　what　that　value　consisted。

Yours　faithfully

J。　Burdon…Sanderson。　31…2。）

In　leaving　the　subject　of　scientific　religious　inquiry；　I　will　only　add　that　I　do　not　believe　it　receives　any　important　helpand　certainly　it　suffers　incidentally　much　damaging　interruptionfrom　the　study　of　abnormal　manifestations　or　abnormal　conditions　of　personality。

（3）　　Both　of　the　above　effects　seem　to　me　of　high；　perhaps　the　very　highest；　importance　to　faith　and　to　thought。　　But；　under　the　third　head；　I　name　two　which　are　more　directly　traceable　to　the　personal　work　of　Darwin；　and　more　definitely　characteristic　of　the　age　in　which　his　influence　was　paramount：　　viz。　the　influence　of　the　two　conceptions　of　evolution　and　natural　selection　upon　the　doctrine　of　creation　and　of　design　respectively。

It　is　impossible　here；　though　it　is　necessary　for　a　complete　sketch　of　the　matter；　to　distinguish　the　different　elements　and　channels　of　this　Darwinian　influence；　in　Darwin's　own　writings；　in　the　vigorous　polemic　of　Huxley；　and　strangely　enough；　but　very　actually　for　popular　thought；　in　the　teaching　of　the　definitely　anti…Darwinian　evolutionist　Spencer。

Under　the　head　of　the　directly　and　purely　Darwinian　elements　I　should　class　as　preeminent　the　work　of　Wallace　and　of　Bates；　for　no　two　sets　of　facts　have　done　more　to　fix　in　ordinary　intelligent　minds　a　belief　in　organic　evolution　and　in　natural　selection　as　its　guiding　factor　than　the　facts　of　geographical　distribution　and　of　protective　colour　and　mimicry。　　The　facts　of　geology　were　difficult　to　grasp　and　the　public　and　theologians　heard　more　often　of　the　imperfection　than　of　the　extent　of　the　geological　record。　The　witness　of　embryology；　depending　to　a　great　extent　upon　microscopic　work；　was　and　is　beyond　the　appreciation　of　persons　occupied　in　fields　of　work　other　than　biology。

III。

From　the　influence　in　religion　of　scientific　modes　of　thought　we　pass　to　the　influence　of　particular　biological　conceptions。　　The　former　effect　comes　by　way　of　analogy；　example；　encouragement　and　challenge；　inspiring　or　provoking　kindred　or　similar　modes　of　thought　in　the　field　of　theology；　the　latter　by　a　collision　of　opinions　upon　matters　of　fact　or　conjecture　which　seem　to　concern　both　science　and　religion。

In　the　case　of　Darwinism　the　story　of　this　collision　is　familiar；　and　falls　under　the　heads　of　evolution　and　natural　selection；　the　doctrine　of　descent　with　modification；　and　the　doctrine　of　its　guidance　or　determination　by　the　struggle　for　existence　between　related　varieties。　　These　doctrines；　though　associated　and　interdependent；　and　in　popular　thought　not　only　combined　but　confused；　must　be　considered　separately。　　It　is　true　that　the　ancient　doctrine　of　Evolution；　in　spite　of　the　ingenuity　and　ardour　of　Lamarck；　remained　a　dream　tantalising　the　intellectual　ambition　of　naturalists；　until　the　day　when　Darwin　made　it　conceivable　by　suggesting　the　machinery　of　its　guidance。　　And；　further；　the　idea　of　natural　selection　has　so　effectively　opened　the　door　of　research　and　stimulated　observation　in　a　score　of　principal　directions　that；　even　if　the　Darwinian　explanation　became　one　day　much　less　convincing　than；　in　spite　of　recent　criticism；　it　now　is；　yet　its　passing；　supposing　it　to　pass；　would　leave　the　doctrine　of　Evolution　immeasurably　and　permanently　strengthened。　　For　in　the　interests　of　the　theory　of　selection；　〃Fur　Darwin；〃　as　Muller　wrote；　facts　have　been　collected　which　remain　in　any　case　evidence　of　the　reality　of　descent　with　modification。

