University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The influence of Kant's moral argument on three British personal idealists: A. S. Pringle-Pattison, W. R. Sorley, C. C. J. Webb

(USC Thesis Other)

The influence of Kant's moral argument on three British personal idealists: A. S. Pringle-Pattison, W. R. Sorley, C. C. J. Webb

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content THE INFLUENCE OF KANT'S MORAL ARGUMENT
ON THREE BRITISH PERSONAL IDEALISTS:
A. S. P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n 3 W. R. S o r l e y , C. C. J . Webb
by
Johnny Melvyn Mize
A D i s s e r t a t i o n P r e s e n t e d t o th e
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In P a r t i a l F u l f i l l m e n t o f th e
R eq u irem en ts f o r th e Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(P h ilo s o p h y )
Ju n e 1973
INFORMATION TO USERS
This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document.
While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this
document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of
the original submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page{s)'\ If it was possible to obtain the
missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with
adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and
duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black
mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the
copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred
image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
‘ p h o tographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the
upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from
left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and
continuing on until complete.
4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest
value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be
made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the
dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at
additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog
number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.
University Microfilms
300 N orth Z e e b R oad
Ann A rbor, M ichigan 48106
A X erox E d u catio n C om pany
73-31,657
MIZE, Johnny Melvyn, 1936-
T H E IN FLU E N C E O F KANT'S M O R A L A R G U M E N T
O N T H R E E BRITISH PE R SO N A L IDEALISTS:
A. S. PRINGLE-PAmSON, W . R. SO RLEY,
C. C. J . W E B B .
U n iversity o£ Southern C a lifo rn ia ,
Ph.D., 1973
Philosophy
University Microfilms, A X E R O X Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan
UNIVERSITY O F SO U T H E R N CA LIFO RN IA
T H E GRADUATE SC H O O L
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS A N G ELES, CA LIFO RN IA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, written by
...............................
under the direction of Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by The Graduate
School, in partial fulfillment of requirements of
the degree of
D O C T O R OF P H I L O S O P H Y
D e a n
C C(3
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
.........
J' r - y /'y C h a irm a n
..................
TABLE OP CONTENTS
CHAPTER Page
I . I n t r o d u c t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I I . K a n t’ s M oral Argument f o r
th e E x i s t e n c e o f G o d ................................... 16
I I I . The I d e a o f S y n d e r e s i s as an E lem en t
i n K a n t 's C oncept o f M o r a l i t y ..................... 30
IV. D evelopm ent o f K a n t’ s M oral Argument by
t h e P o s t - K a n t i a n s P r i o r t o t h e
B r i t i s h P e r s o n a l I d e a l i s t s ................................ 50
V. D evelopm ent o f K a n t 's M oral Argument
i n t h e T h in k in g o f t h e B r i t i s h
P e r s o n a l I d e a l i s t s ..................................................... 63
(A) Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n . . . 6 9
(B) W illia m R i t c h i e S o r le y ........................... 82
(C) Clem ent C h a r le s J u l i a n Webb . . . 95
VI. Summary and C o n c l u s i o n ................................ 113
APPENDICES
I . B i o g r a p h i c a l Note on
Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n ........................... 120
I I . B i o g r a p h i c a l Note on
W illia m R i t c h i e S o r le y ........................................... 122
I I I . B i o g r a p h i c a l Note on
Clem ent C h a r le s J u l i a n Webb ........................... 124
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF WORKS CITED ................................................ 126
i i
I. INTRODUCTION
The p u r p o s e o r t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n i s t o t r a c e t h e
i n f l u e n c e o f Im m anuel K a n t 's (172^-180*1) m o r a l a rg u m e n t
f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God on t h r e e B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l
i d e a l i s t s : Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n ( 1 8 5 6 - 1 9 3 1) s
W i l l i a m R i t c h i e S o r l e y ( 1 8 5 5 - 1 9 3 5 ) 5 and C lem en t C h a r l e s
J u l i a n Webb (1865-195**)- 1 s h a l l a t t e m p t t o e x p l a i n why
t h i s a rg u m e n t r a t i o n a l l y a p p e a l e d t o ( y e t was a l s o
c r i t i c i z e d as u n s a t i s f a c t o r y b y ) t h e s e t h i n k e r s .
K ant a r g u e d t h a t o u r p h e n o m e n a l k n o w le d g e o f
n a t u r e p r o v i d e s i n s u f f i c i e n t e v i d e n c e f o r t h e way t h i n g s
r e a l l y a r e . I t i s i n o u r m o ra l e x p e r i e n c e t h a t we f i n d
t h e p r i n c i p a l c l u e s t o t h e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y ( o r a t l e a s t
t h e way we as m o ra l b e i n g s m u st t h i n k o f r e a l i t y ) . The
m o ra l la w — t h e c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e — i s u n d o u b t a b l e and
m ust s e r v e as t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r o u r m e t a p h y s i c a l v ie w s .
I f one w a n ts t o t h i n k i n a way c o n s o n a n t w i t h m o r a l i t y ,
t h e n one m u st b e l i e v e t h a t human p e r s o n a l i t y i s m o r a l l y
f r e e and i n t r i n s i c a l l y v a l u a b l e . F u r t h e r , one m u st b e l i e v e
t h a t p e r s o n s w i l l b e p r e s e r v e d b e y o n d d e a t h so t h a t t h e y
may f u l f i l t h e i r d u ty by p r o g r e s s i n g to w a r d m o ra l p e r f e c
t i o n , an d b e r e w a r d e d w i t h h a p p i n e s s p r o p o r t i o n a t e t o
t h e i r v i r t u e . T h is i s p o s s i b l e o n ly on c o n d i t i o n o f t h e
1
e x i s t e n c e o f God. T h e r e f o r e , i f one i s r e s p o n s i v e t o t h e
m o ra l law w i t h i n , t h e n one m ust p o s t u l a t e t h e e x i s t e n c e o f
God. F a i l u r e t o do so l e a d s t o m o ra l d e s p a i r .
Kant b e l i e v e d t h a t i f a p e r s o n d e c i d e s t o become a
m o r a ll y good man ( a s d u ty b i d s ) , p l e a s i n g t o God, t h e n he
m ust e x p e r i e n c e a s p i r i t u a l r e b i r t h by f r e e l y a d o p t i n g t h e
m o ra l law as h i s su p rem e g u i d e . Then he w i l l f i n d h i m s e l f
upon t h e p a t h o f p r o g r e s s from b a d t o b e t t e r , and h e can
h ope t h a t , f o r God, t h i s am ounts t o h i s b e i n g a c t u a l l y a
good man. H ow ever, t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f su c h a r e b i r t h
demands th e p r e s e n c e i n human n a t u r e o f an i n n a t e p r e d i s
p o s i t i o n t o g o o d n e ss on w h ic h i t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o g r a f t
a n y t h i n g e v i l . S o m e th in g o f p e rm a n e n t good r e m a in s w i t h i n
a s i n f u l man, and i t makes him r e d e e m a b le : i t i s t h e
c a p a c i t y f o r r e s p e c t f o r t h e m o ra l law a s i n i t s e l f a
s u f f i c i e n t i n c e n t i v e o f t h e w i l l . Kant f r e q u e n t l y c a l l e d
t h i s i n c o r r u p t i b l e d i s p o s i t i o n a " s e e d o f goodness," and
he c la im e d t h a t i t i s d i v i n e l y i m p l a n t e d i n e a c h p e r s o n a l i
t y . T h is i d e a o f t h e " s e e d o f g o o d n e s s " can be i n t e r p r e t e d
as a fo rm o f t h e a n c i e n t and m e d ie v a l n o t i o n o f s y n d e r e s i s ,
w h ich was r e g a r d e d by many o f t h e m y s t i c s as a " s p a r k " i n
t h e s o u l by w h ich m y s t i c a l u n io n w i t h God i s a t t a i n e d .
I n h i s f i n a l n o t e s Kant e x p r e s s e d t h e b e l i e f t h a t
t h e m o ra l law i t s e l f i s God, and i n m o ra l e x p e r i e n c e a
v i r t u o u s man e x p e r i e n c e s t h e D i v i n e . T h is i d e a t h a t God
3
r e v e a l s H im s e lf to man i n th e m o ral law seems t o be a
develo p m en t o f K a n t 's n o t i o n t h a t t h e " se e d o f g o o d n ess"
has a d i v i n e o r i g i n and must be r e g a r d e d w ith t h e " h i g h e s t
wonder."
The B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t s were drawn to
K a n t 's m oral argum ent f o r s e v e r a l r e a s o n s . They were
a t t r a c t e d t o K a n t 's view t h a t t h e m o ra l law i s u n d o u b ta b le
and r e q u i r e s a d i v i n e e x p l a n a t i o n . Like Kant th e y
r e c o g n iz e d t h e i n t r i n s i c v a lu e o f r a t i o n a l e x i s t e n c e as
th e e s s e n t i a l c lu e t o t h e u l t i m a t e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y .
Thus th e y b e l i e v e d t h a t e t h i c s i s t h e key t o m e t a p h y s i c s ,
and e t h i c s r e s t s on th e f o u n d a t io n o f t h e r a t i o n a l i t y and
freedom o f th e p e r s o n , who, by v i r t u e o f t h i s r a t i o n a l i t y
and fre e d o m , i s an end i n h i m s e l f . H o llo w in g K a n t 's
p r e c e d e n t , t h e B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t s a rg u e d t h a t
m oral e x p e r i e n c e and th e a n a l y s i s o f p e r s o n a l i t y l e a d to
t h e p o s t u l a t e o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God. The m o ral law
r e q u i r e s t h e p o s t u l a t i o n o f an i n t e l l i g e n t , p o w e r f u l, m o ra l
w i l l ; and s i n c e i n t e l l i g e n c e and w i l l a re c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
o f p e r s o n a l i t y , God must be th o u g h t o f as a p e r s o n a l i t y .
S in c e man i s c r e a t e d i n t h e image o f God, h i s f i n i t e
p e r s o n a l i t i e s a r e a k in t o G od's i n f i n i t e p e r s o n a l i t y .
The B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t s w ere n o t a t t r a c t e d
t o a l l o f K a n t 's m o ral arg u m e n t. N e i t h e r P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n
4
n o r S o rle y made use o f th e d e s p a i r a s p e c t o f th e arg u m en t,
and Webb gave I t on ly a nod. They had mixed r e a c t i o n s to
K a n t 's n o t i o n o f th e "se e d o f goodness" Prom P r i n g l e -
P a t t i s o n and S o rle y i t r e c e i v e d no s p e c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n ,
a lth o u g h S o rle y r e c o g n iz e d t h a t i t re se m b le d th e n o t i o n of
s y n d e r e s i s . Webb, h ow ever, employed th e i d e a i n h i s views
ab o u t r e l i g i o n . These t h i n k e r s had mixed r e a c t i o n s t o
K a n t's n o t i o n t h a t God i s a c t u a l l y immanent i n man i n th e
g u is e o f th e m oral law . A p p a r e n tly , P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n was
n o t a c q u a in te d w ith th e view . S o rle y made no r e f e r e n c e
t o i t . Webb a lo n e advanced a view s i m i l a r t o i t . Yet
each o f t h e s e men b e l i e v e d ( to some d e g re e ) t h a t God
d w e lls i n f i n i t e p e r s o n a l i t i e s and m a n i f e s t s H im se lf i n
human e x i s t e n c e . They e ach c laim ed t h a t th e i n d i v i d u a l
who d ie s t o th e s e l f i s h ego a llo w s t h e immanent d iv in e
r e a l i t y t o m a n if e s t i t s e l f as God's S p i r i t . In th e p r o p h e ts
and s a i n t s , God's i n d w e l l i n g m a n ife s te d i t s e l f i n a
v ig o ro u s l i f e o f th e S p i r i t . In J e s u s , God's S p i r i t was
a b s o l u t e l y m a n if e s te d u n d e r c o n d i t i o n s o f human l i f e .
I t i s g e n e r a l l y a g re e d t h a t Kant was th e f i r s t
to s t a t e t h e u s u a l l y p r e s e n t e d form o f t h e m o ra l (o r
" h i g h e s t good") argument f o r t h e b e in g o f G od.1
1W illiam S o r le y , M oral V alues and th e Thea o f God
(2d e d . ; Cambridge: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 192TT,
p . 329. Also see R. W . H epburn, "Moral Arguments f o r th e
E x is te n c e o f God^’ The E n c y c lo p e d ia o f P h i l o s o p h y , v o l.V ,
5
As de Burgh puts it:
The moral argument . . . is distinctive
of modern thought. It could hardly have
been formulated until the idea of moral
obligation had come into its own and been
subjected to philosophical analysis;2in
other words, until the time of Kant.
Briefly put, the argument states that the moral law re
quires that rational beings are obliged to promote the
highest good, which is virtue accompanied by deserved
happiness; and since the goal of a duty must be possible,
and the highest good is possible only on condition of the
( c o n t ' d ) p . 3 8 3 .
H ow ever, i t s h o u ld b e m e n tio n e d t h a t P r i n g l e -
P a t t i s o n r e f e r r e d t o a p a s s a g e i n t h e c o n c l u d i n g s e c t i o n o f
Hume's D ia lo g u e s C o n c e rn in g N a t u r a l R e l i g i o n w hich he
t h o u g h t a n t i c i p a t e d K a n t 's f o r m u l a t i o n o f t h e m o ra l
a rg u m e n t. In t h e p a s s a g e Hume r e f e r r e d t o g e n u in e t h e is m
as t e a c h i n g t h a t we a r e c r e a t e d by God who p l a n t e d i n us
t h e d e s i r e f o r g o o d , and He w i l l p r o l o n g o u r e x i s t e n c e t o
a l l e t e r n i t y an d r e n d e r o u r f e l i c i t y c o m p le te . Of t h i s
p a s s a g e P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n w r o t e : "The p h r a s e o l o g y o f t h i s
c u r i o u s p a s s a g e s t r i k i n g l y r e c a l l s K a n t 's s u b s e q u e n t
s c h e m e ." Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The I d e a o f God i n
t h e L i g h t o f R e c e n t P h ilo s o p h y (London: O x fo rd U n i v e r s i t y
P r e s s , 1 9 2 0 7 , p . 21.
A n o th e r p r e c u r s o r m e n tio n e d by Kant was C h r i s t i a n
C r u s iu s ( c a . 1 7 1 5 -1 7 7 5 ) who a r g u e d i n h i s A nw eisung
V e r n u n f t i g zu L eben (1 7 ^4 ) t h a t G o d 's e x i s t e n c e c a n b e
p r o v e d by m o ra l e v i d e n c e o n l y . F o r e v id e n c e t h a t Kant
was i n f l u e n c e d by C r u s iu s s e e G io r g io T o n e l l i ' s " C r u s i u s "
i n E n c y c l o p e d i a o f P h i l o s o p h y , v o l . I I , p . 2 6 9 . A lso s e e
b e lo w , p.. -M 8.
2W. G. de B u rg h , From M o r a l i t y to' R e l i g i o n
(London: M acDonald and E v a n s , 1 9 3 8 ) , p . 155-
6
e x i s t e n c e o f God, i t i s t h e r e f o r e n e c e s s a r y t o p o s t u l a t e
3
t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God.
K a n t 's argum ent i s s i g n i f i c a n t f o r s e v e r a l r e a s o n s .
I t p r o v i d e s a r a t i o n a l d e f e n s e f o r t h e u se o f f a i t h i n o u r
a t t e m p t s t o f o r m u l a t e a w o r ld view . The s c i e n c e s , Kant
h e l d , a r e l i m i t e d t o d e a l i n g w ith phenom ena, and th u s a re
u n a b le t o e v a l u a t e su c h i d e a s as t h e w o rth o f a man o r th e
g o a l o f l i f e . L i k e w is e , s c i e n c e i s u n a b le t o d e m o n s tr a te
e i t h e r th e e x i s t e n c e o r n o n - e x i s t e n c e o f f r e e w i l l , im
m o r t a l i t y , o r God; b u t i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y t o abandon t h e s e
n o t i o n s m e re ly b e c a u s e n e i t h e r p u re s p e c u l a t i v e r e a s o n n o r
t h e s c i e n c e s o f p o s i t i v e know ledge o f f e r a c c o u n ts o f them .
R a t h e r , we a r e w a r r a n t e d by p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n i n h a v in g
m o ra l f a i t h .
A n o th e r i m p o r t a n t p o i n t i n K a n t 's arg u m en t i s t h a t
i t shows t h a t a l l e x p e r i e n c e m ust c o u n t i n fo rm in g m e ta
p h y s i c a l t h e o r i e s . Our m o ra l e x p e r i e n c e i s an i m p o r t a n t
Immanuel K a n t, C r i t i q u e o f P r a c t i c a l R e a so n , and
O th e r Works on t h e T heory o f E t h i c s , t r a n s . by Thomas
A b b o tt (6 t h ed. ; London: Longmans, G reen and Co. L t d . , 1967 ) ,
p . 222.
" E v e r y th in g i n n a t u r e w orks a c c o r d i n g t o la w s .
R a t i o n a l b e in g s a lo n e h av e th e f a c u l t y o f a c t i n g a c c o r d i n g
t o t h e c o n c e p t i o n o f l a w s , t h a t i s a c c o r d i n g t o p r i n c i p l e s ,
i . e . , h av e w i l l . S in c e t h e d e d u c t i o n o f a c t i o n s from
p r i n c i p l e s r e q u i r e s r e a s o n , t h e w i l l i s n o t h i n g b u t
p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n . " Immanuel K a n t, F u n d a m e n ta l P r i n c i p l e s
o f t h e M e ta p h y sic o f M o rals ( c o n t a i n e d i n work r e f e r r e d to
i n n o t e 3)> p . 2 9 .
7
( in d e e d , th e most im p o r ta n t) p a r t o f th e e v id e n c e upon
which we must b u i l d our m e ta p h y s ic a l v iew s. F or i n our
m oral e x p e r ie n c e we r e c o g n iz e t r u t h s which we c a n n o t d o u b t.
John B a i l l i e say s "W hatever may be t r u e ab o u t th e cosmos
and my p la c e i n i t , I am i n c a p a b le o f d o u b tin g t h a t I
ought to h e lp my fello w -m an when I see him i n d i s t r e s s .
5
R ig h t i s r i g h t , though th e h eav en s f a l l . "
I ’ may o r may n o t b e a b le t o say ’why’
s e l f i s h n e s s i s w rong, o r I may t h i n k
I know why and y e t (w ith many a n o th e r
h a p l e s s m oral p h i l o s o p h e r ) be q u i t e
wrong i n th e th e o r y I have em braced;
b u t a l l t h i s does n o t in any way a f f e c t
my i n t u i t i v e c e r t i t u d e t h a t s e l f i s h n e s s
i s wrong.
The t r a d i t i o n a l a p p ro ach o f t h e o l o g i a n s was t o p o s i t God’s
e x i s t e n c e , and th e n show th e i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r e t h i c a l
t h e o r y ; b u t Kant began w ith m o r a li t y and co n clu d ed w ith
God. The m o ral law , n o t n a t u r e , r e q u i r e s us t o p o s t u l a t e
t h e b e in g o f God. W hile we a r e u n a b le to d e r iv e v a lu e
judgm ents from f a c t u a l s ta t e m e n t s ( o r an "oug h t" from an
" i s " ) , p e rh a p s i t i s p o s s i b l e f o r m o ral id e a s to g u id e us
i n o u r s e a rc h f o r th e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y . As M uirhead p u t
i t , "We can see t h a t , w h ile i t i s im p o s s ib le t o e x p l a i n
v a lu e s i n term s o f e x i s t e n c e , i t may be p o s s i b l e t o e x p l a i n
5
John B a i l l i e , The I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f R e lig io n (New
York: C h a rle s S c r i b n e r 's Sons, 1 92b), p . 373".
6I b i d . , p. 344.
8
e x i s t e n c e as t h e te m p o r a l s i d e o f t h e i d e a l , and as n e c e s -
7
s a r y t o g i v e i t c o m p le te r e a l i t y .
A n o th e r i m p o r t a n t p o i n t i n K a n t 's a rg u m e n t i s t h e
s t r e s s p l a c e d on t h e v a l u e o f e a c h i n d i v i d u a l human
p e r s o n a l i t y . The i d e a o f a p e r s o n as a s e l f - d e t e r m i n i n g
i n d i v i d u a l , and as s u c h an end i n h i m s e l f , "h a d n e v e r b e e n
8
so much e m p h a s iz e d b e f o r e . " By d ra w in g a t t e n t i o n t o t h e
v a l u e o f p e r s o n h o o d K ant showed t h a t th e i n n e r r e a l m o f
s p i r i t u a l l i f e i s a v i t a l a r e a o f o u r e x p e r i e n c e . Thus he
h e l p e d t o r e l i e v e t h e human m ind fro m t h e o b s e s s i o n o f
n a t u r a l i s m . P r a c t i c a l r e a s o n f r e e s o u r p e r s o n a l i t i e s from
e x t e r n a l c o n s t r a i n t , f o r t h e r e i s no p e r s o n a l i t y u n l e s s
9
l i f e i s r a i s e d t o f re e d o m , i n d e p e n d e n c e , and s p o n t a n e i t y .
The a n a l y s i s o f t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f p e r s o n a l i t y l e a d s t o
t h e d i s c o v e r y o f a l a r g e r s p i r i t u a l r e a lm i n w h ich e a c h
p e r s o n h a s an i m p o r t a n t p a r t t o p l a y . We a r e n o t mere
t h i n g s o r cogs i n an i n d i f f e r e n t w o r ld - m a c h in e . R a t h e r th e
w hole u n i v e r s e i s t h e w o rk in g p l a c e o f a l a r g e r s p i r i t u a l
f o r c e t h a t can be fo u n d i n t h e d e p th s o f e a c h o f o u r s o u l s .
7Jo h n H. M u irh e a d , The P l a t o n i c T r a d i t i o n i n A n g lo -
Saxon P h i l o s o p h y , (New Y ork: The M acM illan C o ., 1 9 3 1 ) ,P • **39•
8W illia m R. I n g e , P e r s o n a l Id e a lis m ' and M y s tic is m
(London: Longm ans, G re e n , and C o ., 1 9 0 7 ) , p . 97*
9
R u d o lf E u c k e n , The' L i f e o f t h e S p i r i t , t r a n s . b y F.
L. P o g so n (2 n d e d .;L o n d o n : W illia m s & N o r g a t e , 1 9 1 3 ) , P- 385-
9
An i m p o r t a n t n o t i o n i n K a n t ’ s l a t e r r e l i g i o u s
t h i n k i n g i s t h a t t h e m o ra l law i s r e a l l y t h e w i l l o f God
p r i m o r d i a l l y e n g r a v e d i n o u r h e a r t s . 10 God p l a n t e d i n man
a s e e d o f g o o d n ess w hich i s an e r r o r l e s s , i n e x t i n g u i s h a b l e ,
i n c o r r u p t i b l e m o ra l d i s p o s i t i o n . T h is i n n a t e d i s p o s i t i o n
com bats an o p p o s in g e v i l p r o p e n s i t y ; and t h u s i t h e l p s t o
a c c o u n t f o r m an’ s fre e d o m . The m o ra l law f o r c e s i t s e l f on
man by v i r t u e o f t h i s m o ra l d i s p o s i t i o n . 11 T h u s, c o n s c ie n c e
1 2
i s an i n s t i n c t and " l i k e t h e d i v i n e o m n ip r e s e n c e , i t i s
1 3
alw ay s w ith us . ”
The re s e m b la n c e o f K a n t 's n o t i o n t o t h e a n c i e n t and
m e d ie v a l c o n c e p t o f s y n d e r e s i s was n o t i c e d by S o r l e y . He
d e f i n e d s y n d e r e s i s as f o l l o w s :
[S y n d e re sis:]- A t e c h n i c a l te rm o f th e
s c h o l a s t i c p h i l o s o p h y , s i g n i f y i n g t h e
i n n a t e p r i n c i p l e i n t h e m o ra l c o n s c i o u s n e s s
o f e v e ry man, w hich d i r e c t s him t o good
and r e s t r a i n s him from e v i l .
Immanuel K a n t, R e l i g i o n W ith in th e L im its o f
R eason A lo n e , t r a n s . by T heodore G reene and Hoyt H udson,
H a rp e r T orchbook (New York: H a r p e r and ■ Row,I9 6 0 ) p . 95.
Ib icL , p . 31.
12Immanuel K a n t, L e c t u r e s on E t h i c s , t r a n s . by L o u is
I n f i e l d , H a rp e r T orchbook (New Y o rk : H a r p e r and R o w ,1 9 6 3 ),
p . 129.
1 3
I b i d . , p . 133 .
l ^
W illia m S o r l e y , " S y n d e r e s i s " D i c t i o n a r y o f
P h ilo s o p h y and P s y c h o lo g y , 1928.
10
I t may be n o te d t h a t th e te rm c o n s c ie n c e ,
when used (as by K ant) as e q u i v a l e n t t o
p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n r e g a rd e d as i n f a l l i b l e ,
c o rre s p o n d s t o th e m e d ia e v a l s y n d e r e s i s and
n o t to th e m e d ia e v a l c o n s c i e n t i a . 1b
1 6
The i d e a o f s y n d e r e s i s v a r i e d i n c o n c e p tio n among
th e s c h o l a r s o f th e m e d ie v a l w o rld . Many o f th e m y s tic s
to o k o v e r th e n o t i o n and made u se o f i t . They c o n c e iv e d o f
i t as a " sp a rk " re m a in in g i n th e s o u l s o f men, im p la n te d
by God ( o r p e r h a p s , as th e b o l d e r m y s tic s c la im e d , th e
s p a rk i s God) b u t weakened by s i n . This s p a rk cau ses men
to s t r i v e tow ard good and t o p r e s s back t o i t s s o u r c e .
W hile no one a d o p te d K a n t's m o ral argum ent i n i t s
e n t i r e t y , few were u n in f lu e n c e d by i t . Yet th e argum ent
d e c lin e d i n a c c e p t a b i l i t y a lm o st a t o nce. S e v e r a l f a c t o r s
were r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h i s , n o t th e l e a s t o f which was th e
g e n e r a l d i s t r u s t o f any argum ent f o r th e e x i s t e n c e o f God.
In a d d i t i o n , t h e r e w ere p o l i t i c a l a tte m p ts a t a com pulsory
form o f r e l i g i o u s f a i t h which c o u ld n o t t o l e r a t e K a n t's
l 7
p h ilo s o p h y o f r e l i g i o n . A lso , th e ro m a n tic is m o f th e
15I b l d . The f r u i t f u l s u g g e s t i o n t h a t t h e i d e a o f
s y n d e r e s i s m ight be found i n K a n t's th e o r y was g iv e n t o me
by P r o f e s s o r Geddes MacGregor.
1 6
The term s y n d e r e s i s ( o r s y n t e r e s i s ) seems t o be
d e r iv e d from a s c r i b a l e r r o r in Jero m e, when i t o c c u rs as a
c o r r u p t i o n o f s y n e i d e s i s , th e norm al Greek word f o r
"c o n sc ie n c e !' See b elo w , p . 34, n. 17-
1 7
F r i e d r i c h P a u lse n ,' 'Immanuel K a n t H i s L ife' and
D o c t r i n e , t r a n s . by J . E. C re ig h to n and A. Lef&vre (New
York: C h a rle s S c r i b n e r 's S ons, 1 9 0 2 ), p. 369 .
I
11
n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y i n Germany was a p r o t e s t and r e v o l t
a g a i n s t th e r a t i o n a l i s m o f t h e A u f k l a r u n g , w h ic h , i n some
c a s e s , had a t t e m p t e d t o g iv e a m a t h e m a t i c a l a c c o u n t o f man
as a m a t e r i a l t h i n g . R o m a n tic ism was e s s e n t i a l l y a r e t u r n
t o t h e s p i r i t u a l view o f t h i n g s , and a r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e
r e a l i t y n o t o n ly o f t h o u g h t b u t o f f e e l i n g . The r o m a n ti c s
1 8
fo u n d th e K a n tia n t h e o r y to o " t h i n , a b s t r a c t , a n d r a t i o n a l . "
P e r h a p s m ost i m p o r t a n t i n t h e l i s t o f c a u s e s f o r
t h e d e c l i n e o f K a n t ’ s m o ra l a rg u m en t w ere some g e n e r a l
c r i t i c i s m s b a s e d upon m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f h i s n o t i o n s .
The m o st f l a g r a n t e x am p les a r e t h e u s u a l l y g iv e n c r i t i c i s m s
t h a t Kant a l lo w e d a c o r r u p t h e d o n ism t o r e p l a c e d u ty by
o f f e r i n g r e l i g i o u s in d u c e m e n ts f o r m o ra l b e h a v i o r , and t h a t
God was f o r Kant m e re ly a co sm ic p o lic e m a n o r p a y m a s te r .
Kant f r e q u e n t l y r e p u d i a t e d s u c h i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s , a s t h e
f o l l o w i n g p a s s a g e i n d i c a t e s :
. . . a l t h o u g h t h e c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e
summum bonum as a w h o le , i n w h ich t h e
g r e a t e s t h a p p i n e s s i s c o n c e iv e d as
com bined i n t h e m ost e x a c t p r o p o r t i o n
w i t h t h e h i g h e s t d e g r e e o f m o ra l p e r
f e c t i o n ( p o s s i b l e i n c r e a t u r e s ) , i n c l u d e s
my own h a p p i n e s s , y e t i t i s n o t t h i s t h a t
i s t h e d e t e r m i n i n g p r i n c i p l e o f t h e w i l l
w h ic h i s e n j o i n e d t o p ro m o te t h e summum
bonum , b u t t h e m o ra l la w , w h ic h , on t h e
c o n t r a r y , l i m i t s by s t r i c t c o n d i t i o n s my
u n b o u n d ed d e s i r e o f h a p p i n e s s . 19
l 8
I b i d .
19
K a n t, P r a c t i c a l R e a s o n , p . 227.
