FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223  
224   225   226   227   >>  
e they flesh or spirit; are they living or dead? If this is really a scientific question, if it is a question not of moral philosophy only, but of biology, we are compelled to repudiate beauty as the criterion of spirituality. It is not, of course, meant by this that spirituality is not morally beautiful. Spirituality must be morally very beautiful--so much so that popularly one is justified in judging of religion by its beauty. Nor is it meant that morality is not _a_ criterion. All that is contended for is that, from the scientific standpoint, it is not _the_ criterion. We can judge of the crystal and the shell from many other standpoints besides those named, each classification having an importance in its own sphere. Thus we might class them according to their size and weight, their percentage of silica, their use in the arts, or their commercial value. Each science or art is entitled to regard them from its own point of view; and when the biologist announces his classification he does not interfere with those based on other grounds. Only, having chosen his standpoint, he is bound to frame his classification in terms of it. It may be well to state emphatically, that in proposing a new classification--or rather, in reviving the primitive one--in the spiritual sphere we leave untouched, as of supreme value in its own province, the test of morality. Morality is certainly a test of religion--for most practical purposes the very best test. And so far from tending to depreciate morality, the bringing into prominence of the true basis is entirely in its interests--in the interests of a moral beauty, indeed, infinitely surpassing the highest attainable perfection on merely natural lines. The warrant for seeking a further classification is twofold. It is a principle in science that classification should rest on the most basal characteristics. To determine what these are may not always be easy, but it is at least evident that a classification framed on the ultimate nature of organisms must be more distinctive than one based on external characters. Before the principles of classification were understood, organisms were invariably arranged according to some merely external resemblance. Thus plants were classed according to size as Herbs, Shrubs, and Trees; and animals according to their appearance as Birds, Beasts, and Fishes. The Bat upon this principle was a bird, the Whale a fish; and so thoroughly artificial were these
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223  
224   225   226   227   >>  



Top keywords:
classification
 

beauty

 

morality

 
criterion
 
principle
 
external
 

organisms

 

standpoint

 

science

 

sphere


interests
 
beautiful
 

question

 

spirituality

 

religion

 

morally

 

scientific

 

twofold

 

warrant

 

seeking


living
 

spirit

 

determine

 
characteristics
 

natural

 
prominence
 
tending
 

depreciate

 

bringing

 

perfection


attainable

 

highest

 
infinitely
 
surpassing
 

nature

 
appearance
 

Beasts

 

animals

 

classed

 

Shrubs


Fishes

 

artificial

 
plants
 

resemblance

 
distinctive
 
ultimate
 

evident

 

framed

 
characters
 

invariably