But　still；　though　thus　united　in　the　modern　history　of　convictions；　though　united　and　confused　in　the　collision　of　biological　and　traditional　opinion；　yet　evolution　and　natural　selection　must　be　separated　in　theological　no　less　than　in　biological　estimation。　　Evolution　seemed　inconsistent　with　Creation；　natural　selection　with　Providence　and　Divine　design。

Discussion　was　maintained　about　these　points　for　many　years　and　with　much　dark　heat。　　It　ranged　over　many　particular　topics　and　engaged　minds　different　in　tone；　in　quality；　and　in　accomplishment。　　There　was　at　most　times　a　degree　of　misconception。　　Some　naturalists　attributed　to　theologians　in　general　a　poverty　of　thought　which　belonged　really　to　men　of　a　particular　temper　or　training。　　The　〃timid　theism〃　discerned　in　Darwin　by　so　cautious　a　theologian　as　Liddon　（H。P。　Liddon；　〃The　Recovery　of　S。　Thomas〃；　a　sermon　preached　in　St　Paul's；　London；　on　April　23rd；　1882　（the　Sunday　after　Darwin's　death）。）　was　supposed　by　many　biologists　to　be　the　necessary　foundation　of　an　honest　Christianity。　　It　was　really　more　characteristic　of　devout　NATURALISTS　like　Philip　Henry　Gosse；　than　of　religious　believers　as　such。　　（Dr　Pusey　（〃Unscience　not　Science　adverse　to　Faith〃　1878）　writes：　　〃The　questions　as　to　'species；'　of　what　variations　the　animal　world　is　capable；　whether　the　species　be　more　or　fewer；　whether　accidental　variations　may　become　hereditary。。。and　the　like；　naturally　fall　under　the　province　of　science。　　In　all　these　questions　Mr　Darwin's　careful　observations　gained　for　him　a　deserved　approbation　and　confidence。〃）　　The　study　of　theologians　more　considerable　and　even　more　typically　conservative　than　Liddon　does　not　confirm　the　description　of　religious　intolerance　given　in　good　faith；　but　in　serious　ignorance；　by　a　disputant　so　acute；　so　observant　and　so　candid　as　Huxley。　　Something　hid　from　each　other's　knowledge　the　devoted　pilgrims　in　two　great　ways　of　thought。　　The　truth　may　be；　that　naturalists　took　their　view　of　what　creation　was　from　Christian　men　of　science　who　naturally　looked　in　their　own　special　studies　for　the　supports　and　illustrations　of　their　religious　belief。　　Of　almost　every　laborious　student　it　may　be　said　〃Hic　ab　arte　sua　non　recessit。〃　　And　both　the　believing　and　the　denying　naturalists；　confining　habitual　attention　to　a　part　of　experience；　are　apt　to　affirm　and　deny　with　trenchant　vigour　and　something　of　a　narrow　clearness　〃Qui　respiciunt　ad　pauca；　de　facili　pronunciant。〃　　（Aristotle；　in　Bacon；　quoted　by　Newman　in　his　〃Idea　of　a　University〃；　page　78。　　London；　1873。）

Newman　says　of　some　secular　teachers　that　〃they　persuade　the　world　of　what　is　false　by　urging　upon　it　what　is　true。〃　　Of　some　early　opponents　of　Darwin　it　might　be　said　by　a　candid　friend　that；　in　all　sincerity　of　devotion　to　truth；　they　tried　to　persuade　the　world　of　what　is　true　by　urging　upon　it　what　is　false。　　If　naturalists　took　their　version　of　orthodoxy　from　amateurs　in　theology；　some　conservative　Christians；　instead　of　learning　what　evolution　meant　to　its　regular　exponents；　took　their　view　of　it　from　celebrated　persons；　not　of　the　front　rank　in　theology　or　in　thought；　but　eager　to　take　account　of　public　movements　and　able　to　arrest　public　attention。

Cleverness　and　eloquence　on　both　sides　certainly　had　their　share　in　producing　the　very　great　and　general　disturbance　of　men's　minds　in　the　early　days　of　Darwinian　teaching。　　But　by　far　the　greater　part　of　tha