12
A r e c e n t s t u d e n t o f K a n t 's th o u g h t d e fe n d s K a n t 's
view a g a i n s t c h a rg e s o f Impure h e d o n ism , as t h e f o l l o w i n g
p a s s a g e i n d i c a t e s :
I f o u r p u r s u i t o f and hope f o r h a p p in e s s :
i s m o t i v a t e d n o t by o u r p r i v a t e d e s i r e t o
by happy b u t by t h e f a c t t h a t i t i s
o b j e c t i v e l y good t h a t we a r e h a p p y , th e n
t h e r e i s no i m p u r i t y i n o u r v o l i t i o n . 20
K a n t 's argum ent was d e v e lo p e d by s e v e r a l o f t h e
German i d e a l i s t s who, w h ile r e j e c t i n g d e t a i l s o f t h e .
a rg u m e n t, a d v a n c e d t h e n o t i o n o f v a lu e as an i m p o r t a n t
g u id e i n t h e s e a r c h f o r t h e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y . T h is
a p p r o a c h c u l m i n a t e d i n th e w orks o f Hermann L o tz e (1 8 1 7 -
1881) who e s p e c i a l l y i n f l u e n c e d t h e B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l
i d e a l i s t s w i t h h i s s u g g e s t i o n ( d e r i v e d from K an t) t h a t th e
p r i n c i p a l c l u e t o w hat i s m ust be fo u n d i n w hat o u g h t t o
b e .
K a n t 's s t r e s s on th e v a lu e o f p e r s o n a l i t y was one
o f t h e f o r c e s i n t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y t h a t gave t o
t h e i s t i c p e r s o n a l i s m a new im p e tu s . A c c o rd in g t o A l b e r t
K nudson, Kant " p r o b a b ly d id more t o p ro m o te t h e s p r e a d o f
2 1
p e r s o n a l i s m th a n any o t h e r t h i n k e r . "
By h i s c o n c e p t i o n o f p e r s o n a l i t y as an ■
end i n i t s e l f he l a i d t h e f o u n d a t i o n o f
e t h i c a l p e r s o n a l i s m , and by h i s d o c t r i n e
o f t h e p rim a c y o f t h e p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n
2 0
A lle n Wood, K a n t' s M o ral R e l i g i o n (New Y ork:
C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1970) , p . 167.
21
A l b e r t C. K nudson, The P h ilo s o p h y o f P e r s o n a l i s m
(New Y ork: The Abingdon P r e s s , 1927)* p i 432.
13
he j u s t i f i e d th e b e l i e f In God, freedom*
and I m m o r t a l i t y . . . . Almost a f u l l p e r s o n a l i s t i c
c r e e d m ight th u s be deduced from c e r t a i n
p h ases o f t h e K a n tia n p h i l o s o p h y . 22
P a n t h e i s t i c modes o f t h o u g h t , such as S p i n o z a 's , l e d some
m in d s, such as H e g e l 's , to w ard an im p e rs o n a l view o f th e
A b s o lu te . G e n e r a l l y , p a n t h e i s t s c la im t h a t t h e f i n i t e s o u l
i s d e s t i n e d to be a b s o rb e d i n t o t h e I n f i n i t e . N o th in g o f
p e rm an en t v a lu e i s t o be found i n th e r e a lm o f t h e f i n i t e ,
so o n e 's on ly hope l i e s i n r e l e a s e from t h e f i n i t u d e o f
i n d i v i d u a l e x i s t e n c e . In c o n t r a s t , th e t h e i s t c la im s t h a t
th e g o a l o f man i s n o t a b s o r p t i o n i n t h e im p e rs o n a l Abso
l u t e ; r a t h e r t h e g o a l i s l i v i n g f e l l o w s h i p w ith a p e r s o n a l
God. The s e l f i s n o t t o be l o s t o r e x t i n g u i s h e d , b u t r e
deemed and p r e s e r v e d . This i s an o p t i m i s t i c view which
t a k e s i t s s ta n d on t h e ground o f human need and h ope.
Theism a f f i r m s t h e s u r v i v a l o f human p e r s o n a l i t y a f t e r
d e a th o f th e body and i t c la im s t h a t t h e d i v i n e B eing
i n c l u d e s p e r s o n a l v a l u e s . One can a t l e a s t in p r i n c i p l e
u n d e r s ta n d a p e r s o n a l God, f o r He i s n o t an a i r y a b s t r a c
t i o n b u t an i n d i v i d u a l . He. can be t r u s t e d and lo v e d .
A p art from p e r s o n a l i t y lo v e would be a mere a b s t r a c t i o n ,
l i k e th e s m ile o f t h e C h e s h ire c a t w i th o u t th e c a t .
P e r s o n a l i t y w ith o u t lo v e i s i n c o m p l e t e , and lo v e w ith o u t
p e r s o n a l i t y i s n o n e x i s t e n t .
22
Ibid .
i r
The British personal idealists were faced on one
side by the forces of naturalism (in the ranks of which
were the materialists, positivists, evolutionists, etc.)
and on the other side by the absolute idealists. Both
sides held that the individual person is. of little sig
nificance. The naturalists were convinced that matter and
motion are the only realities, and ideas are fictions. The
absolute Idealists maintained the theory that finite
individuals disappear in the All. In such an atmosphere
it is little wonder that the personal idealists were
attracted to Kant’s inspiring view of the significance and
worth of the individual person. This view was more
consistent with their religious heritage and their personal
moral experiences than the alternatives just considered.
The British personal idealists recognized values as
an Important part of experience for which an account is
necessary. Any total view must include an explanation of
the emergence of values, especially moral ones, in human
life; but the mechanistic deterministic scientific world
view precluded belief in free will and the objectivity of
the moral law. Hence, following Kant’s method, the British
personal idealists looked beyond the scientific view of the
natural realm for a transcendental explanation to account
for their moral experiences. If nature is indifferent (as
it often appears) to good and evil, then nature is not the
15
t r u e c o m p le te r e a l i t y , s i n c e , as P a u l s e n s t a t e s , i t i s an
"axiom o f t h e w i l l t h a t r e a l i t y c a n n o t be a b s o l u t e l y i n d i f -
2 3
f e r e n t t o good and e v i l . "
These t h i n k e r s were more a t t r a c t e d t o a r a t i o n a l
a p p ro a c h t o r e l i g i o n th a n th e y w ere t o t h e r o m a n tic ap
p r o a c h w hich e x a l t s t h e r o l e o f f e e l i n g and i m a g i n a t i o n a t
t h e c o s t o f r e a s o n . The B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t th o u g h t
t h a t r e l i g i o n s h o u ld be b a s e d n o t upon t r a d i t i o n , s u p e r
n a t u r a l r e v e l a t i o n s , o r m i r a c l e s , b u t r a t h e r upon t h e
e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e m o ra l la w , t h e w i l l w hich i n r a t i o n a l
b e in g s i s d i r e c t e d t o t h e h i g h e s t good. T h u s, t h e s e
t h i n k e r s w ere drawn t o K a n t’ s v ie w s . K ant c a l l e d t h e
c a p a c i t y f o r r e s p e c t f o r t h e m o ra l law as i n i t s e l f a
s u f f i c i e n t i n c e n t i v e o f t h e w i l l t h e p r e d i s p o s i t i o n to
p e r s o n a l i t y , and he c a l l e d t h e i d e a o f t h e m o ra l law
24
p e r s o n a l i t y i t s e l f . The B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t s r e
c o g n iz e d t h e i n t i m a t e c o n n e c t i o n b e tw e e n m o r a l i t y and
p e r s o n a l i t y , and th e y b a s e d t h e i r p h i l o s o p h i e s on t h e s e
c o n c e p t s , w hich l e d them t o b e l i e f i n t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God.
2 3
P a u l s e n , K a n t, p . 318.
24K an t,' R e l i g i o n , p p . 2 2 -2 3 -
I I . KANT’S MORAL ARGUMENT EOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
Kant claim ed t h a t th e only t h i n g t h a t i s good
w ith o u t q u a l i f i c a t i o n i s a good w i l l . 1 A w i l l t h a t a c t s
f o r t h e sake o f du ty i s a good w i l l , and only th o s e a c t i o n s
p erfo rm ed f o r t h e sake o f duty have m oral w o rth . To a c t
2
f o r th e sake o f duty i s t o a c t ou t o f r e s p e c t f o r law.
The e s s e n t i a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f law i s u n i v e r s a l i t y .
But what s o r t o f law can t h a t b e , th e
c o n c e p tio n o f which must d e te rm in e th e w i l l ,
even w ith o u t p a y in g any r e g a r d t o th e e f f e c t
e x p e c te d from i t , in o r d e r t h a t t h i s w i l l
may be c a l l e d good a b s o l u t e l y and w ith o u t
q u a l i f i c a t i o n ? As I have d e p r iv e d th e w i l l
o f ev ery im p u lse which co u ld a r i s e t o i t
from o b ed ie n c e t o any law , t h e r e rem ains
n o th in g b u t th e u n i v e r s a l c o n fo rm ity o f i t s
a c t i o n s t o law i n g e n e r a l , which a lo n e i s to
s e rv e th e w i l l as a p r i n c i p l e , i . e . , I am
n e v e r t o a c t o th e r w is e th a n so t h a t I co u ld
a l s o w i l l t h a t my maxim s h o u ld become a
u n i v e r s a l l a w . 3
R e fo rm u la te d , t h i s c o n c e p tio n becomes an u n c o n d i t i o n a l
command.
There i s t h e r e f o r e b u t one c a t e g o r i c a l
i m p e r a t i v e , n am ely, t h i s : Act only on t h a t
1K ant, F undam ental P r i n c i p l e s , p . 9.
2
I b i d . , p . 16.
3I b i d . , pp. 1 7 -1 8 .
16
17
maxim whereby' th o u g h c a n s t a t t h e same tim e
w i l l t h a t i t s h o u ld be:come a u n i v e r s a l ' l a w . 4
Kant s t a t e d t h a t t h i s c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e can
5
a l s o be f o r m u l a t e d two o t h e r w ays:
So a c t as t o t r e a t ' h u m a n i t y , w h e th e r i n
t h i n e , own p e r s o n o r in' t h a t o f any o t h e r ,
i n e v e ry c a s e as an end w i t h a l , n e v e r as
means o n l y . b
. . . alw ays s o . . . a c t t h a t . th e w i l l c o u ld a t
t h e same tim e r e g a r d i t s e l f as g i v i n g i n i t s
maxims u n i v e r s a l law sT"7
g
He c la im e d t h a t e a c h o f t h e s e fo rm u la s e n t a i l s t h e o t h e r s .
F o r i t t o be p o s s i b l e f o r one t o a c t m o r a lly o n e 's
w i l l must p o s s e s s fre e d o m , w hich can be p r e s e n t o n ly i f t h e
w i l l i s a pow er a b l e t o p ro d u c e e f f e c t s w i t h o u t b e i n g
9
d e te r m in e d by a n y t h i n g o t h e r t h a n i t s e l f . I t I s a b s u r d t o
s p e a k o f o b l i g a t i o n i f t h e r e i s no p o s s i b l e way t o c o m p le te
i t . W hile t h e r e i s no t h e o r e t i c a l p r o o f t h a t a r a t i o n a l
4I b i d . , p . 38.
5T here a r e two a d d i t i o n a l ways as w e l l In w h ich t h e
c a t e g o r i c a l I m p e r a t i v e was e x p r e s s e d by K a n t: "Act as I f
t h e maxim o f t h y a c t i o n were' t o become by t h y w i l l a u n i
v e r s a l law o f n a t u r e . 1 1 ' I b i d . , p . 39; " T h e r e f o r e e v e r y r a
t i o n a l b e in g m ust so a c t as i f he w ere by h i s maxims i n
e v e ry c a se a l e g i s l a t i n g member i n t h e u n i v e r s a l kingdom o f
e n d s ." l b I d . , p . 57-
6I b l d . , p . 47.
7I b i d . , p . 52.
S lb ld . , p . 54.
9Ibid. , p . 65-
18
b e in g i s o r i s n o t f r e e , m o ral freed o m must be p r e s u p p o s e d
by p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n . 10 In h i s C r i t i q u e o f P r a c t i c a l Re as on
Kant c a l l e d t h i s p r e s u p p o s i t i o n o f freedom a p o s t u l a t e o f
p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n , and w ent on t o a rg u e f o r two o t h e r p o s t u
l a t e s which have r e l i g i o u s s i g n i f i c a n c e . But b e f o r e
p a s s i n g on t o t h o s e r e l i g i o u s t h e o r i e s , l e t us c o n s i d e r an
i m p o r ta n t p o i n t i n K a n t 's e t h i c a l t h e o r y .
N e i t h e r t h e o r e t i c a l c o g n i t i o n n o r l o g i c a lo n e can
p ro d u c e m o ra l p r i n c i p l e s . As H. J . P a to n says-, " I t w ould
In d e e d be a m is ta k e to suppose t h a t we c o u ld , as i t w e re ,
i n f e r th e p r i n c i p l e s o f m o r a l i t y from th e p r i n c i p l e s o f
l o g i c a l t h i n k i n g ; . . . . " 11
I t i s m a n i f e s t l y im p o s s ib le t o deduce
m o ra l o b l i g a t i o n from p u r e l y m e ta p h y s ic a l
o r e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s w hich
have n o t h i n g t o do w ith m o r a l i t y .12
U n d e rly in g any th e o r y o f e t h i c s t h e r e must be an unproven
a s su m p tio n about what h a s v a l u e . J u s t as t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f
l o g i c a re u n p ro v a b le and must be r e c o g n iz e d i n t u i t i v e l y , so
to o t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f e t h i c s a r e u n p ro v a b le and must be r e
c o g n iz e d i n t u i t i v e l y . A c c o rd in g t o T heodore G reene,
1 ° Ib ld . , p . 66.
11H. J . P a to n , The C a t e g o r i c a l I m p e r a t i v e , H a rp e r
Torchbooks (New York: H a rp e r & Row, 1967; , p • 2?1.
1 2
I b i d . , p. 226.
19
Kant d e s c r i b e s t h i s [ m o r a l ] e x p e r i e n c e as an
Im m ed iate i n t u i t i o n o f t h e v a l u e and im p o rta n c e
o f m o ra l g o o d n e s s ; as a s p o n ta n e o u s f e e l i n g
o f r e s p e c t f o r t h e m o ra l law and an i n n a t e
s e n s e o f 'o u g h t* o r o b l i g a t i o n t o obey t h e l a w ’s
b e h e s t s . He b e l i e v e s t h a t t h i s m o ra l f a c u l t y
i s as i n e x p l i c a b l e as i s m an’ s c a p a c i t y f o r
s e n s u o u s i n t u i t i o n , b u t he a c c e p t s i t as an
u l t i m a t e , i n c o n t r o v e r t i b l e f a c t and r e g a r d s i t
w ith awe and w o n d er. 13
I n t h e n e x t c h a p t e r I w i l l a t t e m p t t o c l a r i f y t h e n a t u r e o f
t h i s "m o ra l f a c u l t y . " F o r t h e p r e s e n t l e t us c o n s i d e r t h e
r e l i g i o u s view s t h a t K ant drew from h i s e t h i c a l t h e o r i e s .
W hile K ant s t a t e d t h a t good w i l l i s t h e o n ly t h i n g
good w i t h o u t q u a l i f i c a t i o n , he d i d n o t c la im t h a t good w i l l ;
1 * 4
i s t h e o n ly good o r t h e c o m p le te g o o d . The c o n c e p t o f a
h i g h e s t , su p re m e , o r p e r f e c t good ( t h e summum bonum, i n
K a n t ’ s t r a d i t i o n a l la n g u a g e ) w o u ld i n c l u d e h a p p i n e s s i n
a d d i t i o n t o good w i l l . A r a t i o n a l b e i n g d e s i r e s b o th v i r
tu e and h a p p i n e s s p r o p o r t i o n a t e t o v i r t u e , n o t o n ly f o r
h i m s e l f , b u t f o r a l l r a t i o n a l b e i n g s . The p ro m o tio n o f
t h i s h i g h e s t good i s t h e g o a l o f m o ra l l i f e . H ow ever, t h i s
i s n o t t o be i n t e r p r e t e d as m e a n in g t h a t i t i s o u r d u ty t o .
p u r s u e v i r t u e b e c a u s e i t l e a d s t o h a p p i n e s s , f o r t h a t w o u ld ;
c o n t r a d i c t t h e n o t i o n o f a c t i n g f o r t h e sak e o f d u ty ;
r a t h e r , we a r e o b l i g e d t o a c t f o r t h e sak e o f d u t y , i r - |
r e s p e c t i v e o f c o n s e q u e n c e s t o o u r s e l v e s e i t h e r i n t h i s l i f e !
o r a n o t h e r . To do d u ty f o r i t s own s a k e i s v i r t u e . Those |
1 3 !
In t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o K a n t, R e l i g i o n , p . 11.
l k
K a n t, F u n d a m e n ta l P r i n c i p l e s , p . 12. ;
20
who do t h e i r d u t i e s f o r t h e sa k e o f d u ty make th e m s e lv e s
w o rth y o f h a p p i n e s s . Kant d e f i n e d " h a p p in e s s " as " th e
c o n d i t i o n o f a r a t i o n a l b e in g i n th e w o rld w ith whom e v e r y -
1 5
t h i n g goes a c c o r d in g t o h i s w ish and w i l l . . . . " The
s y n t h e s i s o f v i r t u e and h a p p in e s s so u n d e r s to o d does n o t
e x i s t i n t h e p r e s e n t w o rld .
The v i r t u e a f t e r w hich we ought t o s t r i v e i s t h e
co m plete a c c o rd a n c e o f o u r w i l l w ith th e m o ra l law . But
t h i s i s h o l i n e s s , a p e r f e c t i o n beyond us i n t h i s p l a c e and
tim e . Thus we a r e w a r r a n te d in p o s t u l a t i n g f u r t h e r d u r a
t i o n o f o u r p e r s o n a l i t i e s , p r o g r e s s i n g e n d l e s s l y , Kant
c la im e d , to w a rd m o ra l p e r f e c t i o n . T h is e n d l e s s p r o g r e s s i s
o n ly p o s s i b l e on t h e s u p p o s i t i o n o f an e n d le s s d u r a t i o n o f
t h e p e r s o n a l i t y o f t h e same r a t i o n a l b e in g . T h is i s c a l l e d
t h e im m o ra lity o f t h e s o u l . 16
Kant c l e a r l y d id n o t mean t h a t we a t t a i n m o ra l p e r
f e c t i o n a t th e "end" o f " e n d l e s s " p r o g r e s s . I n s t e a d , he
a p p a r e n t l y th o u g h t ( a t th e tim e o f w r i t i n g t h e C r i t i q u e o f
P r a c t i c a l R eason) t h a t i n t h e e n d l e s s n e s s o f o u r m o ral
p r o g r e s s God (from t h e e t e r n a l view ) r e c o g n i z e s i n o u r
e f f o r t s an a d e q u a te f u l f i l l m e n t o f th e m o ral c o n d i t i o n o f
th e h i g h e s t good.
1 5
K an t, P r a c t i c a l R e a so n , p . 221.
16I b i d . , pp. 218-219.
21
F or a r a t i o n a l b u t f i n i t e b e in g , th e only
t h i n g p o s s i b l e i s an e n d le s s p r o g r e s s from
th e lo w e r t o h i g h e r d e g r e e s o f m oral p e r -
f e c t i o n . The I n f i n i t e B e in g , to whom th e
c o n d i t i o n o f tim e i s n o t h i n g , s e e s in t h i s t o us
e n d le s s s u c c e s s i o n a whole o f a c c o rd a n c e w ith
th e m o ra l law ; and th e h o l i n e s s which His
command in e x o r a b ly r e q u i r e s . . . i s t o be found
i n a s i n g l e i n t e l l e c t u a l i n t u i t i o n o f th e
whole e x i s t e n c e o f r a t i o n a l b e i n g s . 17
In h i s l a t e r w ork, R e l i g i o n W ith in th e L im its o f
Reason A lo n e , Kant th o u g h t t h a t i n a d d i t i o n t o an e n d le s s
p r o g r e s s from bad to b e t t e r , some k in d o f s u p e r n a t u r a l co
o p e r a t i o n i s n eeded i n o r d e r f o r a p e r s o n t o become good;
1 8
b u t how t h i s happens s u r p a s s e s o u r c o m p reh en sio n . We can
hope t h a t by t h e g ra c e o f God, who a lo n e knows t h e d e g re e
o f improvement o f our m oral q u a l i t y , we a r e g iv e n c r e d i t as
1 9
i f we were a lr e a d y w e l l - p l e a s i n g t o Him. T his does n o t
mean t h a t we can r e l y on God's mercy as an excuse f o r n o t
d o in g what we can t o improve o u r s e l v e s . The r i g h t c o u rse
i s n o t t o go from g ra c e t o v i r t u e b u t r a t h e r t o p r o g r e s s
2 o
from v i r t u e to p a rd o n in g g r a c e . D iv in e g ra c e must be
d i s t i n g u i s h e d from immoral le n i e n c y .
. . . e a c h must do as much as l i e s i n h i s power
to become a b e t t e r man, a n d . . . only when he
has n o t b u r i e d h i s in b o rn t a l e n t (Luke XIX,
12- 1 6 ) b u t has made use o f h i s o r i g i n a l p r e
d i s p o s i t i o n t o good i n o r d e r t o become a b e t t e r
man, can he hope t h a t i s n o t w i t h i n h i s power w i l l
be s u p p li e d th ro u g h c o o p e r a t i o n from a b o v e .21
17 20
I b i d . , p . 219 I b i d . , p. 190
16 2 1
K ant, R e l i g i o n , p . 40. I b i d . , p. 47.
1 9
I b i d . , p . 70.
22
I f we a d o p t t h e m o ra l d i s p o s i t i o n t o g o o d n e ss and
s t r i v e a f t e r m o ra l p e r f e c t i o n , t h e n we may h a v e f a i t h t h a t
G o d 's g r a c e w i l l make good o u r d e f i c i e n c i e s , f o r o n ly i n
t h i s way can we c o n c e i v e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f o u r c o m p le tio n
o f o u r u l t i m a t e d u ty . Only by f a i t h i n d i v i n e g r a c e can
we c o n c e iv e t h e p r a c t i c a l p o s s i b i l i t y o f m o ra l p e r f e c t i o n .
A l l e n Wood p u t s I t as f o l l o w s :
A d i s p o s i t i o n t o good i s t h u s s e e n by Kant as
a s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n f o r m a n 's m o ra l r e c e p t i v i t y
t o g r a c e , and t h e m o ra l a g e n t may p u t h i s
r a t i o n a l t r u s t i n G o d 's g r a c e i n c o m p le tin g
h i s e f f o r t s and f u l f i l l i n g h i s u n c o n d i t i o n a l
m o ra l p u r p o s e . 22
K ant a r g u e d t h a t we m ust f u r t h e r p o s t u l a t e t h e
e x i s t e n c e o f God as a c o n d i t i o n f o r t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e
h i g h e s t g o o d , s i n c e we f i n i t e c r e a t u r e s l a c k t h e pow er
n e c e s s a r y t o g u a r a n t e e t h a t h a p p i n e s s s h a l l b e a p p o r t i o n e d
a c c o r d i n g t o m e r i t . We m u st p o s t u l a t e t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a
pow er c a p a b l e o f a c h i e v i n g t h i s g o a l . T h is pow er m ust be
c a p a b l e o f r e c o g n i z i n g m o ra l w o r t h ; t h u s I t m u st be c a p a b le
o f c o n c e i v i n g a b s t r a c t p r i n c i p l e s , and t h e r e f o r e i t m u st be
i n t e l l i g e n t . S in c e t h i s pow er w i l l a c t t o r e w a rd m o ra l
w o r t h , i t m ust u s e a w i l l m o r a l l y p e r f e c t . And as t h i s
pow er c a n n o t b e f r u s t r a t e d by tim e o r s p a c e , i t m ust be
e t e r n a l and o m n i p r e s e n t . I n s h o r t , t h i s pow er m ust be con
c e i v e d as God.
2 2
Wood, K a n t 1s M oral R e l i g i o n , p . 2^7 .
23
Now i t was s e e n t o be a d u ty f o r us t o
p ro m o te t h e summum bonum; c o n s e q u e n t l y ,
i t i s n o t m e re ly a l l o w a b l e , b u t i t i s a
n e c e s s i t y c o n n e c te d w ith d u ty as a r e q u i s i t e ,
t h a t we s h o u ld p r e s u p p o s e t h e p o s s i b i l i t y
o f t h i s summum bon urn; and as t h i s i s p o s s i b l e
o n ly on c o n d i t i o n o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God,
i t i n s e p a r a b l y c o n n e c ts t h e s u p p o s i t i o n o f
t h i s w ith d u t y ; t h a t i s , i t i s m o r a lly
n e c e s s a r y t o assume t h e e x i s t e n c e o f G o d .23
However, a r a t i o n a l b e in g does n o t n e e d t h e i d e a o f
God t o be a b le t o r e c o g n i z e h i s d u t y , s i n c e t h e g ro u n d o f
m o ra l a c t i o n i s d u ty f o r d u t y 's s a k e , n o t o b e d ie n c e t o God.
So f a r as m o r a l i t y i s b a s e d upon t h e
c o n c e p t i o n o f man as a f r e e a g e n t who,
j u s t b e c a u s e he i s f r e e , b in d s h i m s e l f
t h r o u g h h i s r e a s o n t o u n c o n d i t i o n a l la w s ,
i t s t a n d s i n n eed n e i t h e r o f t h e i d e a o f
a n o t h e r b e in g o v e r him , f o r him t o a p p re h e n d
h i s d u t y , n o r o f an i n c e n t i v e o t h e r t h a n t h e
law i t s e l f , f o r him t o do h i s d u t y . 21*
E ls e w h e re Kant s t a t e d t h a t i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y to
su p p o se t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God as a b a s i s o f a l l o b l i g a t i o n s
i n g e n e r a l , f o r t h i s r e s t s s im p ly on t h e autonomy o f r e a s o n
i t s e l f . 2 5
Yet m o r a l i t y f o r c e s us on t o r e l i g i o n and t h e r e
c o g n i t i o n o f d u t i e s as d i v i n e commands. D iv in e commands
a r e n o t s a n c t i o n s o r a r b i t r a r y o r d i n a n c e s o f a f o r e i g n w ill;:
r a t h e r t h e y a r e law s o f e v e ry f r e e w i l l . N e v e r t h e l e s s ,
th e y m ust be r e g a r d e d as commands o f God, b e c a u s e i t i s
2 3
K a n t, P r a c t i c a l R e a s o n , p . 222.
24
K a n t, R e l i g i o n , p . 3 *
25
K a n t, P r a c t i c a l R e a so n , p . 222.
24
o n ly fro m a m o r a l l y p e r f e c t a l l - p o w e r f u l w i l l t h a t we
f i n i t e c r e a t u r e s can h o p e t o a t t a i n t h e h i g h e s t good w h ic h
t h e m o ra l law makes i t o u r d u ty t o h o l d as t h e g o a l o f o u r
e f f o r t s . 2 6
The s u p p o s i t i o n o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God a s a r e
q u i r e m e n t o f p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n may be c a l l e d f a i t h , K ant
27
s t a t e d . In a l e t t e r t o J . C. L a v a t e r i n 1775 K an t s t a t e d
t h e f o l l o w i n g : "By 'm o r a l f a i t h ' I mean t h e u n c o n d i t i o n a l
t r u s t i n d i v i n e a i d , i n a c h i e v i n g a l l t h e good t h a t , ev en
2 8
w i t h o u r m o st s i n c e r e e f f o r t s , l i e s b e y o n d o u r p o w e r ."
Kant l a t e r d e f i n e d f a i t h as " t h e m o ra l a t t i t u d e o f R eason
as t o b e l i e f i n t h a t w h ic h i s u n a t t a i n a b l e by t h e o r e t i c a l
2 9
c o g n i t i o n ."
S u p p o se human n a t u r e c o u ld know t h a t God e x i s t s .
I n t h a t c a s e K ant s t a t e d , m o ra l s t r e n g t h w ou ld n o t be
d e v e lo p e d b e c a u s e o u r a c t i o n s w o u ld be done fro m f e a r
3 o
r a t h e r t h a n d u ty . W ith God and e t e r n i t y s t a n d i n g u n c e a s
i n g l y b e f o r e u s , t r a n s g r e s s i o n o f t h e m o ra l law w o u ld be
26
I b i d . , p . 226 .
27 I b i d . , p . 223.
2 8
Im m anuel K a n t, P h i l o s o p h i c a l C o r r e s p o n d e n c e
( 1759- 9 9 ) 3 e d . a n d t r a n s . by A r n u l f Zw eig ( C h ic a g o :
U n i v e r s i t y o f C h ic a g o P r e s s , 1 9 6 7 )> p . 81.
2 9
Im m anuel K a n t, K a n t ' s' C r i t i q u e o f J u d g e m e n t ,
t r a n s . by J . H. B e r n a r d (2d e d . : L ondon: M a c m il l i a n & C o .,
1 9 1 4 ) , p . 409.
30 K a n t, P r a c t i c a l R e a s o n , p . 245.
25
a v o id e d ; b u t t h e m o ra l d i s p o s i t i o n , from w hich a c t i o n s
ou g h t t o p r o c e e d , w ould n o t g a t h e r s t r e n g t h t o r e s i s t i n
c l i n a t i o n s by v i r t u e o f t h e d i g n i t y o f th e m o ra l law i t s e l f .
H ence, t h e m o ra l w o rth o f a c t i o n s w ould c e a s e t o e x i s t .
