FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320  
321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   >>   >|  
nceive of nothing beyond Nature, distinct from it, and above it.... The Theist, therefore, I leave; but while I go with the Pantheist so far as to accept the fact of Nature in the plenitude of its diverse, illimitable, and transcendent manifestations, I cannot go further and predicate with the Pantheist _the unity of its intelligence and consciousness_!"[275] He holds, therefore, that self-existence is an attribute of Nature, that this attribute is so majestic that it may be fairly held to include _all others_, and that, while intelligence and consciousness exist, he cannot affirm their _unity_ in Nature, or regard "Nature as a being, intelligent and conscious." Whence it follows that he can give no other account of the living, intelligent, active, and responsible beings which inhabit the world, than that they came into existence, he knows not how, and that they have the ultimate ground of their existence in a necessary, underived, and eternal being, which is neither intelligent nor self-conscious! 3. Secularism seeks to invalidate the proof from _marks of design_ in Nature by attempting to show, either that it is _merely analogical_, and can, therefore, afford no certainty, or that, if it were certain, it could prove nothing, because, by an extension of the same principle, it must prove too much. Such is the pith and substance of Mr. Holyoake's argument in his singular pamphlet entitled, "Paley refuted in his own Words." He first of all endeavors to invalidate the proof from design by assuming that it is a mere argument from _analogy_, and that at the best analogy can afford no ground of _certainty_, although it may possibly suggest a _probable conjecture_: "It may be said that _analogy_ fails to find out God, and this must be admitted, it being no more than was to be expected. The God of Theology being infinite, it is no subject for analogy.... No conceivable analogy can prove a creation. Creation is without an analogy.... No analogy can prove creation, because no analogy can prove what it does not contain, namely, an example of creation."[276] "Analogy, the specious precursor of reason, would suggest the personality of the powers which awed and cheered man. Reason sends us to facts as the only positive grounds of positive conclusions; but in the childhood of intellect and experience, _likelihood_ is mistaken for _certainty_, and _probability_ for _fact_. In the disturbed reflection of man's image on the wall, as
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320  
321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

analogy

 
Nature
 
intelligent
 

existence

 
creation
 
certainty
 

positive

 

conscious

 

afford

 

argument


design

 

invalidate

 
suggest
 

ground

 
consciousness
 

Pantheist

 

intelligence

 
attribute
 

distinct

 

conceivable


admitted

 

subject

 

infinite

 

Theology

 

expected

 
probable
 

assuming

 

endeavors

 
conjecture
 

Theist


possibly

 

childhood

 

intellect

 

experience

 
conclusions
 

grounds

 

nceive

 

likelihood

 

mistaken

 
reflection

disturbed
 
probability
 

Analogy

 

specious

 

precursor

 

cheered

 

Reason

 

powers

 
personality
 

reason