_Naturalism and Agnosticism_.
Among the non-idealistic writers who have based their argument for the
existence of God mainly or largely upon the consideration that Causality
is unintelligible apart from a rational Will, may be mentioned--among
older writers Reid, _Essays on the Active Powers of Man_, Essay I.
(especially chapter v.), and among more recent ones Martineau, _A Study
of Religion_. Flint's _Theism_ may be recommended as one of the best
attempts to state the theistic case with a minimum of technical
Metaphysic.
Two little books by Professor Andrew Seth (now Seth Pringle-Pattison),
though not primarily occupied with the religious problem, may be
mentioned as very useful introductions to Philosophy--_The Scottish
Philosophers_ and _Hegelianism and Personality_.
[1] Of course deeply religious men like Green who have held this view did
not admit, or did not realize, such consequences. The tendency here
criticized is undoubtedly derived from Hegel, but passages suggestive of
the opposite view can be extracted from his writings, e.g.: 'God,
however, as subjective Power, is not simply will, intention, etc., but
rather immediate Cause' (_Philosophy of Religion_, Eng. trans., ii. p.
129).
[2] The idea of Causality was by Kant identified with the idea of logical
connexion, _i.e._ the relation of the premisses of a syllogism to its
conclusion; but this does not involve _time_ at all, and _time_ is
essential to the idea of Causality. For an admirable vindication of our
immediate consciousness of Causality see Professor Stout's chapter on
'The Concept of Mental Activity' in _Analytic Psychology_ (Book II.
chap. i.).
[3] _Excursion_, Book IV.
[4] For the further development of this argument see Lecture IV.
[5] See especially the earlier chapters of _The Philosophy of the
Unconscious_ (translated by W. C. Coupland).
[6] Of course passages can be quoted from Hegel himself which suggest the
idea that God is Will as well as Thought; I am speaking of the general
tendency of Hegel and many of his disciples. Some recent Hegelians, such
as Professor Boyce, seem to be less open to this criticism, but there are
difficulties in thinking of God as Will and yet continuing to speak of
ultimate Reality as out of Time.
[7] It may be objected that this is true only of 'conceptual space' (that
is, the space of Geometry), but not of 'perceptual space,' _i.e._ space
as it presents itself in a child's perception of
|