T h e r e f o r e , God a llo w s us o n ly t o " c o n j e c t u r e " His e x i s t e n c e ,
3 l
n o t t o p ro v e i t c l e a r l y . The m o ra l law a llo w s us "weak
g l a n c e s " i n t o t h e s u p e r s e n s i b l e r e a l i t y . Kant c o n c lu d e d
t h a t " t h e u n s e a r c h a b l e wisdom by w h ich we e x i s t i s n o t l e s s
w o rth y o f a d m i r a t i o n i n w hat i t h a s d e n ie d t h a n i n what i t
3 2
h a s g r a n t e d . "
In a n o t e added i n t h e se c o n d e d i t i o n o f t h e
C r i t i q u e o f Judgem ent K ant d e s c r i b e d t h e " p r o o f - v a l u e " o f
h i s m o ra l argum ent as f o l l o w s :
T h is m o ra l arg u m en t does n o t s u p p ly any
ob j e c t i ve 1y'-v a l 1 d p r o o f o f t h e B eing o f
God; i t does n o t p r o v e t o t h e s c e p t i c
t h a t t h e r e i s a God, b u t p r o v e s t h a t i f he
w is h e s t o t h i n k i n a way c o n s o n a n t w i t h
m o r a l i t y , he m ust ad m it the' a s s u m p tio n o f
t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n u n d e r t h e maxims o f h i s
p r a c t i c a l R e a s o n . 33
An o b j e c t i o n t h a t m ig h t be r a i s e d a g a i n s t K a n t 's
m o ra l argum ent i s t h a t t h e a c h ie v e m e n t o f t h e summum bonum
i s n o t p o s s i b l e . Kant s t a t e d t h a t i f one b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e
a c h ie v e m e n t o f t h e summum bonum i s n o t p o s s i b l e , t h e n one
w i l l e x p e r i e n c e m o ra l d e s p a i r and w i l l become e i t h e r a
3 l
I b i d . p . 246.
32I b i d . , p . 381.
I b i d . , p . 381.
26
v i s i o n a r y o r a s c o u n d r e l .
F o r w hat p u rp o se s h o u ld I make m y s e lf w o rth y
o f b l e s s e d n e s s th ro u g h m o r a l i t y , i f t h e r e i s
no way t h a t I can p r o c u re t h i s b l e s s e d n e s s ?
W ith o u t God, I w ould h a v e 3^o be e i t h e r a
v i s i o n a r y o r a s c o u n d r e l .
As was s t a t e d above (p . 2 3 ) , Kant c la im e d t h a t f o r i t s own
sak e m o r a l i t y does n o t need r e l i g i o n a t a l l . However, a
m o ra l man who a tte m p ts t o go i t a lo n e w ith o u t c o n f id e n c e
i n t h e h e l p o f God w i l l f a l l i n t o m oral d e s p a i r , and n o t
make h i s b e s t e f f o r t s in c e he t h i n k s i t i s im p o s s ib le to
3 5
a c h ie v e th e summum bonum.
Sjzfren K ie rk e g a a rd (1 813-1855) a g re e d w ith K a n t’ s
p o i n t ab o u t d e s p a i r . K ie r k e g a a r d c la im e d t h a t t h e e t h i c a l
mode o f l i f e (w ith o u t r e l i g i o n ) i s i n t r i n s i c a l l y d e f i c i e n t
b e c a u s e th e r e q u ir e m e n ts a r e "so i n f i n i t e t h a t t h e i n d i -
3 6
v i d u a l alw ays goes b a n k r u p t . . . . ” Aware o f t h e gap b e
tw een o n e ’ s a b i l i t i e s and o n e 's i n f i n i t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ,
one i s d r iv e n onward t o th e r e l i g i o u s mode o f l i f e .
o 4
Immanuel K a n t, V o rle su n g e n u b e r d ie p h ilo s o p h i's c h e
R e l i g i o n s l e h r e ( L e ip z ig : C a rl F r i e d r i c h F r a n z , 1 8 1 7 ) , p . 129.
The above i s my t r a n s l a t i o n o f t h e f o l l o w i n g : "Wozu s o i l
i c h mich d u rc h M o r a l i t a t d e r G l u c k s e l i g k e i t w iirdig m achen,
wenn k e i n Wesen da i s t , das m ir d i e s e G l u c k s e l i g k e i t v e r -
s c h a f f e n kann? So m u sste i c h denn ohne G o t t , e n tw e d e r e i n
P h a n t a s t , o d e r e i n B osew icht s e i n . ”
3 5
A lle n Wood t r a c e s K a n t 's argum ent from "m oral
d e s p a i r ” i n K a n t ’ s Moral R e l i g i o n , p p . 1 55-160.
3 6
S ^ re n K ie r k e g a a r d , S ta g e s on L i f e ’s Way, t r a n s .
by W a lte r Low rie ( P r i n c e t o n : P r in c e to n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s ,
19*40), p. 430.
27
The man who t r i e s t o be a m o r a l l y s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t i n d i
v i d u a l , who t r i e s t o go i t a l o n e w i t h o u t God, n e v e r knows
i f he h a s done a l l he c o u ld i n h i s m o ra l e f f o r t ; so he
f i n d s h i m s e l f i n v o l v e d i n d u p l i c i t y .
Was n o t t h i s p r e c i s e l y t h e r e a s o n f o r y o u r
d i s q u i e t u d e , t h a t you d id n o t know w i t h i n
y o u r s e l f how much i t i s a man can d o , t h a t
a t one moment i t seem ed t o you so i n f i n i t e l y
m uch, a t a n o t h e r so v e r y l i t t l e ? Was i t n o t
f o r t h i s r e a s o n y o u r a n x i e t y was so p a i n f u l ,
t h a t y o u r s o u l c o u ld n o t p e n e t r a t e y o u r con>~-
s c i o . u s n e s s , t h a t t h e more e a r n e s t l y you d e s i r e d
t o a c t , t h e more h e a r t i l y you w is h e d t o , so
much t h e more d r e a d f u l becam e t h e d u p l i c i t y
i n w h ic h you fo u n d y o u r s e l f i n v o l v e d , w o n d e rin g
w h e th e r you may n o t h a v e done w hat you c o u l d ,
b u t no one came t o y o u r a i d . 37
K i e r k e g a a r d c la im e d t h a t d e s p a i r i s t h e t r u e p o i n t o f d e -
3 8
p a r t u r e f o r f i n d i n g God. At e v e r y moment when a man d o es
3 9
n o t r e l a t e h i m s e l f a b s o l u t e l y t o God, t h e r e i s d e s p a i r .
■^Sj^ren Kierkegaard, Either/Or, trans. by David
Swenson and Lillian Swenson (Vol.l) and Walter Lowrie (Vol.
I I ) , Anchor Books(New York: Doubleday & Co.,1 9 5 9),I I , p •347 •
3 8
Ibid., p . 217 •
3 9
S/^ren K i e r k e g a a r d , SgSren K i e r k e g a a r d 1 s J o u r n a l s
and P a p e r s , e d . and t r a n s . by Howard V. Hong and E dna H.
H o n g ( I n d ia n a : I n d i a n a U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 19 6 7 ) V o l . l , p . 348.
Howard Hong s a y s t h a t " d e s p a i r s i g n i f i e s t h e m i s r e l a t i o n -
s h i p b e tw e e n t h e e t e r n a l i n a man and h i s c o n c r e t e e x i s t
e n c e . The p r o p e r r e l a t i o n s h i p I s t h a t t h e e t e r n a l a s t h e
p r im a r y p r i n c i p l e p e n e t r a t e s t e m p o r a l e x i s t e n c e . T h e re
a r e two m ain form s o f t h e m i s r e l a t i o n s h i p o f w h ic h d e s p a i r
i s t h e e x p r e s s i o n : e i t h e r t h a t a man c o n c e n t r a t e s o n ly on
t h e t e m p o r a l o r t h a t t h e e t e r n a l I s o n ly u s e d i n t e l l e c t u a l
l y as k n ow ledge w h ich g a i n s no s i g n i f i c a n c e f o r e x i s t e n c e . "
V o l. I , p . 524.
28
A n o th e r o b j e c t i o n t h a t one m ig h t r a i s e a g a i n s t
K a n t ’ s m o ra l arg u m en t i s t h a t t h e summum bonum may n o t be
w hat Kant c la im e d i t i s . What i f p r i v a t e p l e a s u r e f o r t h e
s e l f i s t h e summum bonum? K a n t 's r e s p o n s e t o t h i s c r i
t i c i s m w ould be t h a t w h ile one c o u ld l o g i c a l l y c o n c e iv e t h e
summum bonum i n t h a t f a s h i o n , one c a n n o t m o r a lly w i l l t h a t
4 o
su ch a p r i n c i p l e s h o u ld become a u n i v e r s a l law .
A n o th e r o b j e c t i o n t h a t can be r a i s e d a g a i n s t th e
m o ra l arg u m en t i s t h a t t h e pow er n e e d e d t o a c h ie v e t h e
summum bonum n e e d n o t be c o n c e iv e d as God. I s n ' t i t
p o s s i b l e t h a t an u n i n t e l l i g e n t f o r c e (su c h as t h e "law o f
k arm a" ) i s s u f f i c i e n t t o a c c o u n t f o r m o ra l p r o g r e s s and
re w a rd f o r v i r t u e ? A K a n tia n r e s p o n s e t o t h i s c r i t i c i s m
would be t h a t t h e m o ra l f o r c e m u st be c o n c e iv e d as c a p a b le
o f r e c o g n i z i n g m o ra l w o r t h , t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f w hich r e
q u i r e s t h e c a p a c i t y t o c o n c e iv e t h e a b s t r a c t p r i n c i p l e o f
t h e m o ra l law . Such a c a p a c i t y r e q u i r e s i n t e l l i g e n c e , as
4 l
w e l l as w i l l , and m ust be c o n c e iv e d as God.
A f u r t h e r o b j e c t i o n t h a t h a s b e e n r a i s e d a g a i n s t
t h e m o ra l argum ent i s t h a t t h e g o a l o f m o ra l p e r f e c t i o n does
n o t seem a t t a i n a b l e . As F r e d e r i c k F e r r e s t a t e s i t , "M oral
p e r f e c t i o n f o r e v e r re m a in s a g o a l , n e v e r an a c h ie v e m e n t.
K a n t, F u n d a m e n ta l P r i n c i p l e s , p . 4 l .
4 1
K a n t, P r a c t i c a l R e a so n , p . 222.
29
I m m o r t a l i t y , t h e n , would seem t o be an i n d e f i n i t e p o s tp o n e
ment o f what p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n demands r a t h e r th a n t h e means
t o i t s ach ie v e m e n t . " 42 T h is same o b j e c t i o n was r a i s e d by
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n ( s e e below , p . 7 0 ). K a n t's re s p o n s e to
t h i s c r i t i c i s m would b e t h a t we may have f a i t h t h a t God’s
g ra c e makes good our d e f i c i e n c i e s in o r d e r t h a t we can f u l
f i l our m oral p u rp o se (se e above, p p . 2 1 -2 2 ).
I n c o n c l u s io n , K a n t’s m oral argum ent s t r e s s e d two
m a jo r t h i n g s : th e v a lu e o f r a t i o n a l b e in g s as ends i n them
s e l v e s , n e v e r t o be used m erely as means (" n o t even by
God"4 3 ); and t h e v a lu e o f p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n , in i t s r e f l e c
t i o n s a b o u t th e a b s o lu te n e s s o f th e m oral law , as th e key
t o th e d is c o v e r y o f r e a l i t i e s which a r e beyond th e scope o f
r e a s o n i n i t s s p e c u l a t i v e u s e . But what i s th e o r i g i n o f
t h i s m ighty m oral law which commands o ur a t t e n t i o n and de
mands o u r r e s p e c t and o b ed ien ce? To t h i s q u e s ti o n we must
d i r e c t o u r a t t e n t i o n n e x t .
bz
F r e d e r i c k F e r r e , B a sic Modern P h ilo so p h y o f
R e l i g i o n (New York: C h a rle s S c r i b n e r 's Sons, 19 6 7 ),
p . 227.
b 3
K ant, P r a c t i c a l R ea so n , p . 229.
I I I . THE IDEA OP SYNDERESIS AS AN ELEMENT
IN KANT'S CONCEPT OP MORALITY
K a n t 's m o ra l a rg u m en t f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God i s
b a s e d on h i s d e e p - s e a t e d c o n v i c t i o n t h a t m o ra l o b l i g a t i o n
i s n o t i l l u s o r y b u t a b s o l u t e l y r e a l . To Kant t h e m a n i f e s t
a u t h o r i t y o f t h e m o ra l law i s so u n q u e s t i o n a b l e t h a t he
c o u ld n o t e n t e r t a i n t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t i t i s t h e r e s u l t
o f e d u c a t i o n o r e m p i r i c a l c o n d i t i o n i n g . The m o ra l law i s
i n n a t e i n man, " p r i m o r d i a l l y e n g r a v e d i n o u r h e a r t s . " 1 I n
h i s f i n a l n o t e s Kant e x p r e s s e d b e l i e f t h a t t h e m o ra l law i s
God. T h e re i s s t r i k i n g r e s e m b la n c e b e tw e e n K a n t 's c o n c e p t
o f t h i s i n n a t e " s e e d o f g o o d n e s s " an d t h e a n c i e n t and
m e d ia e v a l view o f s y n d e r e s i s . W hile K ant may n e v e r h av e
h e a r d o f t h e t e r m s y n d e r e s i s , I t h i n k t h a t i t w i l l become
c l e a r t h a t i t i s a n o t i o n c o n t a i n e d i n h i s t h e o r y . I w i l l
a t t e m p t t o show t h i s by t r a c i n g a b r i e f h i s t o r y o f th e
n o t i o n o f s y n d e r e s i s , and t h e n r e l a t i n g t h e i d e a t o
s i m i l a r n o t i o n s i n K a n t 's t h e o r y .
I n o r d e r t o t r a c e t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e n o t i o n o f
s y n d e r e s i s , i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o b e g i n w i t h t h e G reek te r m
o u v e i S n o i s ( s y n e i d e s i s ) , fro m w h ich t h e te r m auvrnpncris
( s y n t e r e s i s o r s y n d e r e s i s ) p r o b a b l y was d e r i v e d ( s e e b e lo w ,
^ a n t , R e l i g i o n , p . 95-
30
31
p . 3^ , n .1 7 ) . In t h e o p i n i o n o f E r i c D 'A rc y , "The Greek
word f o r c o n s c i e n c e , ouveffiricris, f i r s t o c c u r s i n a fra g m e n t
2
o f D e m o c r itu s ." The p a s s a g e i s t r a n s l a t e d by D 'A rcy as
f o l l o w s :
T h ere a r e men who a r e q u i t e i g n o r a n t o f w hat
i s t o f o llo w t h e d i s s o l u t i o n o f t h e i r m o ra l
n a t u r e ; y e t , b e c a u s e t h e i r c o n s c i e n c e i s
b u rd e n e d w ith th e memory o f t h e i r e v i l c o n d u c t,
th e y to rm e n t t h e m s e l v e s , a l l t h e i r l i v e s l o n g ,
by i n v e n t i n g m yths and f a b l e s a b o u t a l i f e a f t e r
d e a t h . 3
D 'A rcy l a b e l s t h i s u sa g e o f " c o n s c ie n c e " (w hich c o n n o te s
re m o rs e ) " j u d i c i a l " , m eaning r e g r e t a b o u t p a s t a c t s , and
he c la im s t h a t t h e r e i s no s u g g e s t i o n by t h e p r e - C h r i s t i a n
G reeks o f c o n s c ie n c e f u n c t i o n i n g p r i o r t o u n d e r t a k i n g an
a c t i o n .
A c c o rd in g t o C. A. P i e r c e , t h e te rm s y n e i d e s i s
c o n n o te d ( i n p o p u l a r u s a g e ) t h a t c o n s c ie n c e i s a p a r t o f
human n a t u r e , d w e l l i n g in th e s o u l o f e v e ry m an, o r i g i n a t i n g
5
from a d i v i n e s o u r c e . P i e r c e c la im s t h a t t h e te rm came
i n t o C h r i s t i a n i t y from t h e e v e ry d a y s p e e c h o f t h e o r d i n a r y
G re e k , r a t h e r th a n from t h e t e c h n i c a l p h i l o s o p h i c a l u sa g e :
i
2 E r i c D 'A rc y , C o n s c ie n c e and I t s R ight' t o Freedom j
(New Y ork: Sheed & Ward"^ 1 9 6 1 ) , p . 5. j
3 I b i d . The fra g m e n t i s t r a n s l a t e d from H. D i e l s , i
Die F ra g m e n te d e r V o r 's b k r a t i k e r , 1951, 6 8 , B. 297-
!
D 'A rc y , 'C o n s c i e n c e , p . 6.
5
C. A. P i e r c e , C o n s c ie n c e i n t h e New T e sta m e n t
(London: SCM P r e s s L t d . , 1 9 5 5 ) , p . 1fT. :
32
6 7
o f t h e S t o i c s . P a u l 's u s e o f th e te r m i n c l u d e d an emo
t i o n a l e le m e n t, w h ereas t h e S t o i c s c o n s id e r e d em o tio n s
8
f a u l t s . T here i s no e v id e n c e ( i n E n s l i n 's o p in io n ) t h a t
9
P a u l s t u d i e d S t o i c w r i t i n g s .
The a s su m p tio n o f a S t o i c o r i g i n f o r th e
P a u lin e cruveifinais r e s t s on q u i t e i n s u f f i c i e n t
e v i d e n c e , and i s i n h e r e n t l y i m p r o b a b l e . 10
P i e r c e a l s o c la im s t h a t th e m eaning o f th e e v e r y
day u sag e r e s u l t e d i n p a r t from th e d e c a y in g s o c i a l con
d i t i o n s .
I t i s c l e a r t h a t c o n s c ie n c e o n ly came i n t o
i t s own i n t h e Greek w o rld a f t e r th e c o l l a p s e
o f t h e c i t y - s t a t e . The c lo s e i n t e g r a t i o n o f
p o l i t i c s w i t h e t h i c s , w ith t h e fo rm er p r e d o m in a n t,
was no l o n g e r p o s s i b l e : t h e r e was no s u f f i c i e n t l y
c l o s e a u t h o r i t y , e x t e r n a l to t h e i n d i v i d u a l ,
e f f e c t i v e l y t o d i r e c t c o n d u c t. C o n s e q u e n tly ,
as a p i s a l l e r , men f e l l back on th e i n t e r n a l X 1
c h a s t is e m e n t o f c o n s c ie n c e as t h e on ly a u t h o r i t y .
I b i d . , p . 16. A lso s e e P. J . Ja c k so n and K.
Lake, The b e g i n n i n g o f C h r i s t i a n i t y , V o l. IV, t r a n s . by
K. Lake and H. J . Cadbury (London: M acm illan & C o ., 1 9 3 3 ),
p. 287.
7
P a u l u se d th e te r m f o u r t e e n t i m e s , a c c o r d in g t o
E n s l i n , alw ays i n t h e form cuvE ffincis : Horn. 2 :1 5 ; 9 : 1 ;
1 3 :5 ; I Cor. 8 :7 , 1 0 ,1 2 ; 1 0 :2 5 , 2 7 , 28, 29 ( t w i c e ) ; I I
Cor. 1 :1 2 ; 4 : 2 ; 5 :1 1 . M orton E n s l i n , The E t h i c s o f P a u l
(New York: H a rp e r & B r o t h e r s , 1 9 3 0 ), p . 101.
8
P i e r c e , C o n sc ie n c e i n t h e New T e s ta m e n t, p . 16.
9
E n s l i n , The E t h i c s o f P a u l , p . 34.
10P i e r c e , C o n sc ie n c e i n t h e New T e s ta m e n t, p . 16.
11I b i d . , p. 7 6.
33
A c c o r d in g t o D’ A rc y , S t . P a u l i n t r o d u c e d two new
f e a t u r e s i n t o t h e i d e a o f c o n s c i e n c e : t h a t o f h a v in g
a u t h o r i t y t o l e g i s l a t e o r d i r e c t p r i o r t o an a c t i o n ; and
12
t h a t o f b e i n g s u b j e c t t o e r r o r . P a u l d i d n o t abandon
t h e ’' j u d i c i a l " u s a g e o f s y n e i d e s i s , s i n c e he u s e d i t i n
l 3
t h a t s e n s e i n m ost o f i t s o c c u r r e n c e s i n h i s e p i s t l e s .
In o t h e r p l a c e s , h o w e v e r, he fo u n d i t n e c e s s a r y t o u s e t h e
l 4
te rm t o r e f e r t o d o u b ts a b o u t r i g h t n e s s p r i o r t o an a c t i o n .
S t . P a u l , t h e n , i n t r o d u c e s an e n t i r e l y new
p h a s e i n t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e te r m 'c o n s c i e n c e '
i n m o ra l t h e o r y , and two new f e a t u r e s c h a r a c t e r i z e
h i s u s e o f i t . F i r s t , i t i s t o p l a y a
d i r e c t i v e r o l e b e f o r e a c t i o n t a k e s p l a c e . In
t h e p ag an w r i t e r s c o n s c i e n c e d i d n o t a p p e a r on
t h e s c e n e u n t i l a f t e r t h e a c t i o n was p e r f o r m e d ,
an d i t s r o l e was p u r e l y j u d i c i a l ; b u t i n
S t . P a u l , c o n s c i e n c e i s c r e d i t e d w i t h a
l e g i s l a t i v e f u n c t i o n , and i t i n c l u d e s an
o b l i g a t i o n i n t h e p r o p e r s e n s e . S e c o n d ,
c o n s c i e n c e i s f a l l i b l e ; t h e d i r e c t i o n s i t
is s u e s m a y be m i s t a k e n ; b u t w h e t h e r i t be
m i s t a k e n o r n o t , i t seems t h a t we a r e bound
t o f o l l o w i t s r u l i n g s . 15
S e v e r a l o f t h e F a t h e r s o f t h e C h u rc h , su ch as
O rig e n ( 1 8 5 - 2 5 3 ) , S t . Ambrose ( 3 ^ 0 - 3 9 7 ) , S t . B a s i l ( 3 3 0 -
3 7 9 ) , and S t . Jo h n Damscene ( 6 7 5 - 7 ^ 9 ) , s u g g e s t e d v a r i o u s
p h r a s e s t o d e s c r i b e c o n s c i e n c e , and p r o p o s e d s e v e r a l l i n e s
f o r d e v e lo p m e n t. But t h e m ost i m p o r t a n t work was a g l o s s
12
D’ A rc y , C o n s c i e n c e , p . 9-
l 3
I b i d . , p . 8.
l 4
e . g . , I Cor. 8 . 7 , 1 0 , 12.
1 5
D’A rc y , C o n s c i e n e e , pp 1 1 - 1 2 .
3h
w r i t t e n by S t . Jerom e (3*40?— 420) w hich d e te r m in e d l a t e r
d i s c u s s i o n .
. . . a p a s s a g e in S t . Jerom e c u t r i g h t a c r o s s th e
b r i e f th o u g h c o n s i s t e n t a c c o u n ts o f t h e o t h e r
F a t h e r s . I t c o n fu se d th e whole m a t t e r w ith a
new te rm and a new m e ta p h o r. And i t was J e r o m e 's
g l o s s . . . t h a t d om inated t h e e a r l y work o f
S t . Thomas. 16
Jerom e w ro te a commentary on t h e p ro p h e c y o f
E z e c h i e l c o n c e r n in g th e f o u r l i v i n g b e i n g s — th e man, l i o n ,
o x , and e a g l e . In t h e commentary Jerom e o f f e r e d an i n t e r
p r e t a t i o n o f th e v i s i o n h e l d by some " P l a t o n i z e r s " as
f o l l o w s :
These w r i t e r s i n t e r p r e t t h e v i s i o n i n term s o f
P l a t o ’ s th e o r y o f th e t h r e e e le m e n ts o f t h e s o u l.
T h ere a r e R ea so n , S p i r i t , and D e s i r e ; t o t h e s e
c o r re s p o n d r e s p e c t i v e l y the. man, th e l i o n , and
t h e ox. Now above t h e s e t h r e e was t h e e a g l e ; so
i n th e s o u l , th e y s a y , above t h e o t h e r t h r e e
e le m e n ts and beyond them i s a f o u r t h , w hich th e
G reeks c a l l s y n d e r e s i s . T h is i t i s t h a t makes u s ,
t o o , f e e l o u r s i n f u l n e s s when we a r e overcome by
e v i l d e s i r e o r u n b r i d l e d S p i r i t , o r d e c e iv e d by
sham R eason. I t i s n a t u r a l t o i d e n t i f y s y n d e r e s i s
w ith t h e e a g l e , s in c e i t i s d i s t i n c t from th e
o t h e r t h r e e e le m e n ts and c o r r e c t s them when th e y
e r r . .. And y e t i n some men we se e t h i s c o n s c ie n c e
o v e rth ro w n and d i s p l a c e d ; th e y have no s e n s e o f
g u i l t o r shame f o r t h e i r s i n s . . . . 17
16 I b i d . , p . 16.
17 I b i d . , pp. 16-17- T r a n s l a t e d by D 'A rcy from Commen-
ta r iu m i n E z e c h ie le m , 1 ,1 . ( P a t r o l o g i a L a t i n a , 25, 2 2 .) The
o r i g i n o f J e r o m e 's te rm s y n d e r e s i s ( o r s y n t e r e s i s ) ^ is con
t r o v e r s i a l . The Greek word u se d by Jerom e was auv-rnpriais.
Some s c h o l a r s ( e . g . , F ra n k L. C ro ss) b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s term
r e s u l t e d when a s c r i b e m is c o p ie d ei< 5 n ais. See F ra n k L.
C ro s s , " S y n te re s is ," Chambers ' s E n c y c T o p e d ia , New r e v i s e d
e d . ,1 9 6 8 , X I I I , p . 398. F or a c o n t r a s t i n g view se e M.W. H o l-
l e n b a c h , 1 1 S y n d e re sis ^ 1 New P a th o i l c Ericy cTope d i a , 1 9 6 7 3X I I I .
p . 882.
35
J e r o m e 's d e s c r i p t i o n o f s y n d e r e s i s r a i s e d new
p ro b le m s a b o u t t h e n a t u r e o f c o n s c i e n c e . F o r i n s t a n c e , how
can t h e c la im t h a t t h e s p a r k o f c o n s c i e n c e was n o t e x
t i n g u i s h e d ev en i n C ain be r e c o n c i l e d w i t h J e r o m e 's o t h e r
c la im t h a t some men h av e no s e n s e o f g u i l t ? One a n s w e r i s
t h a t c o n s c i e n c e may be d o rm a n t.
J e r o m e 's g l o s s i n f l u e n c e d v a r i o u s s c h o l a s t i c s t o
d e a l w i t h t h e p ro b le m o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f s y n d e r e s i s t o
c o n s c i e n c e . S te p h e n L a n g to n (d. 1228) c l a i m e d t h a t s y n d e r
e s i s i s c o n c e r n e d w i t h m o ra l ju d g m e n ts a t t h e l e v e l o f v e ry
g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s . P h i l i p t h e C h a n c e l l o r ( f l . 1223)
c la im e d t h a t s y n d e r e s i s i s a h a b i t - l i k e f a c u l t y w hich p r o
v i d e s t h e m a jo r p r e m is e o f a p r a c t i c a l s y l l o g i s m . Such a
s y l l o g i s m p ro d u c e s a c o n c l u s i o n w h ic h i s a ju d g m e n t o f
c o n s c i e n c e when t h e m a j o r p r e m is e i s com bined w i t h a m in o r
p r e m is e p r o v i d e d by r e a s o n .
The r e s u l t o f P h i l i p ' s work was t h a t , from
a b o u t t h e y e a r 1 2 3 0 , s t u d i e s o f m o ra l
t h e o l o g y h ad t o p r e s e n t t r e a t i s e s t h a t gave 18
a s i n g l e a c c o u n t o f s y n d e r e s i s and c o n s c i e n c e .
A c u l m i n a t i o n was r e a c h e d i n t h e w orks o f S t .
Thomas A q u in as (1 2 2 5 -1 2 7 4 ) whose o p i n i o n a b o u t s y n d e r e s i s
c h a n g e d from h i s e a r l y a c c o u n t s t o h i s m a tu re w ork. H is
m a tu re v iew i s e x p r e s s e d i n t h e a r t i c l e : "W h e th e r s y n d e r e s i s
1 9
i s a s p e c i a l po w er o f t h e s o u l d i s t i n c t fro m t h e o t h e r s ? "
1 8
D 'A rc y , C o n s c i e n c e , p p . 2 8 -2 9 .
1 9
S t . Thomas A q u in a s , Suirima T h e o l o g i a e , I , 79 * 1 2 .
A quinas h e l d t h a t s y n d e r e s i s i s n o t a s p e c i a l f a c u l t y ,
d i s t i n c t from o t h e r s , b u t a " h a b i t " b e lo n g in g t o p r a c t i c a l
r e a s o n , n o t t o th e w i l l . R a t i o n a l pow ers r e g a r d o p p o s i t e s ,
b u t s y n d e r e s i s does n o t ( i n c l i n i n g t o good o n l y ) . " T h e re
f o r e s y n d e r e s i s i s n o t a pow er. F o r i f i t were a power i t
would be a r a t i o n a l p ow er, s in c e i t i s n o t found i n b r u t e
a n i m a l s . " 2 0
. . . th e f i r s t p r a c t i c a l p r i n c i p l e s ,
b esto w ed on us by n a t u r e , do n o t b e lo n g
t o a s p e c i a l pow er, b u t t o a s p e c i a l 2 \
n a t u r a l h a b i t , w hich we c a l l s y n d e r e s i s .
H a b itu s h e r e means an i n n a t e b u i l t - i n f e a t u r e o f t h e m ind.
H a b its ( i n s c h o l a s t i c w r i t i n g ) d is p o s e a
man to a c t r e a d i l y and e a s i l y i n c e r t a i n
w ays, and th e p a r t i c u l a r h a b i t we a re t o
d i s c u s s i s an in b o r n pow er o f t h e mind
which e n a b le s i t r e a d i l y t o g ra s p and 2Z
m a n ip u la te th e b a s i c t r u t h s o f m o r a l i t y .
A quinas s t a t e d t h a t j u s t as s p e c u l a t i v e r e a s o n has
f i r s t p r i n c i p l e s ( r e f e r r i n g t o A r i s t o t l e ’ s e x p l a n a t i o n i n
Nicom achean E t h i c s , l l ^ l a ? ) , so to o does p r a c t i c a l re a s o n
2 3
have f i r s t p r i n c i p l e s .
The r e l a t i o n s h i p o f s y n d e r e s i s t o c o n s c ie n c e was
c l a r i f i e d by A quinas i n a r t i c l e 13: "W hether C o n sc ie n c e I s
a Power ?" He s t a t e d t h a t c o n s c ie n c e i s an a c t , n o t a
20i b i a .
21I b i d .
22
D 'A rcy , C o n s c ie n c e , p . 3 6 .
2 3
A q u in a s, Summa T h e o T o g ia e , I , 79, 12.
37
power, since it "implies the relation of knowledge to some
thing. .. But the application of knowledge to something is
„2 4
done by some act."
Although an act does not always remain in itself,
yet it always remains in its cause, which is
power and habit. Now all the habits by which
conscience is formed, although many, nevertheless
have their efficacy from one first principle,
the habit of first principles, which is called
synderesis. 2 5
Modern Thomists follow St. Thomas by saying that
"conscience is judgment of the practical reason, drawn from
general principles provided by synderesis, on the morality
2 6
of an individual action to be done by us."
The mystics of the Middle Ages took over the no
tions and terms of the early Christians and combined them
with scholastic philosophy in the search for ways to ex
press their spiritual insights and mystical experiences.
Each mystic, original though he be, yet owes
much to the inherited acquirement of his
spiritual ancestors. These ancestors form his
tradition, are the classic examples on which
his education is based; and from them he takes
the language which they have sought out and
constructed as a means of telling their
adventures to the world. It is by their help
too, very often, that he elucidates for himself
the meaning of the dim perceptions of his
amazed soul. Prom his own experiences he adds
24
A q u in as, Summa T h e o lo g i a e , I , 79, 13-
25I b i d .
2 6
DTA rc y , C o n s c ie n c e , pp. 47— 48.
38
t o t h i s s t o r e ; and h an d s on an e n r i c h e d
t r a d i t i o n o f t h e t r a n s c e n d e n t a l l i f e t o t h g 7
n e x t s p i r i t u a l g e n iu s e v o lv e d by t h e r a c e .
Some o f t h e m y s t i c s , a t t e m p t i n g t o r e a l i z e God i n
t h e i r s o u l s , c la im e d t h a t t h e r e i s a " s p a r k 1 ' a t t h e " a p e x
o f t h e mind" w hich i s " c o n s u b s t a n t i a l w ith t h e u n c r e a t e d
2 8
g ro u n d o f t h e D e i t y . . . " W hile th e b o l d e r m y s t i c s c la im e d
t h a t th e s p a r k i s i t s e l f d i v i n e , o t h e r s c la im e d o n ly t h a t
t h e s p a r k i s s e n s i t i v e t o God, b e in g a p o i n t o f e n t r y f o r
Him i n t o t h e s o u l.
In th e s t r u g g l e t o d e s c r i b e t h i s e x p e r i e n c e ,
th e 's p a r k o f t h e s o u l , ' t h e p o i n t o f j u n c t u r e ,
i s a t one moment p r e s e n t e d t o us as t h e d i v i n e
t o w hich t h e s e l f a t t a i n s : a t a n o t h e r , as t h a t
t r a n s c e n d e n t a l a s p e c t o f t h e s e l f w h ich i s i n
c o n t a c t w ith God. On e i t h e r h y p o t h e s i s , i t i s
h e r e t h a t th e m y s tic e n c o u n t e r s A b s o lu te B ein g .
T h is s p a r k was c a l l e d many n am es, i n c l u d i n g t h e f o l l o w i n g :
" s y n d e r e s i s " ; " p o i n t o f t h e m in d " ; " s c i n t i l l a " ; " s o u l ' s
e s s e n c e " ; " t r u e l i g h t " ; " l i g h t o f t h e s p i r i t " ; and even
" G o d - s e e d " . 3 °
The m y s t i c s g e n e r a l l y c la im e d t h a t t h e s p a r k s h in e s
w i t h i n e ach man, b u t i t h a s t o be c a r e f u l l y te n d e d i n o r
d e r t o grow. Y et we a r e " a l r e a d y p o t e n t i a l l y what God
2 7
E v e ly n U n d e r h i l l , M y s tic is m (New Y ork: The Noon
day P r e s s , 1 9 5 5 ), p . 454.
2. 8
W illia m R alph I n g e , C h r i s t i a n M y s tic is m ( 5 th e d . ;
London: M ethuen 8 c Co. L t d . , 1 9 2 1 ) , p . 7-
29
U n d e r h i l l , M y s tic is m , p. 1 00.
3 o
T h e o lo g ia G e rm a n ic a , t r a n s . by S u sa n n a W inkworth
(New York: P a n th e o n B ooks, I n c . , 1 9 4 9 ) , P* 95.
39
i t e n d s us to become. The command 'Be ye p e r f e c t , ' i s , l i k e
..3 1
all Divine commands, at the same time a promise."
The e a r l i e r m y s tic s r e g a r d e d s y n d e r e s i s as a
" r e s i d u e " o f th e G odlike i n man, o r a rem nant o f th e s i n
l e s s s t a t e b e f o r e th e f a l l ; b u t l a t e r m y s t i c s , such as
M e is t e r E c k h a rt (1260-1329) and W illia m Law (1 6 8 6 -1 7 6 1 ),
r e g a r d e d i t as t h e t r u e e s s e n s e o f th e s o u l — th e immanence
o f God i n man. In I n g e 's o p i n i o n ,
. . . what i s m ost d i s t i n c t i v e i n E c k h a r t Ts e t h i c s
i s th e new im p o rta n c e w hich i s g iv e n t o t h e
d o c t r i n e o f im m anence. The human s o u l i s a
m icro c o sm , w hich in a m anner c o n t a i n s a l l t h i n g s
i n i t s e l f . At t h e 'a p e x o f th e m in d ' t h e r e i s a
D iv in e 's p a r k ' w hich i s so c l o s e l y a k in t o God
t h a t i t i s one w ith Him, and n o t m erely u n i t e d
t o H im .32
Meister Eckhart said,
The s e e d o f God i s i n u s , Given an i n t e l l i g e n t
f a rm e r and a d i l i g e n t f i e l d h a n d , i t w i l l t h r i v e
and grow up t o God whose s e e d i t i s and, a c c o r d i n g
l y , i t s f r u i t w i l l be G o d -n a tU re . P e a r se e d s
grow i n t o p e a r t r e e s ; n u t se e d s i n t o n u t t r e e s ,
and G od-seed i n t o God I 33
... God is closer to the soul than the soul is
to itself and therefore, God is in the soul's
core— God and all the Godhead. 35
To c l a r i f y t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p o f th e s o u l ' s s p a r k to
God, l e t us c o n s i d e r J o s i a h R o y c e 's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f
31I n g e , C h r i s t i a n M y s tic is m , p . 33-
32I b i d , , pp. 1 5 5 -1 5 6 .
3 3M eis'ter E c k h a r t , t r a n s . by Raymond B lak n ey (New
York: H a rp e r 8 c B r o t h e r s P u b l i s h e r s , 19*11), p. 75.
3^I b i d . , p. 22*1.
35I b i d . , p. 215.
40
E c k h a r t :
. . . t h e s o u l o f man f o r E c k h a r t , h a s v a r i o u s
h i g h e r and lo w e r p o w e r s , o r f a c u l t i e s , o f
w h ic h , o f c o u r s e , t h e i n t e l l e c t and t h e w i l l
a r e t h e m o st s i g n i f i c a n t . T h e se s p e c i a l
p o w ers do t h e i r w o rk , an d m u st c o n t i n u e t o do
t h e i r w o rk , s o l o n g as we a r e i n t h e b o d y . What
j o i n s , o r may i n t h e end j o i n t h e s o u l t o God,
i s , h o w e v e r , no one o f t h e s e p o w e r s , b u t t h e
a f o r e s a i d S p a rk o r Glimmer o f t h e s o u l , t h e
F u n k l e i n o r Gan’ s ' t e r , o f w h ic h E c k h a r t o f t e n
s p e a k s . T h i s , I s a y , i s no p o w e r o f t h e s o u l ,
th o u g h i t i s m ean t t o c o r r e s p o n d t o A r i s t o t l e ' s
C r e a t i v e R e a so n . I t i s t h e u n c r e a t e d e s s e n c e
o f o u r c r e a t e d s o u l . Now t h i s F u n k l e i n E c k h a r t
c o n c e i v e s as s o m e th in g e t e r n a l an d i m m o r t a l ,
w h ic h h a s an i n s c r u t a b l e b u t r e a l r e l a t i o n t o
t h e e s s e n c e o f t h e G odhead. T h is S p a rk o f t h e
d i v i n e l i g h t i t i s i n us w h ic h makes us
e t e r n a l l y d i s c o n t e n d w i t h a l l b u t t h e G odhead,
so t h a t w h a t e v e r we know o r d o , i t i s n a u g h t t o
us w h i l s t we s t i l l f i n d o u r s e l v e s o u t o f u n io n
w i t h G o d 's e s s e n c e . 36
H ow ever, E c k h a r t d i d n o t c o n c e i v e t h e s o u l ' s u n io n w i t h t h e
Godhead as an u t t e r a b s o r p t i o n i n w h ic h i n d i v i d u a l i t y i s
l o s t , f o r E c k h a r t b e l i e v e d i n i m m o r t a l i t y . On t h i s p o i n t
Royce ad d s t h e f o l l o w i n g :
. . . E c k h a r t means t h e i n d i v i d u a l s o u l t o be
a b s o r b e d by v i r t u e o f a s e l f - s u r r e n d e r i n t h e
d i v i n e — i . e . , i n t h e c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f t h e
G odhead— b u t n e v e r t o be a b s o r b e d 'i n t o t h e
d i v i n e . 3 7
J u s t a s you c a n n o t b e i n u n i o n w i t h God,
u n l e s s , i n t h e v e r y u n i o n , y o u r e m a in y o u ,
j u s t so y o u r p a s s i v i t y , y o u r s e l f - s u r r e n d e r ,
y o u r w i l l i n g n o t h i n g n e s s , when you a r e
a b s o r b e d i n God, i s s o m e th in g t h a t h a s a l s o
3 6
J o s i a h R o y ce , S t u d i e s o f Good an d E v i l (New Y o rk :
A p p le to n & C o ., 1 9 0 6 ) , p p . 2 8 8 - 2 ^ 9 .
3 7
I b i d . , p. 290.
a v e ry p o s i t i v e a s p e c t . U n le ss y o u r s o u l had
i t s s p e c i a l pow ers i n a d d i t i o n t o t h a t c e n t r a l
S p ark a l r e a d y m e n tio n e d — w e l l , t h e n , you c o u ld
n o t s u r r e n d e r t h e s e p o w e r s . 38
H aving t r a c e d t h e m a jo r d e v e lo p m e n ts o f t h e n o t i o n
o f s y n d e r e s i s , l e t us t u r n t o t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f s i m i l a r
i d e a s i n K a n t 's w ork. K a n t, who h ad t h e cu sto m a ry c l a s s i
c a l t r a i n i n g , o c c a s i o n a l l y q u o te d from t h e Greek and L a t i n
p h i l o s o p h e r s . He was f a m i l i a r w ith D iogenes L a e r t i u s '
3 9
L iv e s and O p in io n s o f t h e E m in e n t 'P h i l o s o p h e r s . Kant
d e s c r i b e d t h e e t h i c a l s y ste m s o f t h e a n c i e n t s , i n c l u d i n g
i+ o
Zeno Of C itium (336-264 B . C . ) . H owever, Kant made no
m e n tio n o f Z en o ’ s b e l i e f t h a t t h e human s o u l i s a d e ta c h e d
p i e c e o f th e d i v i n e a c t i v a t i n g f i r e , n o r d i d he r e f e r t o
4 1
Z e n o 's te rm s y n e i d e s i s , w hich came to b e t r a n s l a t e d as
" c o n s c i e n c e ."
In h i s e a r l i e r l e c t u r e s on e t h i c s ( g iv e n from 1775
to 1 7 8 0 ), Kant u s e d t h e te r m h a b i t u s t o d e s c r i b e t h e r e s u l t
o f c o n d i t i o n i n g a c h i l d so as t o d e v e lo p a h a b i t o f a b h o r -
42
r e n c e o f v i c e . He d e s c r i b e d c o n s c i e n c e as an i n s t i n c t ,
38I b i d . , p . 291.
39
K a n t, L e c t u r e s on E t h i c s , p . 9*
h 0I b i d . , p . 7.
4 1
Zeno i n v e n t e d t h e te rm a c c o r d i n g t o Geddes Mac
G re g o r, I n't r o d u c t i on t o R e l i g i o u s 'P h ilo s o p h y (B o s to n :
H oughton M i f f l i n C o ., 1959Tj P* 133-
4 - 2
K an t, L e c t u r e s on E t h i c s , p . 46.
42
4 3
n o t a mere f a c u l t y . C o n scien ce c a n n o t be d e c e iv e d n o r
e s c a p e d , b e c a u s e , " l i k e th e d i v i n e o m n ip re s e n c e , i t i s
alw ays w ith u s . " 44
Many have a rg u e d t h a t c o n s c ie n c e i s a work
o f a r t and e d u c a t i o n , and t h a t i t ju d g e s and
s e n te n c e s by f o r c e o f h a b i t ; b u t i f t h i s were
th e c a s e , men w ith a c o n s c ie n c e n o t so
t u t o r e d and p r a c t i s e d c o u ld e s c a p e th e s t i n g s
o f c o n s c ie n c e ; t h e r e a r e , h o w ev er, no c a s e s o f
t h i s . 4 5
Whereas e m p iric is m c o n s i d e r s m oral n o t i o n s as im p o rts i n t o
man by e d u c a t i o n and cu sto m , Kant c la im e d t h a t th e m oral
law i s i n n a t e i n human n a t u r e . As L eo n h ard S t a h l i n , i n
a g reem en t w ith K an t, p u t i t , "This m o ra l f e e l i n g may be
m is le d o r n e g l e c t e d , and, as a c o n s e q u e n c e , d e g e n e r a t e o r
become a t r o p h i e d ; b u t n e v e r can i t be im p o rte d i n t o man
from w i t h o u t ; i t can only b e awakened and d e v e lo p e d i n him
4 6
so f a r as i t i s a l r e a d y a p a r t o f h i s n a t u r e . "
In K a n t' s R e l i g i o n W ith in t h e L im its' o f Reason
A lo n e , t h e r e i s e v id e n c e t h a t he was p r o b a b ly f a m i l i a r w ith
t h e c o n c e p t o f s y n d e r e s i s , i f n o t th e word. In t h a t w ork,
he used th e e x p r e s s i o n " se e d o f g o o d n e ss" f r e q u e n t l y and
c la im e d t h a t i t must have a d i v i n e o r i g i n . He d e s c r i b e d i t
43I b i d . , p . 129.
44I b i d . , p . 133-
4 5
I b i d .
4 6
L e o n h ard S t a h l i n , K a n t, L o t z e , and R i t c h i , t r a n s .
by D. W . Simon (E d in b u rg h : T. & T. C l a r k , 1 8 8 9 ) p. 73.
43
as an i n n a t e o r i g i n a l p r e d i s p o s i t i o n t o good i n man, and
c l a r i f i e d i t i n su c h a way a s t o l e a v e l i t t l e d o u b t a b o u t
w hat he was d e s c r i b i n g .
. . . d e s p i t e t h e f a l l , t h e i n j u n c t i o n t h a t we
o u g h t t o become b e t t e r men r e s o u n d s u n a b a t e d l y
i n o u r s o u l s ; h e n c e t h i s m u st b e w i t h i n o u r
p o w e r, ev en th o u g h w hat we a r e a b l e t o do i s i n
i t s e l f i n a d e q u a t e and th o u g h we t h e r e b y o n ly
r e n d e r o u r s e l v e s s u s c e p t i b l e o f h i g h e r , and f o r
us i n s c r u t a b l e , a s s i s t a n c e . I t m ust i n d e e d be
p r e s u p p o s e d t h r o u g h o u t t h a t a s e e d o f g o o d n e ss
s t i l l re m a in s i n i t s e n t i r e p u r i t y , i n c a p a b l e
o f b e i n g e x t r i c a t e d o r c o r r u p t e d . . . . 47
. . . t h e r e i s one t h i n g i n o u r s o u l w h ich we
c a n n o t c e a s e fro m r e g a r d i n g w i t h t h e h i g h e s t
w o n d e r, when we view i t p r o p e r l y , and f o r w hich
a d m i r a t i o n i s n o t o n ly l e g i t i m a t e b u t even
e x a l t i n g , and t h a t i s t h e o r i g i n a l m o ra l p r e
d i s p o s i t i o n i t s e l f i n u s . . . a n d t h e v e r y in c o m p re
h e n s i b i l i t y o f t h i s p r e d i s p o s i t i o n , w h ich
a n n o u n c e s a d i v i n e o r i g i n , a c t s p e r f o r c e upon
t h e s p i r i t e v e n t o t h e p o i n t o f e x a l t a t i o n ,
and s t r e n g t h e n s i t f o r w h a t e v e r s a c r i f i c e a
m a n 's r e s p e c t f o r h i s d u ty may demand o f h i m . 48
The s e e d o f g o o d n e ss i s p r e s e n t i n man a t b i r t h ,
4- 9
th o u g h b i r t h n e e d n o t be t h e c a u s e o f i t . Y et man i s f r e e
and m o r a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e b e c a u s e t h e r e i s a l s o i n human
n a t u r e a " p r o p e n s i t y " t o e v i l , a p r o p e n s i t y t o a llo w t h e
maxim o f s e l f - l o v e t o d o m in a te t h e m o ra l law .
A p r o p e n s i t y i s d i s t i n g u i s h e d fro m a
p r e d i s p o s i t i o n by t h e f a c t t h a t a l t h o u g h i t
can i n d e e d be i n n a t e , i t o u g h t n o t t o be
47K a n t, R e l i g i o n , p p . 4 0 - 4 l ,
k 8I b i d . , p p . 4 4 -4 5 .
^ 9I b i d . , p . 17•
44
represented merely thus; for it can also
be regarded as having been acquired (if it
is good), or' brought by man upon h'im's elf
(if it is evil )p o _ l
Man cannot repudiate the moral law which forces it
self on him by virtue of his moral predisposition. 51 The
moral predisposition gives man the capacity to respect the
5 2
moral law as in itself a sufficient incentive of the will.
If no other incentive worked in opposition, man would
adopt the moral law as his maxim, but man also depends on
the incentives of his sensuous nature and has the propensi
ty to adopt the principle of self-love as his maxim. Man
naturally adopts both principles into his maxim but freely
wills to subordinate one to the other.
Hence the distinction between a good man and
one who is evil cannot lie in the difference
between the incentives which they adopt Into
their maxim (not in the content of the maxim),
but rather must depend upon subordination (the
form of the maxim), i.e., which of the two
incentives he makes the condition of the other.
Consequently, man ("even the best) is evil only
in that he reverses the moral order of the
incentives when he adopts them into his maxim.
He adopts, indeed, the moral law along with the
law of self-love. . . . 53
Man himself must make or have made himself
into whatever, in a moral sense, whether
good or evil, he is or is to become. Either
condition must be an effect of his free choice;
5 0
Ibid. ,
P-
24.
5 1
Ibid.,
P*
I—1
C O
52
Ibid.,
P-
23.
53
Ibid. ,
P • 31.
45
f o r o t h e r w i s e he c o u ld n o t be h e l d r e s p o n s i b l e
f o r i t and c o u ld t h e r e f o r e be m o ra lly n e i t h e r
good n o r e v i l . When i t i s s a i d , Man i s
c r e a t e d g o o d , t h i s can mean n o th in g more th a n :
He i s c r e a t e d f o r good and th e o r i g i n a l p r e
d i s p o s i t i o n in man i s good; n o t t h a t , th e r e b y
he i s a l r e a d y a c t u a l l y good, b u t r a t h e r t h a t
he b r in g s i t ab o u t t h a t he becomes good o r
e v i l , a c c o r d in g t o w h e th e r he a d o p ts o r does
n o t adopt i n t o h i s maxim t h e i n c e n t i v e s which
t h i s p r e d i s p o s i t i o n c a r r i e s w ith i t . . . . 54
Kant b e l i e v e d t h a t i f a man commits h i m s e l f , by a
s i n g l e u n c h a n g e a b le d e c i s i o n , t o ad o p t t h e m o ra l law as h i s
h i g h e s t maxim and become a m o ra lly good man ( p l e a s i n g t o
G od), th e n he must e x p e r i e n c e a s p i r i t u a l " r e v o l u t i o n " and
become a new man by a k in d o f " r e b i r t h " and a change o f
5 5
h e a r t . Only by a d o p t i n g th e m o ra l d i s p o s i t i o n can we hope
" to become th e sons o f G o d ." 56 I f we a d o p t th e m oral d i s
p o s i t i o n th e n we may have f a i t h t h a t G od's g ra c e w i l l h e l p
5 7
us .
Kant was g e n e r a l l y c r i t i c a l o f m y s tic is m b e c a u s e he
f e a r e d t h a t i t w ould le a d t o f a n a t i c i s m and c la im s o f im
m e d ia te s u p e r s e n s i b l e e x p e r i e n c e s , which a r e h in d r a n c e s to
5 8
m oral f a i t h . M y s tic is m , w hich c la im s a c t u a l e x p e r ie n c e o f
’ th e s u p e r s e n s i b l e , can n e v e r c o n s t i t u t e a l a s t i n g c o n d i t i o n
o f any g r e a t number o f p e o p l e , K ant c la im e d , b e c a u s e i t i s
5 1 1 I b i d . , p . 40.
55I b i d . , p . 43.
5 6 ,
I b i d . , p . 54. Kant c i t e s John I , 12.
57See a b o v e ,p p . 2 1 -2 2 .
58
See ab o v e, p p . 24 -2 5 - A lso see b e lo w , p . 110,
46
n o t a g r e e a b l e t o common h a b i t s o f t h o u g h t t o s t r a i n t h e
5 9
i m a g i n a t i o n t o s u p e r s e n s i b l e i n t u i t i o n . Thus m y s t i c i s m i s
n o t a g r e a t d a n g e r t o m o r a l i t y , and i n f a c t i t can b e r e -
6 o
c o n c i l e d w i t h t h e m o ra l la w . K ant f i n a l l y came t o t h e
view ( in t h e Opus Postum um ) t h a t t h e m o r a l e x p e r i e n c e i t s e l f
6 l
i s t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f th e D i v i n e . " G o tt muss n i c h t a l s
S u b s ta n z a u s s e r m ir v o r g e s t e l l t w e r d e n , s o n d e r n a l s d as
6 2
h o c h s t e m o r a l i s c h e P r i n c i p i n m i r . " " G o tt i s t n i c h t e in e
S u b s ta n z s o n d e rn d i e p e r s o n i f i c i r t e I d e e des R e c h ts und
W o h lw o lle n s . . . "6 3
A p p a r e n t l y , Kant b e l i e v e d t h a t i n t h i s i d e n t i f i c a
t i o n o f God w ith t h e m o ra l law h e had r e c o n c i l e d t h e r e
l i g i o u s h u n g e r f o r a p r e s e n t o b j e c t o f w o r s h ip w ith t h e
r e j e c t i o n o f t h e i d o l a t r o u s e f f o r t to p e r c e i v e God by t h e
5 9 .
K a n t, P r a c t i c a l R e a so n , p . 163-
6 0 — . . ,
I b i d .
6 1
The q u e s t i o n w h e th e r K ant r e j e c t e d h i s m o ra l
arg u m en t as t h e r e s u l t o f t h i s n o t i o n o f d i v i n e immanence
i s d i s c u s s e d by G. A. S c h r a d e r i n " K a n t 's P resum ed R ep u d ia-i
t i o n o f t h e 'M o ra l A rg u m en t' I n t h e Opus Postumum"’
P h i l o s o p h y , Vol.XXVI, 1951.
6 2
Im m anuel K a n t, Opus Postumum i n G esam m elte
S c h r i f t e n , P r e u s s i s c h e n Akademie d e r W i s s e n s c h a f t e n
( B e r l i n : W a l t e r de G r u n te r & C o ., 1 9 3 6 ) , V ol. XXI, p . 144.
6 3 I b i d .. , V o l. X X II, p . 1 0 8 . " P e r s o n i f i c i r t e " seem s
t o b e an o l d e r fo rm o f " p e r s o n i f i z i e r e n "
47
s e n s e s . However, as Geddes M acGregor w a r n s , t h e r e a r e
s u b t l e form s o f I d o l a t r y , and one may f a l l I n t o th e
64
t e m p t a t i o n o f i d o l i z i n g w hat i s o n ly n e a r God. The lo v e
o f r i g h t a c t i o n can be a s t e p t o t h e e n c o u n t e r w ith God;
b u t i t a l s o can be an o b s t a c l e t o t h a t e n c o u n t e r i f lo v e o f
6 5
go o d n ess becomes "m oralism V
. . . th e r e l i g i o u s man w ould a c c o u n t i d o l a t r o u s
any a tte m p t t o p u t an e t h i c a l c o n c e rn o r p r i n c i p l e
o r i d e a l a t t h e summit o f h i s e x p e r i e n c e o r th e
c e n t e r o f h i s l i f e . He w ould i n s i s t t h a t even
e t h i c a l c o n d u c t, v i t a l th o u g h i t i n d u b i t a b l y i s
f o r th e l i f e o f r e l i g i o n , m ust n e v e r t a k e t h e
p l a c e o f God. 6 6
C o n c e rn in g K a n t’ s u s u a l d i s t r u s t o f t h e i d e a o f
d i v i n e immanence , T h eo d o re G reene s t a t e d t h e f o l l o w i n g :
. . . th e d o c t r i n e o f an im m anent S p i r i t ,
d w e l l i n g i n t h e h e a r t s and m inds o f men, had
s a v o re d to o much o f t h e m y s t i c i s m o f w hich he
was a l i f e - l o n g enemy. One n e e d e d b u t go a
s t e p f u r t h e r and ad m it t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f b e in g
im m e d ia te ly c o n s c io u s o f t h i s i n d w e l l i n g S p i r i t ,
he had f e l t , t o b e e n s n a r e d i n t h e c o i l s o f t h e
d o c t r i n e o f t h e I n n e r L i g h t — a d o c t r i n e f o r
w hich he e n t e r t a i n e d n o t h i n g b u t s u s p i c i o n and
c o n te m p t. 6 7
G reene f u r t h e r c o n te n d s t h a t Kant was " so a n x io u s t o m ain
t a i n t h a t t h e m o ra l law i s m an’s own law t h a t he c o u ld n o t
6 4
Geddes M acG regor, I r itr 'o d u c tio n t o R e l i g i o u s
P h i l o s o p h y , p . 224.
6 5I b i d . , p. 249.
66
Geddes M acG regor, ■ P h ilo so p h ic a l' I s s u e s i n R e l i
g i o u s T hought (B o s to n : H oughton M i f f l i n Co. , 1973) 5 p~ 417.
6 7
K a n t, R e l i g i o n , p . l x v i i .
48
s e r i o u s l y e n t e r t a i n t h e i d e a o f i t s b e i n g , i n i t s v e ry e s -
6 8
s e n c e , t h e v o ic e o f God."
In o p p o s i t i o n t o G re e n e ’s o p i n i o n s , t h e r e i s a
p a s s a g e from Kant w hich s a y s t h a t "m y s tic is m i s q u i t e r e
c o n c i l a b l e w ith t h e p u r i t y and s u b l i m i t y o f t h e m oral
T II 6 9
l a w . ..
A p o s s i b l e c r i t i c i s m o f th e view t h a t Kant b e
l i e v e d t h a t th e m o ra l law i s d i v i n e l y im p la n te d i n man i s
c o n ta in e d i n a l e t t e r w r i t t e n by Kant t o Marcus Herz i n
1772. I n t h i s l e t t e r Kant was c r i t i c a l o f m o r a l i s t s (su ch
as C r u s iu s ) who h e l d t h a t b a s i c m o ra l law s a re im p la n te d i n
man by God, b e c a u s e th e y e n c o u ra g e " a l l s o r t s o f w ild
7 0
n o t i o n s and e v e ry p io u s and s p e c u l a t i v e b r a i n s t o r m . "
C ru siu s b e l i e v e d i n c e r t a i n im p la n te d r u l e s
f o r t h e p u rp o s e o f fo rm in g jud g m en ts and
ready-m ade c o n c e p ts t h a t God im p la n te d in
t h e human s o u l j u s t as th e y h ad t o be i n
o r d e r to h a rm o n iz e w ith t h i n g s . 71
The r e l a t i v e l y e a r l y d a t e o f t h i s l e t t e r s u g g e s ts t h a t
Kant had n o t y e t g iv e n t h e i s s u e s u f f i c i e n t th o u g h t. His
m atu re w r i t i n g s make p o s s i b l e t h e c la im t h a t he changed
h i s view and a d o p te d a n o t i o n s i m i l a r to t h e one h e ld by
C r u s i u s .
6 8
I b i d .
69
K an t, P r a c t i c a l R e a s o n , p . 163.
70
K an t, P h i l o s o p h i c a l 'C o r r e s p o n d e n c e , p. 73*
71I b i d . , pp. 72-73.
49
The e v i d e n c e i n t h i s c h a p t e r makes p l a u s i b l e t h e
view t h a t K a n t 's c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e m o ra l law c o n t a i n s t h e
n o t i o n o f s y n d e r e s i s . H is n o t i o n t h a t t h e r e i s i n o u r s o u l
a d i v i n e l y o r i g i n a t e d " s e e d o f g o o d n e s s " t h r o u g h w h ic h we
may a c h i e v e a s p i r i t u a l r e b i r t h c e r t a i n l y r e s e m b l e s t h e
i d e a o f s y n d e r e s i s i n many w ay s. A l s o , we may s p e c u l a t e
t h a t t h i s i d e a o f t h e " s e e d o f g o o d n e s s " w h ic h we m u st
7 2
r e g a r d " w ith t h e h i g h e s t w o n d e r " may h a v e l e d K ant t o
d e v e lo p h i s view t h a t t h e m o ra l law i s God, s i n c e He i s t h e
h i g h e s t w o n d e r. K ant d i d n o t c l a i m t h a t we m u st r e g a r d t h e
" s e e d o f g o o d n e s s" ' as_ t h e h i g h e s t w o n d e r , n o r d i d h e c l a i m
t h a t i t is_ t h e h i g h e s t w o n d e r. Y et t o sa y t h a t we m u st
r e g a r d i t w i t h t h e h i g h e s t w o n d e r s u g g e s t s t h a t i t may be
so c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o t h e d i v i n e t h a t f o r p r a c t i c a l p u r
p o s e s t h i s " s e e d o f g o o d n e s s " ( a l o n g w i t h t h e m o r a l law
w h ic h i t r e s p e c t s ) may b e c o n s i d e r e d God.
L e t us t u r n o u r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e l a t e r d e v e lo p m e n ts
o f t h e m o ra l a r g u m e n t.
72
K a n t, R e l i g i o n , p . 4 4 . E m p h a sis m in e .
IV. DEVELOPMENT OF KANT’S MORAL ARGUMENT BY
THE POST-KANTIANS PRIOR TO THE
BRITISH PERSONAL IDEALISTS
The c r i t i c a l p h i lo s o p h y o f Kant l e d t o a group o f
i d e a l i s t sy ste m s o f th o u g h t i n Germany i n t h e f i r s t h a l f o f
t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y . Each o f t h e s e s y ste m s a t t e m p t e d to
a c h ie v e a u n i f i e d c o n c e p t o f r e a l i t y as a w h o le . T h is
m eant t h a t t h e K a n tia n n o t i o n o f t h e unknow able t h i n g - i n -
i t s e l f h ad t o be e l i m i n a t e d . I f t h e t h i n g - i n - i t s e l f i s
e l i m i n a t e d from K a n t 's p h i l o s o p h y , h i s t h e o r y becomes
i d e a l i s m , w hich means t h a t t h i n g s h av e no i n d e p e n d e n t
e x i s t e n c e a p a r t from t h o u g h t . S in c e t h e w o rld t h a t con
f r o n t s one i s n o t o f o n e 's own s o l i p s i s t i c m ak in g , i d e a l i s m :
l e a d s beyond f i n i t e m inds t o an A b s o lu te Mind. !
K a n t 's s u c c e s s o r s w ere a l s o i n f l u e n c e d by h i s
n o t i o n o f th e im p o ran c e o f p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n , and s e v e r a l o f ;
them view ed th e A b s o lu te as a God who c r e a t e s t h e w o rld as
a p l a c e f o r m o ra l t r a i n i n g . S in c e t h i s p u r p o s i v e p r o c e s s
i s i n t e l l i g i b l e t o human m in d s, t h e human mind can r e g a r d
i t s e l f as a m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h e A b s o lu te Mind. P e rh a p s
f
j
t h e human mind i s a m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h e A b s o lu te r e f l e c t i n g '
on i t s e l f . But t h i s n o t i o n p o s e s th e p ro b le m o f how to
a c c o u n t f o r t h e f i n i t e mind w i t h i n t h e I n f i n i t e M ind,
50
51
w ith o u t d e p r i v in g e i t h e r o f i t s u n iq u e r e a l i t y .
One o f th e f i r s t German t h i n k e r s to r e a c t t o K a n t's
m o ral argum ent was F r i e d r i c h H e i n r i c h J a c o b i (1 7 ^ 5 -1 8 1 9 ),
who h e l d t h a t th e a tte m p t t o p ro v e G od's e x i s t e n c e by
l i m i t e d human r e a s o n i s e q u i v a l e n t t o t r y i n g to re d u c e God
t o a c o n d i t i o n a l b e i n g . 1 The b a s i s o f f a i t h i s t h e im
m e d ia te i n t u i t i o n o f s u p e r s e n s i b l e r e a l i t y . God m ust be
known d i r e c t l y by b e in g b o rn in man, so t h a t man i s a b le
2
t o f e e l God as he f e e l s h i m s e l f .
And s o , I r e s t a t e , God h a s t o be b o rn i n t h e
human b e in g h i m s e l f i f t h e human s h o u ld have
a l i v i n g God— n o t a mere im age; He must be
humanly b o rn i n man, f o r o th e r w is e t h e human
would have no s e n s e o f Him. 3
H ence, J a c o b i r e j e c t e d what he f e l t was th e empty fo rm a lism
o f K a n t's th e o r y o f t h e c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e , and w ith i t
t h e th e o r y o f th e p o s t u l a t e s o f p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n .^
F r i e d r i c h H e in r ic h J a c o b i , Werke ( L e i p z i g : G e r h a r d .
F l e i s c h e r , l 8l 6 ) , v o l . I I , p . 28^.
2I b i d . , v o l . I l l , p. 279-
3
I b i d . The above i s my t r a n s l a t i o n ■o f th e f o ll o w i n g
"Und so m uss, i c h w ie d e r h o le e s , G ott im Menschen s e l b s t
g eb o h re n w erd en , wenn d e r Mensch e in e n le b e n d ig e n G o tt—
n i c h t b io s e in e n G otzen— haben s o i l ; E r muss m e n s c h lic h i n '
ihm geb o h ren w erd e n , w e il d e r Mensch s o n s t k e in e n S in n f u r ;
ih n h a t t e . "
A. W . C raw ford, The P h ilo s o p h y o f F. H. J a c o b i
(New York: The M acm illan Co. , 1 9 0 5 ), PP • 3^— 35•
52
K a n t ’ s n o t i o n o f t h e j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f f a i t h i n t h e
name o f p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n was d e v e l o p e d by J o h a n n G o t t l i e b
F i c h t e ( 1 7 6 2 - 1 8 1 4 ) , who w ro te a work t i t l e d E s s a y to w a rd s
a C r i t i q u e o f a l l R e v e l a t i o n i n 1792. I n t h e e s s a y h e
a rg u e d t h a t t h e i d e a o f t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f a m o ra l law
n e c e s s i t a t e s b e l i e f i n God* n o t o n ly a s th e f o r c e n e e d e d t o
s y n t h e s i z e v i r t u e an d h a p p i n e s s , b u t a l s o as t h e em bodim ent
o f t h e m o ra l i d e a l . To F i c h t e , t h e m o ra l o r d e r i s i t s e l f
God. " J e n e l e b e n d i g e und w ir k e n d e m o r a l i s c h e O rdnung i s t
s e l b s t G o t t ; w i r b e d u r f e n k e i n e s a n d e r n G o t t e s , und konnen
5
k e in e n a n d e rn f a s s e n .'1
I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o n o t e t h a t i t was n o t t h e
t h e o r e t i c a l p a r t o f K a n t 's work t h a t a t t r a c t e d F i c h t e : i t
was t h e p r a c t i c a l p a r t t h a t s t i r r e d h i s h e a r t . U n t i l
F i c h t e s t u d i e d K a n t 's i d e a s ( i n 1 7 9 0 ) , h e h a d b een
e n t a n g l e d i n d e t e r m i n i s m , from w h ich K ant r e s c u e d h im ,
a c c o r d i n g t o C h a r l e s E v e r e t t .
I n 1800 F i c h t e p u b l i s h e d The 'V o c a tio n o f Man I n
w hich h e d e s c r i b e d t h e s p i r i t u a l v i s i o n g iv e n him by t h e
m o ra l la w . The s p i r i t u a l v i s i o n r e v e a l s t h e p r o s p e c t o f
a n o t h e r w o r l d , b e t t e r t h a n t h a t w h ic h i s p r e s e n t t o t h e
5
J o h a n n F i c h t e , S a m m tlic h e W erk e, ed . b y I . H.
F i c h t e ( B e r l i n : 1 8 4 5 ) , v o l . v , p . 186.
6
C h a r le s C. E v e r e t t , F i c h t e ’ s S c ie n c e o f K n o w led g e,
(C h ic a g o : S. C. G rig g s a n d C o ., 1892 ) , p . 8 .
53
7
p h y s i c a l e y e . But one n e e d n o t be s e v e r e d fro m t h e t e r
r e s t r i a l w o rld b e f o r e a d m is s io n can be o b t a i n e d i n t o th e
8
e t e r n a l l i f e . Heaven does n o t l i e beyond t h e g r a v e . I t s
9
l i g h t a r i s e s i n e v e ry p u re h e a r t . T h is s p i r i t u a l re a lm
a lo n e g iv e s l i f e s i g n i f i c a n c e , p u r p o s e , and v a l u e . 10 One
may assume o t h e r form s i n f u t u r e l i v e s , b u t t h e s p i r i t u a l
l i f e i s now p r e s e n t an d c a n n o t be any more p r e s e n t i n any
o t h e r o f o u r f i n i t e e x i s t e n c e s th a n a t t h i s m om ent. 11 The
e t e r n a l l i f e i s a t t a i n e d by r e n o u n c i n g a l l b u t t h e m o ra l
1 2
law . When God has p ro v e d us r e a d y f o r o u r n e x t v o c a t i o n ,
t h e n , by t h a t w hich we c a l l d e a t h , God w i l l i n t r o d u c e us t o
1 3
a new l i f e , t h e p r o d u c t o f o u r v i r t u o u s a c t i o n s . The
h o u r o f d e a th i s th e h o u r o f b i r t h t o a new more e x c e l l e n t
l i f e . W hile we mourn f o r one who d i e s h e r e b e lo w , t h e r e i s
7
Jo h an n G o t t l i e b F i c h t e , The V o c a tio n o f Man, t r a n s .
by W illia m S m ith (C h ic a g o : The Open C o u rt P u b l i s h i n g C o .,
1906 ) , p . 113 .
8I b i d . , p . 134.
9I b i d .
1 0
I b i d . , p. l 4 l .
11
I b i d .
12I b i d . , p . 145.
13Ib id . , p . 158.
r e j o i c i n g above b e cau se a man is. born i n t o t h a t w orld ,' j u s t
l 4
as we r e j o i c e when we' r e c e i v e t h o s e b o rn u n to u s .
F r i e d r i c h S c h le ie rm a c h e r (1 7 8 8 -1 8 3 4 ), in c o n t r a s t
t o K ant, a t t a c h e d v a lu e t o th e f e e l i n g elem en t i n r e l i g i o n .
He hoped t h e r e b y to j u s t i f y r e l i g i o n in d e p e n d e n tly o f the
m oral elem ent i n i t . He s t r e s s e d t h a t r e l i g i o u s f a i t h i s
th e f e e l i n g o f dependence on God.
Georg W ilhelm F r i e d r i c h H egel (1 7 7 0 -1 8 3 1 ), though
g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d by K a n t's p h i l o s o p h y , made no p a r t i c u l a r
u se o f K a n t's m oral argum ent. He had no need f o r i t o r f o r
a p r o o f f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God. The H e g e lia n system de
pends on th e n o tio n t h a t God i s B e in g , th e n a t u r e o f which
i s r e v e a le d i n dynamic l o g i c . The H e g e lia n sy stem i s a
p h ilo s o p h y o f th e A b so lu te i n w hich th e r e a l i t y o f th e
l 5
i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l i t y i s a b s o rb e d .
The s i g n i f i c a n c e o f i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l i t y was
em phasized by Immanuel Hermann von F i c h t e (1796-1879) who
opposed what he c o n s id e re d th e a b s o r p t i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l
by th e A b so lu te in H e g e l 's p h ilo s o p h y . Such a b s o r p t i o n
makes f i n i t e p e r s o n a l i t i e s m erely so many moments i n th e
A b s o lu te , w hereas F i c h t e b e l i e v e d t h a t th e m o ral d e v e lo p -
1 6
ment o f p e r s o n a l i t y i s th e g o a l o f c r e a t i o n .
1^I b i d . , pp. 175-176.
15See below , p . 76 .
1 F r e d e r i c k C o p le s to n , A H i s to r y o f P h i l o s o p h y ,
Image Books (New York: The Newman P re s s ,l 9 o A ) , V ol..V II/I ,p . 24
55
R u d o l f Hermann L o tz e ( I 8 l 7 - l 8 8 l ) was e s p e c i a l l y
i n f l u e n c e d by t h e m o ra l a rg u m e n t. He r e g a r d e d v a l u e s as
t h e c lu e t o t h e m ean in g o f e x i s t e n c e . He c la im e d t h a t t h e
p r a c t i c a l a n d t h e o r e t i c a l s p h e r e s a r e s e p a r a t e , and t h a t
th e g u l f b e tw e e n s p i r i t an d n a t u r e i s w id e and d e e p . I t i
n e c e s s a r y t o draw a t t e n t i o n to t h i s g u l f i n o r d e r t o
c l a r i f y t h e n a t u r e o f m a n 's s p i r i t u a l l i f e . N a tu r e does
n o t r u l e p e r s o n a l i t y . I t i s i n s p i r i t u a l l i f e t h a t p e r -
1 7
s o n a l i t y i s b u i l t up i n t h e medium o f v a l u e .
In L o t z e ' s v ie w , t h e h i g h e s t t h i n g i n o u r
e x p e r i e n c e i s t h e human s p i r i t , w h ich m ust be c o n c e iv e d as
t h e e x p r e s s i o n o f God. We m ust t h i n k o f God as e x p r e s s i n g
H im s e lf f o r t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f v a l u e s and m o ra l i d e a l s .
In f a c t , o u r b e l i e f i n G o d 's e x i s t e n c e r e s t s on o u r m o ra l
e x p e r i e n c e : " . . . G o d i s n o t h i n g e l s e th a n t h a t W i l l whose
c o n t e n t and modes o f p r o c e d u r e a r e com prehended i n o u r r e -
1 8
f l e c t i o n as t h e ' i n t r i n s i c a l l y Good' : . . . "
T h e re i s an " o b l i g a t o r y m a j e s t y " i n e t h i c a l com
m ands, L o tz e c o n t e n d e d , t h a t makes them a b s o l u t e l y c e r t a i n
l 9
n e e d in g no d e r i v a t i o n fro m any o t h e r s o u r c e . I n r e s p o n s e
17 /
E. E. Thom as, L o t z e ' s T h eo ry o f R e a l i t y (London:
Longmans, G re e n , an d C o ., 1 9 2 1 ) , p p . 2 1 3 -2 1 4 .
18
Hermann L o t z e , O u t l i n e s o f t h e P h il o s o p h y o f
R e l i g i o n , t r a n s . e d i t e d by George Ladd ( B o s to n : Ginn and
C o . , 1 8 8 6 ) , p . 139-
19I b i d . , p. 100.
56
t o t h e q u e s t i o n w h e th e r an a c t i s r i g h t b e c a u s e God s a y s
i t i s , o r God s a y s i t i s r i g h t b e c a u s e i t i s r i g h t , L o tz e
an sw ered t h a t th e w i l l o f God n e i t h e r f o llo w s from n o r
p r e c e d e s H is n a t u r e — j u s t an i n m o tio n , n e i t h e r d i r e c t i o n
20
n o r v e l o c i t y can be a n t e c e d e n t o r s u b s e q u e n t.
L o t z e ’s p h ilo s o p h y o f v a l u e s (w hich depends h e a v i
l y on K a n t 's n o t i o n s ) was v e ry i n f l u e n t i a l , b o th i n E ngland
and A m erica. C a rre s t a t e d t h a t " L o t z e 's i n f l u e n c e p e r
su a d e d t h i n k e r s t o r e t u r n from th e p o s i t i o n o f H egel t o an
2 1
o u t l o o k n e a r e r t o t h a t o f K a n t."
L e t us t u r n o u r a t t e n t i o n t o t h e B r i t i s h s u c c e s
s o r s o f K ant. There a re two m ain t h e o r i e s t h a t a tte m p t to
e x p l a i n t h e aw akening o f i d e a l i s m i n E n g la n d d u r in g t h e
n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y . Some h i s t o r i a n s o f p h ilo s o p h y ( th e
m ost n o t a b l e b e in g John H. M uirhead) c o n te n d t h a t th e
B r i t i s h i d e a l i s m o f t h e n i n e t e e n t h c e n tu r y was t h e p r o d u c t
o f n a t i v e E n g l i s h g e n iu s p o s s e s s e d o f a P l a t o n i c t r a d i t i o n ,
r a t h e r th a n th e develo p m en t o f im p o rte d German t h o u g h t .
In th is - v ie w , B r i t i s h i d e a l i s m i s s e e n as t h e i n h e r i t a n c e
o f th e P l a t o n i c t r a d i t i o n e s t a b l i s h e d by R alph Cudworth
20
I b i d . , p . 139•
21 .
M eyrich H. C a r r e , Phas'es o f Thought i n E n g lan d
(O x fo rd : C laren d o n P r e s s , 1 9 ^ 9 ), p . 3^3-
57
2 2
( 1 6 1 7 -1 6 8 8 ) a t C am bridge i n t h e s e v e n t e e n t h c e n t u r y .
A c c o r d in g t o M u ir h e a d , t h e P l a t o n i c t r a d i t i o n (w h ic h e x
h a u s t e d i t s e l f a t C am bridge by 1 6 8 0 ) was c a r r i e d i n t o t h e
e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y by two O x fo rd w r i t e r s : J o h n N o r r i s
(1 6 5 7 -1 7 1 1 ) an d A r t h u r C o l l i e r ( 1 6 8 0 - 1 7 3 2 ) . B ut t h e s e two
men w ere o v e rsh a d o w e d by t h e g r e a t e r fame o f J o h n Locke
(1632- 170 A) a n d G eorge B e r k e l e y (1685 - 1 753 ) . I n t h e n i n e
t e e n t h c e n t u r y Sam uel T a y l o r C o l e r i d g e ( 1 7 7 2 -1 8 3 4 ) p a s s e d
on t h e P l a t o n i c t r a d i t i o n t h a t n o u r i s h e d h i s m ind a t l e a s t
as much as t h e German w r i t e r s d i d .
I t was from t h e n e o - P l a t o n i s t s t h a t C o l e r i d g e
g o t h i s f i r s t s i g h t o f a w i d e r w o r l d t h a n t h a t
o f Locke o r H a r t l e y , and h e p r o b a b l y owed n o t
l e s s t o C u d w o rth , J o h n S m ith , an d H enry More
t h a n t o K a n t, F i c h t e , and S c h e l l i n g . 3
C o l e r i d g e c la im e d t h a t a l l t h e e l e m e n t s o f h i s p h i l o s o p h y
w e re i n e x i s t e n c e by t h e t i m e he r e a d t h e w o rk o f t h e
2 4
German p h i l o s o p h e r s .
A c c o r d in g t o M u ir h e a d , t h e i d e a l i s t i c r e v i v a l o f
t h e g e n e r a t i o n a f t e r C o l e r i d g e owed l i t t l e t o K ant o r
2 5
H e g e l; i t s s o u r c e was P l a t o , C u d w o rth , an d B e r k e l e y .
22
M u irh e a d , The P l a t o n i c T r a d i t i o n i n A ngl'o-Saxbn
P h i l o s o p h y , p . 35.
2 3 I b i d . , p . 413.
24
Sam uel T a y l o r C o l e r i d g e , L e t t e r s o f Samue1 T a y l o r
C o l e r i d g e , e d . by E. H. C o l e r i d g e (L o n d o n : W illia m
H e in em an n , 1 8 9 5 ) , v o l . I I , p . 735*
2 5
M u irh e a d , The P l a t o n i c T r a d i t i o n i n A n g lo -S a x o n
P h i l o s o p h y , p . 14. .......
58
At O xford " th e new th o u g h t owed a t l e a s t as much t o th e
r e v i v a l o f P l a t o n i c s t u d y , i n i t i a t e d by B enjam in J o w e t t
(1817- 1893)3 as t o German p h i l o s o p h y ."26
A se c o n d view t h a t a t t e m p t s t o e x p l a i n t h e r e v i v a l
o f i d e a l i s m i n t h e n i n t e e n t h c e n t u r y i n " t r a d i t i o n a l l y '
e m p i r i c i s t B r i t a i n " s t r e s s e s th e i n f l u e n c e o f German
t h o u g h t , e s p e c i a l l y o f Kant and H e g e l. R u d o lf Metz con
te n d s t h a t B r i t i s h i d e a l i s m d i d n o t h a rk b a c k t o any
e a r l i e r B r i t i s h h e r i t a g e , b u t stemmed d i r e c t l y fro m German
2 7
p h ilo s o p h y . Metz c la im s t h a t t h e r e was an " e n t i r e
a b s e n c e " o f any c o n t i n u i n g i d e a l i s t i c c u r r e n t i n t h e
2 8
c e n tu r y p r e c e d i n g th e movement. Prom t h e d e a th o f
B e r k e le y i n 1753 u n t i l t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f S t i r l i n g ' s work
on H eg el i n 1865 , t h e s tr e a m O-f i d e a l i s m h ad d r i e d up
a lm o st c o m p le te ly . The Cam bridge P l a t o n i s t s w ere an i s o
l a t e d phenom ena, and no s i m i l a r movement a p p e a r e d a f t e r i£ ?
25I b i d .
27
R u d o lf M etz, A H undred Y ears o f B r i t i s h P h ilo s o p h y ,,
t r a n s . by J . W. H a rv e y , Th E"! T e s s o p , and H. S t u r t (New i
Y ork: M a c m illa n , 1 9 3 8 ), p . 238.
2 8
I b i d .
29I b i d . , p . 250 .
59
In th e o p i n i o n o f Rene W e lle k , t h e e s s e n t i a l s o f
C o l e r i d g e ’ s p h ilo s o p h y were d e te rm in e d by K a n t's th o u g h t
3 0
and te r m in o lo g y . C o le rid g e s t u d i e d K a n t 's w r i t i n g a f t e r
v i s i t i n g Germany i n 1 7 9 8 -9 , and he s a i d t h a t K a n t 's w o rk ,
"more th a n any o t h e r w ork, a t once i n v i g o r a t e d and d i s c i -
3 1
p l i n e d my u n d e r s t a n d i n g . " K a n t's work l e d C o le r id g e t o
b e l i e v e t h a t p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n g r a s p s t r u t h s w hich go beyond
s e n s e e x p e r i e n c e ; i t can a p p re h e n d s p i r i t u a l r e a l i t i e s ,
i n c l u d i n g God, who i s th e i n f i n i t e e x p r e s s i o n o f t h e i d e a l
s o u g h t f o r by m o ra l b e i n g s . In a l e t t e r w r i t t e n t o J . H.
Green i n 1817, C o le rid g e s a i d "I r e v e r e n c e Immanuel Kant
w ith my w hole h e a r t and s o u l , and b e l i e v e him t o be th e
only p h i l o s o p h e r , f o r a l l men who have t h e power o f
t h i n k i n g . "3 2
In b a l a n c i n g th e above view s ab o u t th e aw ak en in g of
n i n e t e e n t h c e n tu r y B r i t i s h i d e a l i s m , i t can be c o n te n d e d
t h a t w h ile E n g lan d had an i d e a l i s t i c t r a d i t i o n b r a n c h i n g
30
Rene W e lle k , Immanuel Kant i n E n g la n d : 1793-1838
( P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 3 1 ), P* 102.
3 1
Samuel T a y lo r C o le r id g e , B i o g r a p h ! a L i t e r a r i a
(New York: E. P. D u tto n , 1 9 0 6 ), p . 767
3 2
C o l e r i d g e , L e t t e r s o f Samuel T a y lo r C o l e r i d g e ,
v o l . I I , p . 682.
60
from t h e P l a t o n i c r o o t , t h e i n f l u e n c e o f German t h o u g h t was
an i m p o r t a n t c r o s s - f e r t i l i z a t i o n t h a t p o w e r f u l l y s t i m u l a t e d
B r i t i s h i d e a l i s t i c t h o u g h t . H ow ever, t h e i n i t i a l i n f l u x o f
German i d e a l i s m i n t o E n g la n d r e s u l t e d fro m p o e t i c , l i t e r a r y ,
r e l i g i o u s , and t h e o l o g i c a l i n t e r e s t s , r a t h e r t h a n from
p h i l o s o p h i c a l o n e s , Metz c l a i m s .
I t was o u t o f th e p o e t r y o f t h e R o m a n tic s
t h a t t h e new view o f t h e w o r ld and a t t i t u d e
to l i f e grew up w h ic h s u p e r s e d e d t h e a n t i
q u a t e d form s o f t h o u g h t o f t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t .
The e a r l i e s t i n d i c a t o r s o f t h e new s p i r i t u a l
c o n t e n t , w hich much l a t e r was t o b r e a k i t s
way t h r o u g h i n t o p h i l o s o p h y a l s o , a r e t o be
fo u n d i n t h e poems o f S h e l l e y and K e a t s , o f
W ordsw orth and C o l e r i d g e . 33
The d e s i r e t o sav e t h r e a t e n e d f a i t h a g a i n s t a g n o s
t i c i s m , m a t e r i a l i s m , and i n d i f f e r e n c e made some B r i t i s h
m inds r e c e p t i v e t o t h e e n t r a n c e o f German T h o u g h t. James
H u tc h is o n S t i r l i n g (1 8 2 0 -1 9 0 9 ) r o u s e d B r i t i s h i d e a l i s m
from i t s s lu m b e r by t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f The S e c r e t o f H egel
i n 1 865. In t h e o p i n i o n o f M e tz , " S t i r l i n g as p h i l o s o p h e r
was a t h e o l o g i a n i n d i s g u i s e , h a v i n g no u s e f o r a
p h i l o s o p h y t h a t d i d n o t h av e t h e c a r e o f r e l i g i o u s i n t e r -
e s t s as i t s c h i e f e n d . He e x p r e s s e d c o n te m p t f o r t h e
e v o l u t i o n i s t s who c la im e d t o b e a d v a n c e d t h i n k e r s y e t l e f t
man n o t h i n g b u t h i s a n i m a l i t y . S t i r l i n g r e g a r d e d K a n t 's
33M etz, A H undred Y e a rs o f B r i t i s h P h i l o s o p h y , p . 2 39 .
31*Metz, B r i t i s h P h i l o s o p h y , p . 267*
6 1
p h i lo s o p h y as t h e f o u n d a t i o n o f t h e i d e a l i s m w h ich H egel
d e v e lo p e d f o r t h e use o f c h am p io n in g t h e C h r i s t i a n r e l i
g io n .
T h is c o u p l i n g o f p h i l o s o p h y w ith r e l i g i o n
was o f t h e g r e a t e s t im p o rta n c e i n t h e
r e c e p t i o n o f H egel i n t o E n g la n d . H e g e l 's
p h i l o s o p h y o n ly a t t r a c t e d b e c a u s e i t c o u ld
b e h a r n e s s e d t o t h e t h e o l o g i c a l c h a r i o t ,
an d l e d i n t o t h e f i e l d a g a i n s t N a t u r a l i s m ,
M a t e r i a l i s m , and D a rw in ism . 35
The e v o l u t i o n i s t s had c r e a t e d an a tm o sp h e re i n
w hich some r e l i g i o u s m inded men f e l t t h r e a t e n e d . Thomas
Henry H uxley (1 8 2 5 -1 8 9 5 ) c la im e d t h a t i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o
g r e s s c o n s i s t s i n th e g r a d u a l v i c t o r y o f m a t t e r and
c a u s a l i t y o v e r m ind and fre e d o m , and he s t a t e d " I b e l i e v e
t h a t we s h a l l , s o o n e r o r l a t e r , a r r i v e a t a m e c h a n ic a l
3 6
e q u i v a l e n t o f c o n s c i o u s n e s s - . . . " Huxley s a i d o f many o f
t h e b e s t minds i n h i s d a y :
They w a tc h what th e y c o n c e iv e t o be th e
p r o g r e s s o f m a t e r i a l i s m , i n such f e a r and
p o w e r le s s a n g e r as a sa v a g e f e e l s , when,
d u r in g an e c l i p s e , t h e g r e a t shadow c r e e p s
o v e r t h e f a c e o f t h e sun.. The a d v a n c in g t i d e
o f m a t t e r t h r e a t e n s t o drown t h e i r s o u l s ; t h e
t i g h t e n i n g g r a s p o f law im pedes t h e i r fre e d o m ;
th e y a r e a la rm e d l e s t m a n 's m o ra l n a t u r e be
d e b a s e d by t h e i n c r e a s e o f h i s w isd o m. 37
3 5
I b i d .
3 6
Thomas H. H u x le y , M ethods and R e s u l t s (New York:
D. A p p le to n and C o ., 1 9 1 7 )5 P- 191-
37Xbid. , p. 160.
62
I t i s l i t t l e wonder t h a t i d e a l i s t i c argum ents ap
p e a l e d to th o s e p h i l o s o p h e r s who b e l i e v e d t h a t u l t i m a t e
r e a l i t y must be i n some se n se s p i r i t u a l . Thomas H i l l Green
(1836-1882) and Edward C a ird (1835-1908) were e a r l y B r i t i s h
i d e a l i s t s who s t r e s s e d th e s p i r i t u a l a s p e c t o f man. Soon
B r i t i s h i d e a l i s m s h i f t e d tow ard th e H e g e lia n ty p e o f
i d e a l i s m and i t s A b s o lu te .
F r a n c is H e rb e rt B rad ley (1846-192*1) and B ern ard
B osanquet (1848-1923) w ere th e l e a d i n g a b s o l u t e i d e a l i s t s .
They a g re e d w ith H e g e l's c r i t i c i s m s o f K a n t 's t h e o r i e s ,
c la im in g t h a t K a n t's e t h i c s p r o v id e s o n ly i d l e a b s t r a c t i o n s
and empty fo rm a lism . However, r e f l e c t i o n on m o r a l i t y does
le a d on t o r e l i g i o n which i n tu r n le a d s t o th e A b s o lu te .
S in ce th e A b so lu te i s th e u l t i m a t e s t a n d a r d o f v a l u e ,
u l t i m a t e v a lu e cannot be a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e f i n i t e s e l f .
I t was t h i s a t t i t u d e a d o p te d by t h e a b s o l u t e i d e a l i s t s
to w ard f i n i t e p e r s o n a l i t y which l e d t o t h e r e a c t i o n o f th e
p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t s .
V. DEVELOPMENT OP KANT'S MORAL ARGUMENT IN THE
THINKING OP THE BRITISH PERSONAL IDEALISTS
P e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m i s one o f s e v e r a l form s o f
p e r s o n a l i s m . P e r s o n a l i s m h a s b e e n d e f i n e d by Knudson as
t h a t form o f i d e a l i s m w hich g i v e s e q u a l
r e c o g n i t i o n t o b o th t h e p l u r a l i s t i c and
m o n i s t i c a s p e c t s o f e x p e r i e n c e and w hich
f i n d s i n t h e c o n s c io u s u n i t y , i d e n t i t y ,
and f r e e a c t i v i t y o f p e r s o n a l i t y t h e key
to t h e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y and t h e s o l u t i o n
o f t h e u l t i m a t e p ro b le m s o f p h i l o s o p h y . 1
A c c o rd in g t o P e t e r B e r t o c c i , p e r s o n a l i s m i s t h e name f o r
th o s e sy ste m s o f p h i l o s o p h y w h ic h , d e s p i t e d i f f e r e n c e s ,
a g re e t h a t : (1) p e r s o n a l i t y i s th e b e s t c l u e t o t h e n a t u r e
o f r e a l i t y ; (2 ) a l l l e v e l s o f b e i n g s a r e dtpe- .dent on a
Cosmic P e r s o n ; (3 ) a l l v a l u e s a r e r o o t e d i n t h e p u rp o s e o f
God; an d (4) e v e ry p h a s e o f p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s h o u ld be
2
s y n o p t i c a l l y r e l a t e d i n t h e s e a r c h f o r. t r u t h .
T here a r e f o u r m ain form s o f p e r s o n a l i s m :
p e r s o n a l i s t i c r e a l i s m ; p e r s o n a l i s t i c monism; p e r s o n a l i s t i c
1K nudson, The P h ilo s o p h y o f P e r s o n a l i s m , p . 87 .
2
P e t e r B e r t o c c i , " P e r s o n a l i s m , " E n c y c lo p e d ia
A m e ric a n a , i n t . e d . , 1965s v o l.X X I, p . 631 *
63
6k
p a n p sy c h ism ; and p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m . P e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m i s
th e t y p i c a l form o f p e r s o n a l i s m b e c a u se i t h as m ost con
s i s t e n t l y h e l d to t h e p e r s o n a l s t r u c t u r e o f r e a l i t y .
P e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m r e g a r d s e ach p e r s o n as u n iq u e , c r e a t e d by
God, p o s s e s s i n g autonomy and t h e c a p a c i t y m o ra lly t o co
o p e r a t e w ith th e d i v i n e p u rp o s e w hich i s d i s c o v e r a b l e
th ro u g h i n t e r a c t i o n w ith n a t u r e and o t h e r p e r s o n s . O bvious
l y , p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m i s a k i n t o C h r i s t i a n th e is m .
T h a t th e p e r s o n a l i t y o f God and t h e
s a c r e d n e s s o f human p e r s o n a l i t y e x p r e s s
t h e t r u e g e n iu s o f th e C h r i s t i a n r e l i g i o n ,
w h a te v e r may be s a i d o f i t s t h e o l o g y , i s
h a r d l y open t o q u e s t i o n , a n d - t h a t t h e s e b e l i e f s
have r e c e i v e d t h e i r c o m p le te s t p h i l o s o p h i c a l
j u s t i f i c a t i o n i n modern p e r s o n a l i s t i c
m e t a p h y s i c s , w ould seem e q u a l l y c l e a r .
P e r s o n a l i s m i s p a r e x c e l l e n c e t h e C h r i s t i a n
p h i lo s o p h y o f o u r d a y . d
P e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m r e p r e s e n t s th e f i n i t e s e l f ' s
a tte m p t t o a v o id b e in g sw allo w ed up i n th e im p e rs o n a l o r
s u p r a p e r s o n a l A b s o lu te . In t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e im p o r
ta n c e o f p e rs o n h o o d , p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m a llo w s i n d i v i d u a l s
r e l a t i v e in d e p e n d e n c e w ith r e g a r d t o th e A b s o lu te .
C o p le s to n v e n t u r e s t h e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n t h a t "one o f t h e
b a s i c f a c t o r s i n p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m i s a judgm ent o f v a l u e ,
namely t h a t p e r s o n a l i t y r e p r e s e n t s t h e h i g h e s t v a l u e w i t h i n
th e f i e l d o f o u r e x p e r i e n c e . ,fl+ T h is b e in g s o , th e
3
Knudson,' P e r s o n a l i s m , p . 80.
^ C o p le s te n , A H i s t o r y o f P h i l o s o p h y , v o l . V I I I ,
65
p e r s o n a l I d e a l i s t s t h o u g h t i t n e c e s s a r y t o c o n c e iv e o f God
as t h e p e r f e c t p e r s o n a l i t y .
When t h e c o n c e p t o f p e r s o n a l i t y i s a p p l i e d t o God,
i t m u st mean more o r l e s s w hat we com prehend by t h e te rm
when i t i s a p p l i e d t o o u r s e l v e s . 5 E ut t h i s d o e s n o t im ply
t h a t God i s a d e v e l o p i n g o r in c o m p l e t e B e in g . The e s s e n
t i a l e l e m e n t s i n p e r s o n a l i t y do n o t in- and o f th e m s e lv e s
i n v o l v e f i n i t u d e . P e r s o n a l i t y i n i t s e s s e n c e means s e l f -
0
h o o d , s e l f - k n o w l e d g e , and s e l f - c o n t r o l . None o f t h e s e
e le m e n ts i m p l i e s l i m i t a t i o n . "B etw een a b s o l u t e n e s s and t h e
•7
e s s e n c e o f p e r s o n a l i t y t h e r e i s n o i n c o n s i s t e n c y . "
I t i s so m etim es c la im e d t h a t t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f
t h e c o n c e p t o f p e r s o n a l i t y t o God i s a p i e c e o f a n t h r o p o
m orphism t h a t s h o u ld be a v o i d e d . Those who deny p e r s o n a l i
t y t o God u s u a l l y c la im t h a t i n t e l l i g e n c e an d fre e d o m m ust
n o t b e a s c r i b e d t o t h e A b s o lu te b e c a u s e i t i s a
t r a n s c e n d e n t r e a l i t y w h ich c a n n o t be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h any
mode o f b e i n g . I t e x p r e s s e s i t s e l f t h r o u g h t h e f i n i t e , b u t
n o t h i n g f i n i t e e x p r e s s e s i t s n a t u r e . T h u s, p e r s o n a l i t y may
n o t b e a t t r i b u t e d t o i t .
5A l b e r t C. K nudson, The D o c t r i n e o f God (New York:
The A bingdon P r e s s , 1 9 3 0 ) , p . 29£>~!
6I b i d . , p . 299•
7I b i d .
66
In r e s p o n s e t o t h i s a t t e m p t t o e s t a b l i s h an a n t i
t h e s i s b e tw e e n p e r s o n a l i t y and t h e A b s o l u te , Knudson sa y s
t h a t such a view r e s t s upon a m i s ta k e n c o n c e p tio n o f w hat
B
m e t a p h y s i c a l a b s o l u t e n e s s i s . I f one a r r i v e s a t th e n o t i o n
o f t h e A b s o lu te by a p r o c e s s o f l o g i c a l s u b o r d i n a t i o n o f
th e i n d i v i d u a l t o t h e c l a s s t o w hich i t b e l o n g s , and t h i s
c l a s s t o t h e c l a s s above i t , u n t i l t h e u l t i m a t e u n i v e r s a l
i s r e a c h e d , t h e n one has a r r i v e d a t a c o n c e p t b a r r e n o f
c o n t e n t .
The u l t i m a t e u n i v e r s a l i s t h u s th e e m p t i e s t
o f a l l t e r m s ; an d t h i s th e A b s o lu te becomes
when i t I s a r r i v e d a t by a p r o c e s s o f l o g i c a l
s u b o r d i n a t i o n and i s i d e n t i f i e d w ith u n i v e r s a l
b e i n g . When c o n c e iv e d o f as p u re u n i t y or
p u r e s u b s t a n c e o r p u re s p i r i t i t i s a mere
a b s t r a c t i o n . . . .As s u c h , i t I s n e c e s s a r i l y n o n
p e r s o n a l , b u t i t i s a l s o devoid* o f any d e f i n i t e
c h a r a c t e r w h a t s o e v e r , and may be s e t a s id e as
a f i c t i o n o f c o n c e p t u a l t h o u g h t .9
The i d e a o f th e A b s o lu te can be r e t a i n e d i n t h e
c a u s a l s e n s e as t h e in d e p e n d e n t c a u se o f t h e u n i v e r s e ; and^
i n t h i s s e n s e t h e r e i s no i n c o n s i s t e n c y b etw een i t and t h e
n o t i o n o f p e r s o n a l i t y .* ° E v e r y t h i n g i s d e p e n d e n t upon t h e
A b s o lu te f o r i t s e x i s t e n c e . But a b s o l u t e n e s s th u s u n d e r
s to o d does n o t e x c lu d e s e l f - l i m i t a t i o n : in f a c t , n o t t o
have su ch pow er w o u ld be a l i m i t a t i o n . God may l i m i t
8I b i d . , p . 305 .
9I b i d . , p. 304.
67
H im se lf by c a l l i n g i n t o e x i s t e n c e b e in g s t o whom in d e p e n d
ence i s g r a n t e d . "Such s e l f - l i m i t a t i o n in v o lv e s no en
croachm ent upon th e d iv in e a b s o l u t e n e s s ; r a t h e r i t i s an
e x p r e s s i o n o f i t . " 11
The e le m e n ts o f p e r s o n a l i t y must be a t t r i b u t e d t o
th e A b s o lu te i f i t i s t o be re g a rd e d as a b s o l u t e p o w er, f o r
o th e r w is e i t would l a c k s e lf - k n o w le d g e and s e l f - c o n t r o l .
F i n i t e b e i n g s have p e r s o n a l i t y only i n im p e r f e c t d e g r e e s .
The A b s o lu te h as p e r f e c t p e r s o n a l i t y . " I n s t e a d o f s a y in g
t h a t p e r s o n a l i t y i s i n c o n s i s t e n t w ith a b s o l u t e n e s s , we m ust
s a y , r a t h e r , t h a t p e r f e c t p e r s o n a l i t y i s p o s s i b l e only i n
th e A b s o l u t e . " 12
The n o t i o n t h a t God i s p e r s o n a l has p o s i t i v e
r e l i g i o u s and p h i l o s o p h i c a l v a lu e . F e llo w s h ip w i t h God,
and t r u s t i n H is goodness im ply His p e r s o n a l i t y . Only t h e
p e r s o n a l i t y o f God makes p o s s i b l e communion w ith Him. H is
p e r s o n a l i t y i s th e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n o f His g o o d n e s s , f o r
t h e r e can be no goodness i n th e e t h i c a l s e n s e of t h e word
w ith o u t fre e d o m and i n t e l l i g e n c e . Only a p e r s o n a l b e in g
can be g o o d , and a p a r t from p e r s o n a l i t y goodness i s a mere
a b s t r a c t i o n . " A ll th o s e r e l i g i o u s v a lu e s c o n s e q u e n tly
t h a t a re bound up w ith th e b e l i e f i n th e d i v i n e r i g h t e o u s
n e ss and lo v e a re d ep en d e n t f o r t h e i r very b e in g on a
11 Knudson, The P h ilo so p h y o f P e r s o n a l i s m , p . 6H.
12
K nudson, The D o c tr in e o f God, p. 305-
68
1 3
p e r s o n a l i s t i c . view o f t h e w o r l d . "
A n o th e r r e l i g i o u s v a l u e a t t a c h e d t o t h e c o n c e p t i o n
o f God as p e r s o n a l i s t h e im p a c t t h i s h a s on o u r c o n c e p t i o n
o f man. I n a f f i r m i n g t h e l i k e n e s s o f man t o God, we a f f i r m
t h e h i g h d i g n i t y o f man. G o d 's l o v e h a s l e d Him t o com-
1 4
m u n ic a te H is l i k e n e s s t o u s . We a r e a k i n t o God. When
a man s i n s , t h e s i n i s n o t a c o m p le te e x p r e s s i o n o f h i s
p e r s o n a l i t y , f o r s o m e t h i n g o f good r e m a in s w i t h i n him and
l 5
makes him r e d e e m a b l e . T h is c o n c e p t i o n i s s i m i l a r t o
K a n t 's n o t i o n o f t h e " s e e d o f g o o d n e s s . "
T h e re a r e two p h i l o s o p h i c a l v a l u e s i n t h e c o n c e p
t i o n o f God as p e r s o n a l . One v a l u e c o n s i s t s i n t h e f a c t
t h a t p e r s o n a l i t y i s a c o n c r e t e an d e m p i r i c a l r e a l i t y : i t
i s g i v e n i n e x p e r i e n c e . We know t h e s e l f d i r e c t l y (Hume
and Buddha n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g ) , and t h i s f a c t p r o v i d e s a
1 6
f o u n d a t i o n f o r e m p i r i c a l m e t a p h y s i c s .
The s e c o n d p h i l o s o p h i c a l v a l u e i n t h e c o n c e p t i o n of:
God a s p e r s o n a l i s t h a t p e r s o n a l i t y c o n t a i n s i n i t s e l f a '
s o l u t i o n o f f u n d a m e n t a l p r o b le m s o f m e t a p h y s i c s . I f we
w is h t o know how u n i t y can be h a r m o n iz e d w i t h p l u r a l i t y ,
and i d e n t i t y w i t h c h a n g e , t h e n we m ust s e e k t h e s o l u t i o n in!
13I b i d . , p . 307. I
1^ I b i d . , p . 3 0 8 .
15I b i d . , p . 350 .
16I b i d . , p. 309. !
o u r own f r e e a g e n c y . W e. change and y e t th ro u g h memory we
re m a in t h e same p e r s o n .
L e t us t u r n o u r a t t e n t i o n t o th e i d e a s o f t h r e e
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t s .
(A) Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n
Andrew S e th ( th e name P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n was ad d ed in
1898 as a c o n d i t i o n o f a c c e p t i n g a b e q u e s t ) h as b e e n d e s
c r i b e d as " th e f i r s t and m ost i m p o r t a n t r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f
t h e t r a n s i t i o n i n t h e d e v e lo p m e n t o f B r i t i s h p h ilo s o p h y
from t h e ty p e o f i d e a l i s m commonly c a l l e d a b s o l u t e i d e a l i s m
1 8
t o t h a t known as p e r s o n a l i s m . " By co m b in in g th e p r i n c i p l e
o f c o n t i n u i t y and t h e p r i n c i p l e o f e m e rg e n t e v o l u t i o n , and
c o n j o i n i n g them w i t h h i s m o ra l e x p e r i e n c e , he a r r i v e d a t an
arg u m en t f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God, an argum ent w h ich i s
s i m i l a r t o and i n f l u e n c e d by K a n t 's m o ra l a rg u m e n t.
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n u s e d t h r e e p a r t s o f K a n t 's
a rg u m e n t: t h e n o t i o n o f t h e i n t r i n s i c w o rth o f i n d i v i d u a l
p e r s o n s ; t h e n o t i o n o f t h e p o s t u l a t e s o f p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n ;
and t h e n o t i o n t h a t e t h i c s i s t h e f o u n d a t io n o f m e ta p h y s ic s
He d e s c r i b e d K a n t 's scheme as f o l l o w s :
. . . a f t e r we h av e d i s c a r d e d t h e e i g h t e e n t h -
c e n t u r y fram ew ork o f t h e K a n tia n schem e, t h e
17I b i d ., p . 310.
---------
G. W. Cunningham , The1 I d e a l i s t i c ' Argument' i n Re
c e n t B r i t i s h and' A m erican P h ilo s o p h y (New York: The C e n tu ry
C o ., 1 9 3 3 ) , p . 150.
70
c e n t r a l and p e rm a n e n tly im p o rta n t p o s i t i o n
r e m a in s — the. i d e a o f I n t r i n s i c v a lu e as
u l t i m a t e l y d e t e r m in a ti v e i n a p h i l o s o p h i c a l
r e f e r e n c e , as y i e l d i n g u s , i n th e K a n tia n
p h r a s e , an i n t e l l i g i b l e w o rld , w h ich , when
r e c o g n i z e d , s e t s l i m i t s t o th e e x c l u s iv e
p r e t e n s i o n s o f th e w o rld o f se n se p e r c e p t i o n ,
and d e f i n e s th e mode o r d e g re e o f r e a l i t y
which b e lo n g s t o t h a t w o rld i n th e t o t a l
scheme o f t h i n g s . This c o n c e p tio n o f
i n t r i n s i c v a lu e as th e c lu e to th e u l t i m a t e
n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y i s th e fu n d a m e n ta l c o n t e n t i o n
o f a l l i d e a l i s t i c p h ilo s o p h y s in c e K a n t 's t i m e . 19
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n r e j e c t e d t h a t p a r t o f K a n t's
a p p ro ach w hich he th o u g h t " i n t r o d u c e s God sim ply as a means
2 0
t o t h e h a p p in e s s o f i n d i v i d u a l human b e i n g s . " He made
t h i s p o i n t c l e a r e r by ad d in g t h i s :
S u r e ly i f , as Kant i n s i s t s , i t i s wrong to
t r e a t a human b e in g m erely as a m eans, i t
must be a f a l s e way o f p u t t i n g t h i n g s to
p r e s e n t God h i m s e l f i n t h i s m erely i n s t r u m e n t a l
l i g h t — as a deus ex' ma'china i n t r o d u c e d t o e f f e c t
th e e q u a t i o n b etw een v i r t u e and h a p p in e s s ..21
22
In s h o r t , he c la im e d t h a t Kant view ed God as a " P a y m a s te r ."
K a n t’ s n o t i o n o f th e m oral l i f e as an i n f i n i t e p r o
c ess o f a p p ro x im a tio n to p e r f e c t v i r t u e was r e j e c t e d by
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n b e c a u se th e i n f i n i t e d i s t a n c e t o th e g o a l
2 3
makes i t ■ u n r e a c h a b l e .
19P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The Idea' o f God, pp. 37-38.
20I b i d . , p . 3^.
21 I b i d .
22I b i d . , p . 35.
23Andrew S eth P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The I d e a o f Tmmo'rtal-
i t y (O xford: The C laren d o n P r e s s , 1 9 2 2 ), p . 134. F o r K a n t's
answ er t o t h i s k in d o f c r i t i c i s m see above, p . 29 .
71
P r i n g l e - P a t t l s o n a l s o c r i t i c i z e d K a n t 's a rg u m en t
b e c a u s e i t f a i l e d t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e r e l i g i o u s h u n g e r f o r
an " e t e r n a l l i f e " — n o t as s o m e th in g i n t h e f u t u r e , a f t e r
e a r t h l y l i f e i s e n d e d , b u t a s a t r a n s c e n d e n t a l e x p e r i e n c e
2 4
e n jo y e d h e r e and now. In view o f t h i s c r i t i c i s m i t w ou ld
seem t h a t P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n d i d n o t r e c o g n i z e t h e i m p l i c a
t i o n s o f s p i r i t u a l r e b i r t h c o n t a i n e d i n K a n t 's n o t i o n o f
t h e " s e e d o f goodness." P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n was a c q u a i n t e d
w i t h t h e m y s t i c a l n o t i o n o f t h e " s p a r k " as th e f a c u l t y by
2 5
w hich m y s t i c a l u n io n i s a t t a i n e d , b u t a p p a r e n t l y he d i d
n o t c o n n e c t t h e i d e a o f t h e " s p a r k " w i t h K a n t 's i d e a o f th e
" s e e d o f goodness," More o b v io u s i s t h e f a c t t h a t he c o u ld
n o t h a v e b e e n f a m i l i a r w i t h K a n t 's f i n a l t h o u g h t s a b o u t th e
m o ra l p e r s o n ' s e x p e r i e n c e o f God i n t h e m o ra l la w , f o r had
he b e e n f a m i l i a r w i t h t h e I d e a , he w o u ld n o t h a v e r a i s e d
t h e c r i t i c i s m t h a t K a n t 's a rg u m e n t f a i l s t o p r o v i d e f o r
t r a n s c e n d e n t a l e x p e r i e n c e .
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n ' s i d e a l i s m p r o v i d e d t h a t n a t u r e
p o s s e s s e s no e x i s t e n c e a p a r t from s p i r i t u a l c o m p l e t i o n ; b u t
l i k e w i s e he i n s i s t e d t h a t m ind i s v o id w i t h o u t a w o r ld t o
f u r n i s h t h e m a t e r i a l s o f know led g e and d u t y . B o th a r e
2 ^I b i d . , p . 135-
25 Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , "M ysticism ','
D i c t i o n a r y o f 'P h ilo s o p h y and' P s y c h o lo g y , 1928.
72
n e c e s s a r y e le m e n ts o f a s i n g l e sy ste m . I t i s t h e ta s k o f
p h ilo s o p h y t o d e s c r i b e t h i s sy ste m i n i t s e n t i r e t y , and t o
a v o id f i x i n g a t t e n t i o n on on ly one p a r t . The n a t u r a l i s t s
f i x t h e i r a t t e n t i o n on o n ly th e p r i n c i p l e o f c o n t i n u i t y i n
n a t u r e , and n e g l e c t a n o t h e r e q u a l l y im p o r ta n t a s p e c t , name
l y , t h e em ergence o f u n i q u e n e s s . Thus, n a t u r a l i s m has come
to mean " th e ty p e o f t h e o r y w hich so e m p h asiz es th e con
t i n u i t y betw een man and t h e non-human n a t u r e from which he
s p r i n g s as t o m in im iz e , i f n o t e n t i r e l y t o deny, any d i f
f e r e n c e betw een t h e m ." 26
In th e a tte m p t t o s i m p l i f y , th e n a t u r a l i s t " l e v e l s
down" s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s ; and by t h i s p r o c e s s he
l e a v e s out f e a t u r e s o f th e w o rld which r e q u i r e e x p l a n a t i o n .
The r e s u l t i s a f a l s i f i c a t i o n o f th e f a c t s . I f we add t o
t h e p r i n c i p l e o f c o n t i n u i t y t h e e q u a l l y im p o r ta n t p r i n c i p l e
o f em ergent e v o l u t i o n , we g a in a more co m p lete view o f
r e a l i t y .
C o n tin u ity o f p r o c e s s and th e em ergence o f
r e a l d i f f e r e n c e s - - t h e s e a r e , i n s h o r t , th e
tw in a s p e c t s o f t h e cosm ic h i s t o r y , and i t
i s e s s e n t i a l t o c l e a r t h i n k i n g t h a t th e one
be n o t a llo w e d to o b s c u re t h e o t h e r . 27
Mind i s p a r t o f n a t u r e , and b o th are e le m e n ts i n a
s i n g l e sy ste m . The com ing i n t o b e in g o f a s e l f - c o n s c i o u s
2 8
s p i r i t i s th e "main m i r a c l e " o f t h e u n i v e r s e . But t h e
26P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The I d e a o f God, pp. 88- 89 .
27I b i d . , p. 103.
2 8P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The I d e a o f I m m o r t a l i t y , p. 70•
73
s o u l I s n o t an I m m a t e r i a l s u b s t a n c e i n f u s e d i n t o m a t t e r . 29
Man i s n o t " a m e c h a n i c a l u n io n o f a c o r p s e and a g h o s t . " 30
M a t e r i a l i s m , e p ip h e n o m e n a lis m , i n t e r a c t i o n i s m , and p a r a l
l e l i s m a l l f a i l t o a c c o u n t a d e q u a t e l y f o r o u r e x p e r i e n c e o f
body a n d s o u l . O nly e m e rg e n t e v o l u t i o n a d e q u a t e l y c o n
c e i v e s t h e s o u l as t h e " s y s t e m a t i c u n i t y o f t h e c o n s c i o u s
e x p e r i e n c e o f a p a r t i c u l a r i n d i v i d u a l c e n t r e — t h e i n d i v i d
u a l c e n t r e b e i n g d e f i n e d o r d e t e r m in e d a t t h e o u t s e t by
3 1
t h e b o d i l y o r g a n i s m . . . . " The b o d y i s t h e medium t h r o u g h
w hich t h e s o u l comes i n t o e x i s t e n c e , y e t t h e g e n e s i s o f
c o n s c i o u s n e s s from t h e o r g a n i c p r o c e s s c a n n o t be u n d e r -
3 2
s t o o d . Once i n t o e x i s t e n c e t h e s o u l , a s a s e l f - c o n s c i o u s
s p i r i t , a t t a i n s i n d e p e n d e n c e and may s u r v i v e t h e d i s s o l u
t i o n o f t h e m a t e r i a l o r g a n is m t h r o u g h w h ic h i t was b r o u g h t
3 3
i n t o b e i n g .
fro m t h e m in d e m e rg e s t h e a w a r e n e s s o f v a l u e s ,
e s p e c i a l l y m o r a l o n e s , w h ic h m ust be i n c l u d e d a s p a r t o f
t h e e v i d e n c e f o r t h e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y . I n f a c t , s i n c e
m o ra l v a l u e s a r e p a r t o f t h e h i g h e r r a n g e o f e x p e r i e n c e ,
th e y m u st s e r v e as c l u e s t o th e h i g h e r n a tu r e , o f r e a l i t y .
29I b i d . , p . 7 2 .
30
I b i d . , p . 91•
31I b i d . , p . 100.
32I b i d . , p . 1 0 2 .
3 3I b i d ., p. 105.
74
The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e e t h i c a l l i f e m ust
be t a k e n , t h e r e f o r e , as c o n t r i b u t i n g t o
d e t e r m i n i n g t h e n a t u r e o f t h e s y s te m i n w hich
we l i v e . N ay, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
we h av e p u t upon t h e p r i n c i p l e o f v a lu e and
upon t h e e v o l u t i o n a r y d i s t i n c t i o n b e tw e e n lo w e r
and h i g h e r r a n g e s o f e x p e r i e n c e , t h e e t h i c a l
p r e d i c a t e s m ust c a r r y u s n e a r e r t o a t r u e
d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e u l t i m a t e L i f e i n w h ich we
l i v e th a n t h e c a t e g o r i e s w hich s u f f i c e t o
d e s c r i b e , f o r e x a m p le , t h e e n v i r o n m e n ta l
c o n d i t i o n s o f o u r e x i s t e n c e . 34
How can one J u s t i f y a t t a c h i n g " h i g h e r " s i g n i f i c a n c e
t o v a l u e s , e s p e c i a l l y m o ra l o n e s , i n t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f
r e a l i t y ? P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n c la im e d t h a t a l t h o u g h one c a n n o t
" p ro v e " t h i s v ie w , one ca n say t h a t i t i s a c o n v i c t i o n
w h ich c a n n o t be e s c a p e d by anyone who i s aw are o f t h e
g r e a t n e s s o f man an d h i s v a l u e s .
E v e ry fo rm o f p h i l o s o p h i c a l i d e a l i s m a p p e a r s
t o i n v o l v e t h i s c o n v i c t i o n o f t h e p r o f o u n d
s i g n i f i c a n c e o f human l i f e , as c a p a b l e o f
a p p r o p r i a t i n g and r e a l i z i n g t h e s e v a l u e s .
And w i t h o u t su ch a c o n v i c t i o n , a rg u m e n t a b o u t
God o r t h e u n i v e r s e w ould seem t o be a m ere
w a s te o f t i m e ; f o r t h e man t o whom h i s own
l i f e i s a t r i v i a l i t y i s n o t l i k e l y t o f i n d a
m ean in g i n a n y t h i n g e l s e . 35
F u r t h e r m o r e , t h i s u n p ro v e n c o n v i c t i o n i s no l e s s
w e l l f o u n d e d t h a n t h e s c i e n t i f i c c o n v i c t i o n t h a t n a t u r e i s
i n t e l l i g i b l e and c o h e r e n t . S in c e no f i n i t e mind can s u r v e y
n a t u r e i n i t s e n t i r e t y , t h e r e i s no way t o p ro v e t h a t i t i s
t h o r o u g h l y c o h e r e n t , y e t we a c c e p t t h i s u n p ro v e n a s s u m p tio n
34
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The I d e a o f G od, p . 103•
35I b i d . , p . 236.
75
as n e c e s s a r y f o r s c i e n t i f i c e n d e a v o r. Here P r i n g l e - P a t t i s c n
made u se o f and e x te n d e d th e a p p l i c a t i o n o f K a n t's, c o n c e p t
o f t h e p o s t u l a t e s o f r e a s o n .
. . . i f we ask what i s th e n a t u r e o f o u r
u n c e r t a i n t y t h a t e x i s t e n c e , t h e w o rld o f
f a c t s , i s u l t i m a t e l y and t h r o u g h o u t i n t e l l e c t u a l l y
c o n h e r e n t— t h a t we have t o do, i n s h o r t , n o t
w ith a chaos b u t w ith a co sm o s, a w o rld whose
laws may be i n f i n i t e l y complex and d i f f i c u l t
t o u n r a v e l , b u t which w i l l n e v e r p u t us t o
perm an en t i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n f u s io n — we a r e bound
t o r e p l y t h a t i n a s e n se i t i s an u n p ro v e d b e l i e f .
I t i s unproved i n t h e s e n s e t h a t we have n o t
e x p lo r e d th e whole o f e x i s t e n c e , and i n the.
n a t u r e o f t h e c a se can n e v e r hope t o i n c lu d e
a l l t h e f a c t s w i t h i n t h e n e t o f r e a s o n . And
hence i t may p e rh a p s be c a l l e d a p o s t u l a t e o f
r e a s o n , a supreme h y p o t h e s i s . 36
As s t a t e d ab o v e, P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n h e l d t h a t i t i s
t h e t a s k o f p h ilo s o p h y t o d e s c r i b e t h e u n i v e r s e i n i t s
e n t i r e t y . The t o t a l p r o c e s s i n c l u d e s man and h i s
so i t must be se e n as a s p i r i t u a l sy ste m ( s i n c e s p i r i t i s
th e h i g h e s t q u a l i t y known) w hich may a p p r o p r i a t e l y be
c a l l e d th e A l l , th e W hole, t h e A b s o lu te , o r God. Paced
w ith t h e e v id e n c e o f a s p i r i t u a l u n i v e r s e w hich p r o g r e s s e s
to w ard g r e a t e r v a l u e s , one can n o t " r e s t i n any p r i n c i p l e o f j
e x p l a n a t i o n s h o r t o f t h a t w hich we name th e A b s o lu te o r
36I b i d . , p . 239-
37I b i d . , p . 15^•
76
T h is c o n c l u s i o n i s i n a g re e m e n t w i t h t h e H e g e l i a n
view t h a t God i s i d e n t i c a l w i t h t h e w h o le w o r ld p r o c e s s
w h ich d e v e lo p s to w a r d s e l f - k n o w l e d g e t h r o u g h human m in d s.
But i n H e g e lia n is m and t h e B r i t i s h H e g e l i a n s c h o o l t h e
i n d i v i d u a l f i n i t e m inds a r e o f l i t t l e s i g n i f i c a n c e , b e i n g
s im p ly t h e means by w h ic h t h e A l l g a i n s k n ow ledge o f
i t s e l f , and i n d i v i d u a l s d i s a p p e a r i n t h e p r o c e s s . In f a c t ,
" t h e a t t e m p t o f t h e H e g e l i a n and N e o - H e g e lia n s c h o o ls t o
u n i f y t h e d i v i n e and t h e human s u b j e c t i s u l t i m a t e l y
3 8
d e s t r u c t i v e o f t h e r e a l i t y o f b o t h . "
The r a d i c a l e r r o r o f H e g e l i a n i s m and t h e a l l i e d
E n g l i s h d o c t r i n e i s t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e human and
d i v i n e s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s , o r t h e u n i f i c a t i o n o f c o n s c i o u s -
3 9
n e s s i n a s i n g l e s e l f . But t h i s e n t a i l s t h a t t h e human
s o u l i s a mere mode o r e f f l u x o f t h e d i v i n e , and t h e s o u l
i s l o s t i n t h e A b s o l u te . T h is b e l i e f i s no more c o n s o l i n g
t h a n t h e b e l i e f t h a t t h e c h e m ic a l e le m e n ts o f o u r b o d ie s
40
w i l l s u r v i v e i n new a r r a n g e m e n t s .
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n a r g u e d t h a t f i n i t e p e r s o n a l i t i e s
a r e o f u l t i m a t e v a lu e and m u st n o t be l o s t ; c h a r a c t e r i s
4 l
t h e o n ly l a s t i n g p r o d u c t and o n ly v a l u a b l e r e s u l t o f t i m e .
Andrew S e th ( P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n ) , H e g e lia n is m and
P e r s o n a l i t y (London: B lackw ood and S o n s , 1 8 8 7 ) , p p . 2 2 1 -2 2 2 .
3 9
I b i d . , p . 215 •
* * ° I b i d . , p . 227.
* * 1Ibid . , p. 228.
Each p e r s o n i s a u n iq u e b e i n g , an e x p r e s i o n o r f o c a l i z a -
4 2
t i o n o f t h e u n i v e r s e w hich i s now here e l s e r e p e a t e d .
T h u s, th e A b s o lu te m ust n o t be c o n c e iv e d i n a m anner w hich
4 3
w ould e l i m i n a t e th e v a l u e o f f i n i t e s e l f h o o d . Each r e a l
s e l f i s o n e, u n i q u e , and i n d i v i s i b l e . Even th e i d e a o f
God must be a d j u s t e d t o th e i d e a o f i n d i v i d u a l human p e r
s o n a l i t y , f o r God i s n o t an in d e p e n d e n t f a c t . God needs
man as much as man n e e d s God, s in c e God h a s no m ean in g o u t
s i d e o f r e l a t i o n s h i p t o p e r s o n a l l i f e , and man h a s no mean-
^ 5
i n g in d e p e n d e n t o f t h e d i v i n e g ro u n d . God i s n o t f u l l y
S e l f - r e a l i z e d u n l e s s f i n i t e p e r s o n a l i t i e s a r e l e f t f r e e t o
e n t e r v o l u n t a r i l y i n t o communion w ith Him. " I hav e a
c e n t r e o f my own— a w i l l o f my own— w hich no one s h a r e s
w i t h me o r can s h a r e — a c e n t r e w hich I m a i n t a i n ev en i n my
if 5
d e a l i n g s w ith God H i m s e l f . "
I t i s on t h i s p o i n t o f t h e u n iq u e n e s s and im p e r
v i o u s n e s s o f e a c h s e l f t h a t P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n was s u b j e c t e d
t o c r i t i c i s m by an o t h e r w i s e s y m p a th e tic r e a d e r , W. R.
I n g e , who c o n te n d e d t h a t " t h i s n o t i o n o f 'i m p e r v i o u s 1
4 2P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The I d e a o f God, p . 2 6 7 .
1+3I b i d . , p . 314.
4^ P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , H e g e l i a n i s m , p . 228.
^ P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The I d e a o f 'I m m o r t a l i t y , p . 157*
4 6
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , H e g e l i a n i s m , p . 217.
78
7
s p i r i t u a l atom s i s f l a t l y c o n t r a r y t o C h r i s t i a n i t y . ”
I n g e s t a t e d t h a t t h e c o n c e p t i o n o f i m p e n e t r a b l e p e r s o n a l i t y
4 8
seem s t o h a v e i t s h i s t o r i c a l b e g i n n i n g w i t h K a n t. The
e m p h a s is by K ant an d P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n ( a n d o t h e r p e r s o n a l
i d e a l i s t s as w e l l ) on t h e i n d i v i d u a l a s an e n d i n h i m s e l f
i s u n f o r t u n a t e , i n I n g e 's o p i n i o n , b e c a u s e i t m akes m y s t i -
4 9
c a l u n i o n i m p o s s i b l e . The w ho le o b j e c t o f o u r l i f e h e r e
i s t o make t h i s ' s p a r k ' [ s y n d e r e s i s ] e x t e n d i t s l i g h t o v e r
t h e w h o le man, e x p e l l i n g a n d d e s t r o y i n g t h a t s e l f i s h n e s s
5 0
and i s o l a t i o n w h ic h i s t h e p r i n c i p l e - o f o u r - f a l s e ' - s e l f ' . "
Only by l o s i n g s e l f i s h c o n c e r n ( s e l f i s h n e s s b e i n g t h e r o o t
o f s i n ) can we g a i n i d e a l p e r s o n a l i t y . I n I n g e ' s o p i n i o n ,
when t h e f a l s e s e l f i s d e s t r o y e d , t h e n t h e t r u e s e l f can
s a y w i t h P a u l , " I l i v e , y e t n o t I b u t C h r i s t l i v e t h i n
,»51
m e. "
I n d e f e n s e o f P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n ' s v ie w i t ca n be
s a i d t h a t he was n o t s e e k i n g t o a v o i d i n t i m a t e communion
w i t h God; he was s e e k i n g t o a v o id a b s o r p t i o n by God. The
c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f s e l f d i s a p p e a r s i n t h e a b s o r b i n g
4 7
I n g e , P e r s o n a l I d e a l i s m a n d M y s t i c i s m , p . 9 5 .
4 8
I b i d . , p . 97-
4 9 -
I b i d . , p . 96 .
so
I b i d . , p . 80.
5 1G3al. 2:20.
79
c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e , y e t t h i s does n o t
5 2
mean t h e l o s s o f s e l f o r p e r s o n a l i t y . The s e l f s u r v i v e s
t o r e a l i z e th e f r u i t i o n o f t h e u n io n . In u n io n w i t h God
5 3
" e t e r n a l l i f e " i s e x p e r i e n c e d i n t h e m id s t o f tim e . The
i n d i v i d u a l who e x p e r i e n c e s t h e lo v e o f God h e r e and now i n
th e a p p r e h e n s io n o f T r u th o r B ea u ty o r Goodness i s n o t
5 4
t r o u b l e d a b o u t p e r s o n a l s u r v i v a l o r i m m o r t a l i t y , h o w ev er.
Such s u r v i v a l w ould mean n o t h i n g t o him I f he were
s e p a r a t e d from God. I m m o r t a l i t y w i t h o u t e t e r n a l l i f e i s
5 5
m e a n i n g l e s s . N o n e t h l e s s , t h e i n d i v i d u a l may s u r v i v e t h e
d e a t h o f t h e body t o p u rs u e h i s d e s t i n y u n d e r new c o n d i -
5 6
t i o n s . T here i s no r e a s o n why th e c r e a t i v e p r o c e s s
s h o u ld i n t e r v e n e to d i s s o l v e t h e p e r s o n a l i t i e s t h a t hav e
5 7
b e e n c a l l e d i n t o b e i n g .
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n c la im e d t h a t p e r s o n a l i m m o r t a l i t y
i s n o t an i n h e r e n t p o s s e s s i o n o f each human b e i n g , f o r
p e r s o n a l i t y must be won b e f o r e t h e r e can be any q u e s t i o n
5 8
o f i t s c o n s e r v a t i o n . A t r u e s e l f , g iv e n t h e o p p o r t u n i t y ,
5 2
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , The Idea, o f 'I m m o r t a l i t y , p . l 6 3 .
3I b i d . , p. 145 •
51*I b i d . , p . 147.
55I b i d . , p . 205.-
56I b i d . , p . 105.
57I b i d . , p . 163.
58I b i d . , p . 196.
80
may come i n t o b e in g as th e r e s u l t o f e f f o r t ; b u t th e d a n g e r
o f d i s i n t e g r a t i o n i s always p r e s e n t . I m m o r ta lity does n o t
5 9
come a u t o m a t i c a l l y . Yet i t may be t h a t no s i n g l e s o u l
w i l l be l o s t , b e c a u se o f th e i n f i n i t e l o n g - s u f f e r i n g o f
d iv in e com passion. I t i s r a s h t o im agine God's p a t i e n c e
e x h a u s te d a f t e r an i n d i v i d u a l 's s h o r t e a r t h l y l i f e .
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n a d m itte d t h a t th e i d e a o f u n i v e r s a l r e s t o
r a t i o n has an a p p e a l s in c e i t i s b a s e d on t h e c o n c e p tio n o f
God's u n l i m i t e d goodness g iv i n g f u r t h e r o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n
l a t e r l i v e s t o th o s e who do n o t f i n d r e s t i n God in th e
6 o
p r e s e n t l i f e . The d is a d v a n ta g e o f t h i s i d e a i s t h a t i f
p e o p le a re a s s u re d t h a t , w h a te v e r th e y do, a l l w i l l come
r i g h t in th e end, th e n they w i l l n o t be f u l l y awakened t o
th e g r a v i t y o f th e d e c i s io n s n e c e s s a r y t o f i n d t h e i r way to
6 1
God. I f human b e in g s are f r e e t o a c c e p t o r r e j e c t th e
good f r e e l y o f f e r e d by God, th e n i s i t p o s s i b l e t h a t some
s o u l s , however lo n g t h e i r p r o b a t i o n , may, t o th e end,
h a rd e n t h e i r h e a r t s , and so e x c lu d e th e m s e lv e s from g ra c e ?
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n answ ered t h a t such freedom i s an a b s t r a c
t i o n o f t h e i n t e l l e c t , and t h a t " f i n a l d e t e r m in a ti o n to
e v i l i s i n c o n s i s t e n t w ith what we b e l i e v e o f th e omnipo-
6 2.
te n c e o f lo v e o r th e a l l - c o n s t r a i n i n g power o f g o o d n e s s."
59I b i d . , p. 2 00. 62I b i d . , p . 204.
5 0
I b i d . , p . 202.
61I b i d . , pp. 203-204.
81
In e v a l u a t i n g P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n 1s arg u m e n ts I o f f e r
t h e f o l l o w i n g c r i t i c i s m o f h i s a t t a c k on K a n t ’ s " u s a g e " o f
God as a means t o e f f e c t t h e h i g h e s t good. Does n o t any
t h e o r y w hich a r r i v e s a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t " t h e r e f o r e , God
e x i s t s , " u se God as a means t o make s e n s e o f t h e e v id e n c e
w hich p o i n t s t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n ? Did n o t P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n
u se God as t h e " p r i n c i p l e o f e x p l a n a t i o n " t o a c c o u n t f o r
t h e s p i r i t u a l l y p r o g r e s s i v e u n i v e r s e ? F u r th e r m o r e , one can
d e fe n d Kant by p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t h i s p r i n c i p l e s do n o t p r e
c lu d e u s i n g ; r a t h e r , t h e p r i n c i p l e s r u l e o u t u s i n g as a
means o n ly . F i n a l l y , i t i s d o u b t f u l i f " u s in g " God as a
p r i n c i p l e o f e x p l a n a t i o n i s a n y t h i n g l i k e " u s i n g " Him as a
means t o s a t i s f y a s e l f i s h i n c l i n a t i o n .
On t h e p o s i t i v e s i d e one can r e c o g n i z e P r i n g l e -
P a t t i s o n ' s a rg u m en t f o r t h e em erg en ce o f h i g h e r v a l u e s as
a v a l u a b l e e x t e n s i o n o f t h e m o ra l a rg u m e n t. The p o s s i b i l i
ty o f t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f h i g h e r v a l u e s th a n any now known
w ould r e q u i r e a h i g h e r p r i n c i p l e o f e x p l a n a t i o n . Can we
s a f e l y say t h a t we h av e a r r i v e d a t an a d e q u a te r e c o g n i t i o n
o f t h e h i g h e s t v a l u e s , o r h a s e m e rg e n t e v o l u t i o n a way t o
go y e t ?
In c o n c l u s i o n , i t s h o u ld be n o t e d t h a t P r i n g l e -
P a t t i s o n was s t i l l u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e a b s o l u t e
i d e a l i s t s , and was u n a b l e t o a r r i v e a t u n e q u iv o c a l t h e i s m ,
6 3
i n t h e o p i n i o n o f C o p l e s t o n . Metz s t a t e d t h a t P r i n g l e -
63C o p l e s t o n , H i s t o r y , v o l . V III., I , p . 2 8 l .
P a t t i s o n ' s p h i l o s o p h y i s an u n s a t i s f a c t o r y compromise t h a t
6 k
e x a l t s human p e r s o n a l i t y a t t h e c o s t o f God. I n th e
o p in io n o f J . B. B a i l l i e , P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n " c a n n o t be s a i d
t o p o s s e s s any o r i g i n a l i t y as a t h i n k e r . He was a sympa
t h e t i c i n t e r p r e t e r and e x p o n e n t r a t h e r th a n a c r e a t o r o f
6 5
f o r m a tiv e i d e a s . "
(B) W illia m R i t c h i e SorTey
Cunningham m a i n t a i n e d t h a t W illia m R i t c h i e S o r le y
added " n o th in g i n p r i n c i p l e t o th e h i g h e r n a t u r a l i s m o f
6 6
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n . " Even i f t h i s s ta te m e n t i s t r u e (and I
do n o t t h i n k t h a t i t i s ) , S o r l e y ’ s e l a b o r a t i o n o f th e
p r i n c i p l e s o f p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s m d e s e rv e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . He
was a b le t o s q u e e z e th e is m from v a lu e e x p e r i e n c e , w h ile
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n was n o t a b l e t o do so from h i s " u n s a t l s -
6 7
f a c t o r y amalgam o f a b s o l u t e i d e a l i s m and t h e i s m ." A ls o ,
i n t h e o p in io n o f R a s h d a l l , S o r le y was b o th more c o n v in c in g
6 8
and c o n s i s t e n t t h a n P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n .
64M etz, A Hundred Y ears o f B r i t i s h P h i l o s o p h y , p . 389
65J . B. B a i l l i e , " P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n as P h i l o s o p h e r "
i n P ro c e e d in g s' o f t h e B r i t i s h Academy, 1 9 3 1 3 p . 463.
6SThe I d e a l i s t i c A rgum ent, p . 171.
67C o p le s to n , H i's'to ry , v o l . V I I I , I , p . 268.
68H. R a s h d a l l , "The M oral Argument f o r P e r s o n a l
I m m o r t a l i t y K in g 1 ■ s C o lle g e L e c tu r e s on' 'I m m o r ta lity , ed.
by W. R. Mat thew s (L ondon: U n i v e r s i t y o f London P r e s s ,
1 9 2 0 ), p . 86.
S o r l e y b o l d l y a n n o u n c e d t h e s t r a t e g y o f h i s w ork as
f o l l o w s :
The p u r p o s e o f t h e p r e s e n t w ork i s t o e n q u i r e
i n t o t h e b e a r i n g o f e t h i c a l i d e a s upon t h e
v ie w o f r e a l i t y a s a w h o le w h ic h we a r e j u s t i f i e d
i n f o r m i n g . The a rg u m e n t b e g i n s w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n
o f v a l u e s an d e n d s w i t h t h e i d e a o f G o d .59
Any f i n a l view o f r e a l i t y m ust b e b a s e d on e x p e r i
e n c e ; b u t t h i s m u st n o t be a r b i t r a r i l y l i m i t e d t o s e n s e
d a t a w h ic h a r e t h e b a s i s o f n a t u r a l s c i e n c e . Human
e x p e r i e n c e i n c l u d e s t h e a p p r e c i a t i o n o f m o ra l v a l u e s w h ic h
m u st s e r v e as t h e b a s i s o f " e t h i c a l s c i e n c e . " 70 The e x p r e s
s i o n " e t h i c a l s c i e n c e " was u s e d by S o r l e y t o draw a t t e n t i o n
t o t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s o f law s o f n a t u r e and law s o f m o r a l i t y .
J u s t as t h e g e n e r a l law s o f n a t u r e a r e b a s e d on t h e j u d g
m ents o f s e n s e p e r c e p t i o n , so to o t h e g e n e r a l la w s o f
m o r a l i t y a r e b a s e d on p a r t i c u l a r a p p r e c i a t i o n s o f good o r
7 i
b a d made i n c o n c r e t e s i t u a t i o n s . T hese p a r t i c u l a r v a l u e
ju d g m e n ts a r e im m e d ia te i n t u i t i o n s , l i k e p e r c e p t i o n s , and
n o t t h e r e s u l t o f r e a s o n i n g . They a r e n o t i n t u i t i o n s o f
g e n e r a l p r o p o s i t i o n s fro m w h ic h o t h e r m o ra l t r u t h s a r e
d e d u c e d .
6 9
S o r l e y , M o ra l V a lu e s and t h e I d e a o f G od, p . 1.
7 ° I b i d . , p . 91 and p . 1 5 0 .
7 1
I b i d . , p . 91* S o r l e y r e f e r s t o A r i s t o t l e ' s view
i n t h e N lc o m a c h e a h E t h i c s , 11 4 2 a 27 3 t h a t m o ra l ju d g m e n t i s
i n t h e f i r s t i n s t a n c e a p e r c e p t i v e ju d g m e n t.
Our m o ra l know ledge I s n o t d e r i v e d fro m a
f i x e d and c e r t a i n p r i n c i p l e . I t grows i n
amount and i n o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h t h e gro w th
o f o u r m o ra l e x p e r i e n c e ; and by c r i t i c i s m
o f t h i s e x p e r i e n c e we g r a d u a l l y form l e s s
i m p e r f e c t c o n c e p t i o n s o f t h e r e a lm o f e n d s ,
o r w o rld o f v a l u e s , as a w h o l e . 72
On t h i s p o i n t S o r le y c la im e d an i m p o r t a n t b r e a k
w ith K a n t’ s view t h a t a l l m o ra l ju d g m en t i s an a p p l i c a t i o n
o f t h e f i x e d an d c e r t a i n g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e o f t h e i n t r i n s i c
v a lu e o f good w i l l . As a p u r e l y f o rm a l p r i n c i p l e , S o rle y
c la im e d , i t i s u n a b le t o y i e l d any c o n c r e t e e t h i c a l c o n t e n t
and i t t h u s f a i l s t o g iv e a s y s te m o f m o ra l v a l u e s . In
c o n t r a s t , e t h i c a l s c i e n c e makes no c l a i m t o i n f a l l i b i l i t y ,
j u s t as n a t u r a l s c i e n c e a d m its t h a t t h e o r i e s a b o u t n a t u r a l
law s may be m is ta k e n and s u b j e c t t o c o r r e c t i o n . E r r o r s
e n t e r i n t o s e n s e jud g m en t and m o ra l ju d g m e n t, and t h e y m ust
be c o r r e c t e d by a d d i t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e . But t h e p o s s i b i l i t y
o f e r r o r d o es n o t deny t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f t r u t h and ob
j e c t i v i t y i n e i t h e r s c i e n c e . The ad v an ce o f b o th n a t u r a l
and e t h i c a l s c i e n c e r e q u i r e s c r i t i c i s m and t h e o c c a s i o n a l
d i s c a r d i n g o f p r e l i m i n a r y g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s .
M o r a l i t y , l i k e s c i e n c e , i s a d e v e lo p m e n t, th e
h i s t o r y o f w hich can be t r a c e d . M o r a l i t y i s r e l a t e d to
s o c i e t y much i n t h e same way as s c i e n c e i s , f o r b o t h a r e
s o c i a l p r o d u c t s ; b u t t h i s do es n o t a f f e c t t h e v a l i d i t y o f
72S o r l e y , M oral V alues' and I d e a o f God, p . 155.
85
73
e i t h e r . The mere i n d i v i d u a l o u t s i d e s o c i e t y would n o t
p o s s e s s th e i n t e l l e c t u a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f a p e rso n
c o n s c io u s o f h i s c o n n e c tio n s w ith o t h e r s . The la n g u a g e
u se d t o e x p r e s s ju d g m e n ts i s a s o c i a l f o r m a tio n . T h u s,
a p a r t from s o c i a l i n f l u e n c e n e i t h e r s c i e n t i f i c n o r e t h i c a l
knowledge c o u ld e x i s t .
We c a n n o t, t h e r e f o r e , make th e s o c i a l , any
more th a n t h e p s y c h i c a l , o r i g i n o f m o r a li t y
an o b j e c t i o n t o i t s v a l i d i t y , u n l e s s we a re
p r e p a r e d a t t h e same tim e t o a llo w t h a t th e
s o c i a l o r i g i n o f s c ie n c e i s an o b j e c t i o n t o
i t s v a l i d i t y . 75
In b o th m o r a l i t y and s c i e n c e r e f e r e n c e i s made to
so m eth in g beyond t h e m e n ta l s t a t e o f a s u b j e c t — t o a v a lu e
a p p r e c i a t e d o r t o an o b j e c t ( o r r e l a t i o n s h i p ) p e r c e i v e d .
S o r le y c la im e d t h a t b o th e t h i c a l and n a t u r a l s c ie n c e a r e
o b j e c t i v e , n o t s u b j e c t i v e o r r e l a t i v e .
The a p p r e c i a t i o n o f v a lu e i s on t h e same
l e v e l a s know ledge o f t h i n g s , t h e i r q u a l i t i e s
and r e l a t i o n s . We have no more r e a s o n f o r
s a y in g t h a t v a l u e i s r e l a t i v e b e c a u s e i t i s
a p p r e c i a t e d by us th a n we have f o r s a y in g t h a t
f a c t s a r e r e l a t i v e b e c a u s e th e y a re ap p reh en d ed
by u s . 76
In s h o r t , S o r le y b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e c la im t h a t v a lu e j u d g
m ents a r e m e re ly s u b j e c t i v e i s on " a l l - f o u r s " w ith t h e
73
I b i d . , p . 70.
74I b i d . , p . 72.
75
I b i d .
6I b i d ., p . 13^•
86
c la im f o r t h e s u b j e c t l v i t y o f k n o w led g e. F o llo w in g Hume,
one can a rg u e th a t, t h e r e a r e no o b j e c t i v e c o n n e c t i o n s i n
n a t u r e ; t h e r e i s n o t h i n g more th a n a s u b j e c t i v e c o n n e c t i o n
o f i d e a s i n t h e m ind. But i f one w a n ts t o p r e s e r v e , ob
j e c t i v i t y i n n a t u r a l s c i e n c e , t h e n , S o r le y c l a i m e d , one
must g r a n t o b j e c t i v i t y t o e t h i c a l s c i e n c e .
The c r i t e r i a o f v a l i d i t y t h a t can be a p p l i e d t o
m o ra l ju d g m e n ts a r e o b j e c t i v i t y , u n i v e r s a l i t y , c o h e r e n c e ,
7 7
s y s t e m a t i s a t i o n , and c o m p r e h e n s iv e n e s s . B ut t h e s e
c r i t e r i a a r e n o t a lw a y s c a p a b le o f e a s y a p p l i c a t i o n , so we
may e x p e c t c o m p e tin g t h e o r i e s . Our e t h i c a l k n o w le d g e , l i k e
o u r s c i e n t i f i c k n o w le d g e , i s l i m i t e d . N o n e t h e l e s s , t h e r e
h av e b e e n a d v a n c e s i n b o th f i e l d s . S o r le y c la im e d t h a t i t
i s a p e rm a n e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f m o ra l c o n s c i o u s n e s s t o
f i n d e t h i c a l v a l u e i n c e r t a i n ty p e s o f e x p e r i e n c e .
At e v e r y c r i t i c a l t u r n th e m o ra l ju d g m en t
p r o n o u n c e s f o r t h e s u p e r i o r i t y o f t h e
s p i r i t u a l t o t h e m a t e r i a l i n l i f e , and
r e c o g n i z e s t h e im p o r ta n c e of. s o c i a l ends
when c o n f r o n t e d by t h e i n t e r e s t o r a p p a r e n t
i n t e r e s t s o f t h e s e l f - s e e k i n g i n d i v i d u a l .
T h is h i g h e r l i f e and t h e w i d e r l i f e - — th e
l i f e o f s p i r i t and t h e l i f e f o r o t h e r s —
t h e s e t h e m o r a l ju d g m en t a p p ro v e s w i t h a
c o n s ta n c y w h ic h i s a lm o s t u n i f o r m . 78
A f i n a l d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e m o ra l i d e a l i s n o t
p o s s i b l e , h o w e v e r, f o r know led g e o f t h e m o ra l i d e a l grows
77I b i d . , p p . 9 3 -1 0 0 .
78I b i d . , p. 106.
87
7 9
i n c l e a r n e s s as c h a r a c t e r a p p ro x im a te s t o i t . I t can be
e x p r e s s e d b e s t as a s p i r i t i n w hich t h e h i g h e r s o c i a l
8 0
c a p a c i t i e s triu m p h o v e r s e l f i s h impulses. T h is i s th e
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f t h e good w i l l . However, as we have s e e n ,
t h i s p r i n c i p l e must rem ain m e re ly f o r m a l, u n a b le to p r o v id e
g u id a n c e i n t h e c o n c r e t e d e t a i l s o f l i f e ; i t s c o n te n t can
o nly be g o t from ju d g m en ts o f good and bad b a s e d on p rim a ry
8 1
v a lu e e x p e r i e n c e . N o n e t h e l e s s , th e p r i n c i p l e o f good w i l l
i s u n c o n d i t i o n a l , s i n c e i t c a n n o t be a l t e r e d by o u r v a lu e
e x p e r i e n c e s o r t h e i r r e s u l t a n t ju d g m e n ts . O th e r e t h i c a l
n o t i o n s may n eed r e v i s i o n , b u t n o t th e fo rm a l p r i n c i p l e o f
t h e m o ra l l i f e — th e o b l i g a t i o n t o p u r s u e and c h e r i s h th e
good. S o r le y compared th e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f t h i s p r i n c i p l e
t o th e m o ra l l i f e w i t h th e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f th e axiom o f
8 2
n o n - c o n t r a d i c t i o n t o know ledge.
A f t e r S o r le y e s t a b l i s h e d a c la im f o r th e o b j e c t i v i
t y of t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f e t h i c a l s c i e n c e , th e n he t r i e d t o
show t h a t m o ral v a l u e s b e lo n g t o th e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y .
He c la im e d t h a t t h e r e a r e t h r e e d i v i s i o n s o f r e a l i t y :
(1) p e r s o n s , t h i n g s , and o r g a n i c b e in g s i n b etw een ;
(2) r e l a t i o n s ; and (3 ) v a l u e s . 83 U ltim a te r e a l i t y i s th e
79I b l d . , p . 508.
80 I b i d .
81I b i d . , p . 147.
82I b i d .
83I b i d . , p. 2 2 5 ff.
88
8 4
g ro u n d o f e v e r y t h i n g t h a t i s r e a l . A c o m p r e h e n s iv e v iew
o f r e a l i t y m ust i n c l u d e an a c c o u n t o f t h i n g s and p e r s o n s ,
85
l a w s , a n d v a l u e s , a s d e p e n d e n t u p o n t h i s u l t i m a t e g r o u n d .
N a t u r a l s c i e n c e i g n o r e s v a l u e s b e c a u s e v a l u e
c h a r a c t e r i z e s i n d i v i d u a l s , an d s c i e n c e i s c o n c e r n e d w i t h
8 6
t h e u n i v e r s a l . V a lu e i s a s c r i b e d t o i n d i v i d u a l b e i n g s o r
g ro u p s o f i n d i v i d u a l b e i n g s w h ich e x i s t o r a r e c o n t e m p l a t e d
as p o s s i b l y e x i s t i n g . M o ra l p e r f e c t i o n i s o f v a l u e i f i t
e x i s t s ; b u t as a m ere c o n c e p t a p a r t fro m a c t u a l r e a l i z a t i o n
i t i s n o t o f v a l u e .
The p r e d i c a t i o n o f v a l u e t h u s i m p l i e s o r
assu m es s o m e th in g e x i s t i n g w h ic h can be
s a i d t o p o s s e s s t h e v a l u e ; t h e t r u e ' b e a r e r
o f v a l u e i s an e x i s t e n t o r s o m e th in g c o n
c e i v e d as e x i s t i n g . Were t h e r e no e x i s t e n c e
t h e r e w o u ld b e no v a l u e ; v a l u e o u t o f r e l a t i o n
t o e x i s t e n c e h a s no m e a n i n g . 87
T h in g s h av e i n s t r u m e n t a l v a l u e t o p e r s o n s , who a r e
c o n s c i o u s b e i n g s who a c t i n p u r s u i t o f e n d s f r e e l y
8 8
s e l e c t e d . E t h i c a l v a l u e s a r e f a c t s o f p e r s o n a l c o n s c i o u s
n e s s , a n d th e y a r e r e a l i z e d t h r o u g h t h e w i l l an d i n t h e
89
c h a r a c t e r o f p e r s o n s .
I b i d . , p . 500.
8 5
I b i d .
86I b i d . , p . 1 1 1 .
8 7
l b i d . , p p . 108-109*
88I b i d . , p . 1 8 9 .
" i b i d . , p. 184.
89
And w h ich o f t h e s e v a l u e s i s h i g h e s t f o r man?
Prom h i s own r e a s o n and from s o c i a l judgm ent
he becomes aw are o f th e d i f f e r e n c e s o f v a lu e
w hich make one way p r e f e r a b l e t o a n o t h e r and
a u t h o r i t a t i v e f o r h i s w i l l . No c a u s a l n e c e s s i t y
com pels him t o t a k e th e way he o u g h t t o t a k e .
B u t, i f he does so c h o o s e , and i f he accu sto m
h i m s e l f t o w i l l th e h i g h e r v a l u e s i n s p i t e o f
th e a t t r a c t i o n s o f o t h e r i n t e r e s t s , th e n he
a c h ie v e s i n t h i s p r o c e s s a h i g h e r v a l u e th a n
any o t h e r — t h a t o f t h e good w i l l o f a f r e e m a n .90
S o r le y n e x t a s k e d how we a r e t o i n t e r p r e t and
u n d e r s t a n d r e a l i t y as a w h o le , i n c l u d i n g e t h i c a l v a l u e s .
N a t u r a l i s m , d e ism , p a n th e is m , and p l u r a l i s m w ere c o n s i d e r e d
by him and d i s m i s s e d as i n a d e q u a t e a c c o u n t s . Theism b a s e d
on m o ra l e v id e n c e seem ed more p r o m is in g . He s y m p a t h e t i c a l
ly c o n s i d e r e d ( b u t r e j e c t e d as d e f e c t i v e ) t h r e e v a r i a t i o n s
o f t h e m o ra l arg u m en t f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God. The f i r s t
arg u m en t was t h a t p r e s e n t e d by H a r a ld H o f fd in g i n The
P h ilo s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n . B ec au se v a l u e s a r e o b j e c t i v e we a re
l e d t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e " u n i v e r s e , w hich u p h o ld s and co n
t a i n s t h e s e o b j e c t i v e l y v a l i d v a l u e s , w i l l n o t c a r e l e s s l y
l e t them go b u t w i l l p r o v id e some means f o r t h e i r p e rm a n e n t
9 1
r e a l i z a t i o n . " T h is arg u m en t f o r t h e c o n s e r v a t i o n o f
v a l u e s does n o t go f a r en o u g h , S o r le y c o n te n d e d , b e c a u s e i t
a p p e a r s t o r e s t c o n t e n t w i t h t h e m o ra l s t a t u s quo i n s t e a d
o f i n s i s t i n g t h a t p e r f e c t i o n s h o u ld be a c h ie v e d .
9 °T b i d . , p p . 4 4 4 -4 4 5 .
91I b i d . , p . 174 .
90
The se co n d argum ent was t h a t g iv e n by H a s tin g s
R a s h d a ll i n The Theory o f Good and E v i l . Where can e t e r n a l
o b j e c t i v e l y v a l i d m o ral v a lu e s e x i s t i f n o t em bodied i n
m a t t e r and n o t r e a l i z e d by f i n i t e m inds? T here m ust be a
Supreme Mind w hich i s th e home o f such v a l u e s . S o r le y
q u o te d from R a s h d a l l :
A m o ra l i d e a l can e x i s t nowhere and nohow
b u t i n a m ind; an a b s o l u t e m o ra l i d e a l can
e x i s t o n ly i n a Mind from, w hich a l l R e a l i t y
i s d e r i v e d . Our m o ra l i d e a l can o n ly c la im
o b j e c t i v e v a l i d i t y i n so f a r as. i t can
r a t i o n a l l y be r e g a r d e d as t h e r e v e l a t i o n o f
a m o ra l i d e a l e t e r n a l l y e x i s t i n g i n th e mind
o f G o d .92
The t h i r d argum ent S o r le y e v a l u a t e d was K a n t's
m o ra l arg u m en t. S o r le y r e c o g n i z e d t h e v a lu e o f i t .
K a n t 's argum ent i s open t o c r i t i c i s m i n d e t a i l ;
b u t i t i s re m a rk a b le as t h e f i r s t c l e a r s t a t e
ment o f th e t r u t h t h a t a m e ta p h y s ic a l th e o r y
c a n n o t be a d e q u a te u n l e s s fo u n d ed on a r e c o g n i t i o n
o f th e re a lm o f e n d s , as w e l l as th e re a lm o f
n a t u r e , t o w hich man b e l o n g s . 93
N o n e t h e l e s s , t h e argum ent as p r e s e n t e d by Kant m ust be r e
j e c t e d . K a n t 's view ( a c c o r d i n g t o S o r le y ) was t h a t t h e r e
a re two sy ste m s o f r e a l i t y — th e m o ra l and n a t u r a l r e a lm s —
and God i s r e q u i r e d i n o r d e r t o b r i n g ab o u t harmony b etw een
th e two d i f f e r e n t s y s te m s . "The b e in g o f God i s th u s
i n t r o d u c e d by Kant as a means o f u n i t i n g two d i s p a r a t e
9 2
I b i d . ., p . 3^8. The p a s s a g e - q u o t e d i s from
H. R a s h d a ll,' The Theory o f Good' and' E v i l ■ (.19-07),. v o l . I I ,
p . 212.
93I b i d . , p. 330.
91
s y s te m s o f c o n c e p t i o n s , w h ic h h a v e b e e n s u n d e r e d i n h i s
9 * +
t h o u g h t . " N e i t h e r n a t u r e a l o n e n o r m o r a l i t y a l o n e r e
q u i r e s God; b u t t h e r e c o n c i l i a t i o n o f them r e q u i r e s God i n
K a n t ’ s t h e o r y .
Now3 f o r K a n t, n a t u r e i s a c l o s e d an d s e l f -
c o n s i s t e n t s y s t e m ; so i s m o r a l i t y . N e i t h e r ,
t h e r e f o r e p r o v e s God; b u t he i s n e e d e d t o w e ld
them t o g e t h e r ; and t h e m o ra l r e a s o n demands
t h e i r u l t i m a t e h a r m o n y .95
S o r l e y r e j e c t e d t h i s v iew o f two d i s p a r a t e s y s te m s
o f r e a l i t y .
We m u st r e g a r d t h e tw o s y s t e m s , t h e r e f o r e ,
n o t as t h e o r d e r s o f tw o e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t
w o r l d s , b u t r a t h e r a s d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s o f
t h e same r e a l i t y .
Prom t h i s p o i n t o f view t h e m o r a l a rg u m e n t
w i l l r e q u i r e t o be f o r m u l a t e d i n a d i f f e r e n t
way fro m t h a t i n w h ic h i t i s s e t f o r t h by K a n t .
I t w i l l be n e c e s s a r y t o h a v e r e g a r d n o t t o a
c o n n e x io n b e tw e e n tw o w o r l d s , b u t t o r e l a t i o n s
w i t h i n t h e one s y s te m o f r e a l i t y ; and we s h a l l
h a v e t o e n q u i r e w h at k i n d o f g e n e r a l v ie w i s
j u s t i f i e d when b o t h m o ra l i d e a s and o u r e x p e r i e n c e
o f n a t u r e a r e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t . 96
T h is b r i n g s us t o an a c c o u n t o f S o r l e y Ts v e r s i o n o f
t h e m o ra l a rg u m e n t f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God. S o r l e y
c l a i m e d t h a t t h e i s m r e s u l t s fro m a c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e
w h o le o f e x p e r i e n c e , w h ic h i n c l u d e s b o t h t h e f a c t s o f
m o ra l v a l u e s an d t h e a p p a r e n t m o ra l i n d i f f e r e n c e o f n a t u r e .
He c l a im e d t h a t h i s a rg u m e n t h a s a w i d e r r a n g e t h a n o t h e r
911 I b i d . , p . 3 3 ^ .
95I b i d . , p . 335-
96I b i d . , p p . 336- 3 3 7 .
92
a rg u m en t b e c a u s e i t i s fo u n d e d n o t on t h e m o ra l o r d e r by
i t s e l f b u t on i t s r e l a t i o n t o t h e o r d e r o f e x i s t i n g t h i n g s ,
9 7
and b o th m ust h av e t h e same u l t i m a t e g r o u n d .
The o r d e r o f n a t u r e and o f f i n i t e m in d s , as
we know th e m , do n o t , h o w e v e r , m a n i f e s t
e t h i c a l v a l u e s w i t h any e x a c t n e s s o r p u r i t y ;
i n t h e i r e x i s t i n g n a t u r e t h e y a r e o u t o f
harm ony w i t h t h e m o ra l o r d e r . B ut harm ony may
be r e a c h e d i f i t i s a l l o w a b l e t o assum e p u r p o s e
i n t h e w o r ld and f re e d o m i n man. N a tu r e can
t h e n be r e g a r d e d a s an a p p r o p r i a t e medium f o r
t h e r e a l i z a t i o n o f v a l u e by m inds f i n i t e b u t f r e e .
The harm ony i s a r e l a t i o n w h ic h s t a n d s i n n e e d
o f r e a l i z a t i o n ; and t h e p u r p o s e o f r e a l i z i n g
i t r e q u i r e s c o n s c i o u s n e s s i n t h e g ro u n d o f
r e a l i t y as a w h o le . T h is g ro u n d o r p r i n c i p l e
o r r e a l i t y w i l l t h e r e f o r e i n v o l v e t h e w i l l t o
g o o d n e s s as w e l l as i n t e l l i g e n c e and p o w er;
and t h i s i s w hat we mean by G o d .98
The c ru x o f t h i s arg u m en t i s t h e a s s u m p tio n o f p u r p o s e i n
t h e w o r l d . S o r l e y a r g u e d t h a t t h e r e i s e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e
9 9
w o r ld i s a n im a te d by a u n i v e r s a l c o n s c i o u s p u r p o s e .
I f p u r p o s e be a d m i t t e d a s n e c e s s a r y f o r th e
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f o r g a n i s m s , an d i f o rg a n is m s
a r e h e l d t o h av e a r i s e n o u t o f i n o r g a n i c
m a t e r i a l , t h e n t h e r e i s good r e a s o n t o
p o s t u l a t e t h a t t h e p r o c e s s w hich l e d t o
o r g a n i c an d p u r p o s i v e l i f e was i t s e l f a n im a te d
by p u r p o s e . 10 0
S o r le y a d m i t t e d t h a t t h i s d o c t r i n e i s n o t r i g i d l y demon
s t r a b l e , y e t n e i t h e r i s i t r u l e d o u t by e x p e r i e n c e .
97 I b i d . , p . 479.
" i b i d . , p p . 4 7 9 -4 8 0 .
" i b i d . , p . 421.
1 ° ° I b i d . , p . 420.
93
We have fo u n d t h a t , even i f e x p e r ie n c e does .
not' compel us t o ad m it t h e r e a l i t y o f p u rp o s e
i n n a t u r e and o f i n d i v i d u a l fre e d o m , a t l e a s t
i t does n o t e x c lu d e t h e s e i d e a s , and i t
j u s t i f i e s o u r a c c e p ta n c e o f them as p o s t u l a t e s
i n t h e f o r m a t i o n o f a co m p re h e n siv e view o f
r e a l i t y as a w h o l e . 101
T here i s t h e n , i n S o r l e y ' s v iew , a harmony betw een
m oral law and n a t u r e . N a tu re i s t h e medium f o r t h e t r a i n -
l o 2
in g o f m o ra l b e i n g s . N a tu re i s s u b s e r v i e n t t o th e p u r
pose o f God: th e p e r f e c t i o n o f goodness i n f i n i t e minds
1 o 3
who f r e e l y s t r u g g l e i n n a t u r e to w a rd m o ra l p e r f e c t i o n .
The p u rp o se e x i s t s e t e r n a l l y i n G od's m ind; th e tim e p r o
c e ss i s th e sc e n e on w hich f i n i t e minds work o u t t h i s
l o 4
p u r p o s e . Man i s a s p i r i t im m ersed in m a t t e r , r e s t r i c t e d
t o tim e and s p a c e . G od's p u rp o se can n o t be l i m i t e d by
tim e o r s p a c e , so th e d i v i n e p u rp o s e i s f r e e from th e
d i s t i n c t i o n b etw een means and a t t a i n m e n t . 105
The t h e i s t i c view o f th e w o rld w hich I have
b een c o n s i d e r i n g i s d e f i n i t e l y an e t h i c a l view .
I t was l e d up t o by an e n q u ir y i n t o t h e f a c t s
o f v a lu e i n t h e w o rld and by th e c o n c e p tio n o f
a m o ra l o r d e r o f t h e w o r ld ; and i t i s s u e s in
a view w hich f i n d s th e. m o ra l p u rp o s e o f th e
w o rld to be th e p u rp o s e o f a Supreme Mind and
w hich r e g a r d s f i n i t e m inds as a t t a i n i n g u n i t y
1 0 1
I b i d . , p . 446.
102'I b id . , p . 504.
1 0 3
I b i d
I b i d . , p . 463■
l O H
1° 5I b i d . , p . 491•
94
w i t h t h i s Suprem e Mind n o t by t h e a b .s o r p tio n
o r t h e i r i n d i v i d u a l i t y b u t by t h e p e r f e c t i n g
o f t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i n c o o p e r a t i n g w i t h t h e
d i v i n e p u r p o s e . 106
S o r l e y s a i d t h a t God can be t h o u g h t o f i n s u c h ways
as t h e f o l l o w i n g : i n t e l l i g e n t s p i r i t ; t h e p r i n c i p l e o r
g ro u n d o f a l l r e a l i t y ; p e r f e c t i o n ( " w h ic h m eans v a l u e o r
10 7
w o r t h a t i t s h i g h e s t p o i n t " ) ; w isd o m ; a n d l o v e . H o w e v e r,
he n e v e r e x p l i c i t l y m e n tio n e d t h e i d e a o f d i v i n e p e r s o n a l i -
10 8
t y . He r e f e r r e d t o God as "him" a t l e a s t o n c e , b u t
a v o id e d r e f e r e n c e t o p e r s o n h o o d i n God. P e r h a p s i n h i s
e f f o r t t o a v o i d a n th ro p o m o rp h is m S o r l e y t h o u g h t i t b e t t e r
n o t t o e x t e n d t h e l i s t o f d i v i n e t r a i t s t o i n c l u d e
p e r s o n a l i t y . I n any c a s e , he d i d n o t advance, t h e n o t i o n o f
d i v i n e p e r s o n a l i t y t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t C. C. J . Webb d i d , as
we s h a l l s e e .
I n e v a l u a t i n g S o r l e y ' s v ie w s one can a g r e e t h a t h i s
way o f s t a t i n g t h i n g s i s i n s e v e r a l r e s p e c t s a n im p ro v em en t
o v e r K a n t ’ s w ay. B ut w h e t h e r t h e r e a r e tw o " s y s te m s " o r
tw o " a s p e c t s " o f r e a l i t y i s n o t c r u c i a l f o r t h e m o ra l
a r g u m e n t. S o r l e y d e v e l o p e d v a l u e t h e o r y m ore c o m p l e t e l y
t h a n K a n t, and t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f an " e t h i c a l s c i e n c e "
a r e i m p r e s s i v e . But S o r l e y ' s t h e o l o g i c a l s p e c u l a t i o n s
b a s e d upon h i s v a l u e t h e o r y a re n o t much more, d a r i n g t h a n
10 6
Tbid., p . 4 6 7.
10 7
I b i d . , p . 4 8 7 .
10 8
I b i d . , p . 507•
95
K a n t 's . I n f a c t , so f a r as I can s e e , t h e r e a r e no
i m p l i c a t i o n s i n what S o r le y s a i d o f God t h a t Kant h ad n o t
c o n s id e r e d .
S o r l e y ' s argum ent s t a n d s o r f a l l s w i t h h i s assum p
t i o n o f p u rp o s e i n n a t u r e . T h is seems t o be a r e t r e a t to
th e t e l e o l o g i c a l argum ent r a t h e r t h a n an ad v an ce o f t h e
m o ra l arg u m e n t. N o n e t h e l e s s , t h e " t e l e o - m o r a l " argum ent
p r e s e n t e d by him i s i m p r e s s i v e .
( C) Clem ent C h a rle s J u l i a n Webb
The p h i l o s o p h i c work w h ich i n f l u e n c e d Webb most i n
h i s u n d e r g r a d u a t e s t u d i e s was a t r a n s l a t i o n o f K a n t 's
l o 9
G ru n d leg u n g d e r M e ta p h y sik d e r S i t ' t e n . Webb fo u n d i n
K a n t 's e t h i c a l and r e l i g i o u s t h e o r i e s many i d e a s w ith w hich
he a g r e e d . He a g re e d w ith Kant t h a t m o ra l p r i n c i p l e s a r e
n o t i l l u s o r y , as n a t u r a l i s m c l a i m s ; t h u s n a t u r a l i s m m ust be
r e j e c t e d . The a c c e p ta n c e o f r e l i g i o u s , m o ra l and a e s t h e t
i c e x p e r i e n c e s as g e n u in e r a t h e r t h a n i l l u s o r y assum es t h a t
B e a u ty , G oodness, and D i v i n i t y a r e r e a l i t i e s , in d e p e n d e n t
o f o u r m inds as i s t h e w o rld r e v e a l e d i n s e n s o r y e x p e r i
e n c e . D oubts ab o u t t h e r e a l i t i e s o f t h e s e i s e x p l a i n e d by
t h e f a c t t h a t i n such e x p e r i e n c e s t h e r e i s r e q u i r e d
1 0 9 C. C. J . Webb, " O u t l i n e o f a P h ilo s o p h y o f
R e l i g i o n " i n C ontem porary B r i t i s h P h i l o s o p h y , se c o n d
s e r i e s e d . by J . H. M uirhead (New Y ork: The M acm illan C o .,
1 9 2 6 ), p. 338.
96
"an e x e r c i s e o f v o lu n ta r y a d h e s io n o f th e o b j e c t compared
w herew ith th e su b c o n sc io u s s y n t h e s i s o r th e a c t o f a t t e n
t i o n which may be a llo w ed t o be r e q u i s i t e t o th e a c h i e v e
ment even o f an e x p e r ie n c e o f s e n s i b l e o b j e c t s m ight be
„ n o
c a l l e d in v o lu n ta ry ."
But w h ile th e p a r t n e c e s s a r i l y p la y e d by
th e w i l l i n t h e s e d e p a rtm e n ts o f s p i r i t u a l
l i f e a c c o u n ts f o r th e c o m p a ra tiv e i n s t a b i l i t y
o f o u r s e n se o f t h e i r r e a l i t y , a c q u ie s c e n c e in t h e
b e l i e f t h a t th e y a r e p u r e l y s u b j e c t i v e and
i l l u s o r y c a n n o t be r e c o n c i l e d w ith th e
u n e s c a p a b le c o n s c io u s n e s s o f m oral o b l i g a t i o n ,
o f a c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e , upon t h e t r u e
c h a r a c t e r o f which i t i s th e im m o rtal m e r it o f
Kant to have i n s i s t e d more d e c i s i v e l y and
i m p r e s s i v e l y th a n any o t h e r p h i l o s o p h e r .
I t i s no doubt t r u e t h a t Kant h i m s e l f d id n o t
allo w t o o u r c o n s c io u s n e s s o f b e a u ty o r t o our
c o n s c io u s n e s s o f God th e same s e l f - a c c r e d i t i n g
a u t h o r i t y and u n q u e s tio n a b le v a l i d i t y t h a t he
acc o rd e d t o o u r c o n s c io u s n e s s o f th e m oral law
w r i t t e n i n o u r h e a r t s . B u t, even i f we do no t
go beyond h i s own p o s i t i o n i n r e s p e c t o f t h e s e ,
th e a d m issio n o f th e c la im i n b e h a l f o f m o r a li t y
a lo n e i s s u f f i c i e n t t o o v e rth ro w th e n a t u r a l i s t i c
p o s i t i o n w hich i s assumed when o u r c o n s c io u s n e s s
o f p h y s i c a l o b j e c t s i s ta k e n t o r e v e a l a r e a l i t y
in d e p e n d e n t o f o u r s e l v e s in a sen se i n which no
o t h e r p a r t o f o u r e x p e r ie n c e can p r e t e n d t o do
so . And t o t h o s e who have once u n d e rs to o d and
a d m itte d K a n t's c la im on b e h a l f o f M o ra lity th e
f i n a l abandonment o f b e l i e f i n i t s j u s t i c e w i l l
be n o t l e s s d i f f i c u l t th a n i t would be f o r a l l
men c o n s i s t e n t l y t o in d u lg e i n s c e p t i c i s m
r e s p e c t i n g t h e e x i s t e n c e o f a p h y s i c a l w o rld
in d e p e n d e n t o f o u r i n d i v i d u a l m i n d s .111
Webb a l s o a g re e d w ith Kant t h a t r e l i g i o n p r e s u p
p o ses m o r a l i t y , and t h a t th e o n ly l e g i t i m a t e ap p ro ach to
I I o
I b i d . , p . 344.
I I I I b i d ., pp. 344-45.
97
r e l i g i o n i s v i a m o ra l c o n s c i o u s n e s s . " I t i s t h e d i s t i n c
t i v e f e a t u r e o f h i s [ K a n t 's ] p h i l o s o p h y o f r e l i g i o n t h a t i t
t e a c h e s us t o s e e k i n o u r m o ra l c o n s c i o u s n e s s an d t h e r e
112
a lo n e t h e e s s e n c e o f r e l i g i o n ; . . . "
. . . t h r o u g h t h e m o ra l c o n s c i o u s n e s s we come
t o t h e k now ledge o f God, and so R e l i g i o n i n
t h e o r d e r o f o u r know led g e p r e - s u p p o s e s
M o r a l i t y as i t s r a t i o - c d g n o 's c e n d ! .: b u t
M o r a l i t y r e m a in s u l t i m a t e l y u n i n t e l l i g i b l e
e x c e p t t h r o u g h b e l i e f i n God, and t h u s
M o r a l i t y , i n t h e o r d e r o f n a t u r e , p r e - s u p p o s e s
t h e o b j e c t o f R e l i g i o n as i t s 'r a t i o ' e s s e n d i l 13
On t h e o t h e r h a n d , R e l i g i o n p r e - s u p p o s e s
M o r a l i t y i n t h e s e n s e t h a t t h e e v id e n c e o f
t h e m o ra l law r e q u i r e s no a u t h e n t i c a t i o n by
t h e o l o g i c a l dogma, b u t t h a t f o r u s , a t l e a s t
a t o u r p r e s e n t s t a g e o f i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o g r e s s ,
t h e way t o R e l i g i o n m ust be th r o u g h M o r a l i t y :
t h a t t h e o n ly f r u i t f u l t h e o l o g y i s t h a t w h ic h :xk
makes i t s m ain a p p e a l t o t h e m o ra l c o n s c i o u s n e s s . . . . ,
God may be i n c o n c e i v a b l e , i m m o r t a l i t y u n b e l i e v a b l e ,
b u t d u ty i s u n d e n i a b l e , Webb c la im e d . Anyone who comes t o
t h i s r e c o g n i t i o n i s u r g e d t o a d v a n c e t o f a i t h i n God as
r e q u i r e d t o j u s t i f y t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e a u t h o r i t y o f
t h e m o ra l l a w . 115 F o r w i t h o u t f a i t h i n God t h e m o ra l law
1 12
C. C. J . Webb, K a n t ' s P h ilo s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n
(London: O x fo rd U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1926) , p . 17.
1 1 3
C. C. J . Webb, " I s R e l i g i o n P r e - S u p p o s e d by
M o r a l i t y , o r M o r a l i t y by R e l i g i o n ? " In' Sym posium ,
P ro c e e d in g 's o f t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n S o c i e t y , 1 8 9 4 , v o l . i i ,
#3, p . 527
115Webb, K a n t ' s P h il o s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n , p . 85.
98
w ou ld seem t o be a " v o ic e c r y i n g i n t h e w i l d e r n e s s " o f an
a l i e n w o r l d , I t s p r e s e n c e w h e r e in m ust re m a in a m y s te r y .
Such a view w ould te n d t o d i s c o u r a g e us i n o u r m oral
e n d e a v o r s and t o sap o u r m o ra l e n e r g i e s . Our m o ra l e f f o r t
w ould be d e s t i n e d t o p e r p e t u a l d i s a p p o i n t m e n t i n a sy stem
o f t h i n g s w h o lly i n d i f f e r e n t t o m o ra l p u r p o s e s . 116 T h is
i s , o f c o u r s e , t h e p o i n t o f K a n t ’s " d e s p a i r " a rg u m e n t.
K a n t 's p rim a ry c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e p h i l o s o p h y o f
r e l i g i o n , i n W ebb's o p i n i o n , was as f o l l o w s :
. . . God i s only a p p r e h e n s i b l e by us i n and
th r o u g h o u r m oral o b e d ie n c e t o t h e la w , w hich
we know by i t s own 'm a n i f e s t a u t h o r i t y ' to
b e t h e e x p r e s s i o n o f h i s w i l l . T h is i s
K a n t 's fu n d a m e n ta l th o u g h t a b o u t r e l i g i o n and
h i s p r i n c i p a l c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e p h i l o s o p h y
o f i t . 117
Webb r e c o g n iz e d w hat he t h o u g h t w ere d e f e c t s i n
K a n t 's r e l i g i o u s t h e o r i e s . He c la im e d t h a t Kant was wrong
118
i n i d e n t i f y i n g t h e r e l i g i o u s w i t h t h e m o ra l s e n t i m e n t .
A ls o , he was wrong i n t h a t he was u n a b l e t o f i n d room f o r
119
d e v o t i o n i n r e l i g i o n . Webb c r i t i c i z e d K a n t 's u se o f th e
te rm "autonom y" which l e n d s i t s e l f t o an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
i n c o n s i s t e n t w ith t h e in d e p e n d e n c e o f o b l i g a t i o n upon o n e 's
116I b i d . , p . 86.
11 7
I b i d . , p . 115•
1 1 8
I b i d . , p . 204.
119
Webb, " O u tlin e o f a P h ilo s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n "
p. 354.
99
12 0
willing to perform the obligatory act. Such language
must not be allowed to suggest that it is from one's
willing what is right that the obligation to do right
comes. One cannot really think that one's willing what is
12 l
right is the source of the obligation to do it.
... in our consciousness of obligation we
are aware of an imponent of the obligation
whom we must reverence as other than our
selves and as not merely superior to us but
supreme over us, even though, in virtue of
the unconditional acceptance of the obligation
by our reason, that which he imposes may be
intelligibly spoken of as self-imposed. We
must acknowledge in obligation... an aspect not
only of 'autonomy', but also of a 'heteronomy',
which turns out on inspection to be really a
'theonomy'. Such a heteronomy, however, is not
a heteronomy in Kant's sense; for, as we have
all along insisted, it is involved in our notion
of God that he is immanent in our reason and
will, which notwithstanding he transcends.122
In spite of these (and other) objections, Webb
defended Kant's moral argument for the existence of God,
though he thought it was poorly expressed. He claimed that
Kant's formulation of the argument was stated in an awk
ward and unimpressive form which has led to less than
justice being done to the thought which underlies it.
Kant insisted that absolute disinterestedness is the very
hall mark of genuine morality. Yet when one finds him
12 0
C. C. J. Webb, Divine Personality and Human Life
(London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd". , 1920;, p. 121.
121Ibld., p. 120.
122
I b i d . , p . 132.
100
c o n t e n d i n g t h a t t h e r e m u st be a m o ra l G overnor o f t h e
u n i v e r s e t o aw ard h a p p i n e s s t o t h e v i r t u e w h ich d e s e r v e s
I t , i t i s e a s y t o think- t h a t he h a s f a l l e n fro m t h e h e i g h t
o f h i s g r e a t a rg u m e n t t o t h e l e v e l o f a c ru d e and t h e o -
12 3
l o g i c a l u t i l i t a r i a n i s m .
Webb c la im e d t h a t t h e m o ra l a rg u m e n t was s u b j e c t t o
a t t a c k on two g r o u n d s : i n c o n s i s t e n c y and a r t i f i c i a l i t y .
The c h a r g e o f i n c o n s i s t e n c y i s made by t h o s e who c la im t h a t
t h e b o a s t e d d i s i n t e r e s t e d n e s s o f K a n t’ s e t h i c s i s i n c o n
s i s t e n t w i t h t h e p r o m is e d re w a rd o f h a p p i n e s s f o r v i r t u e .
Webb a n sw e re d t h i s c h a r g e by p o i n t i n g o u t t h a t Kant d id
n o t r e l a p s e from d i s i n t e r e s t e d n e s s , s i n c e he n e v e r f a i l e d
t o i n s i s t t h a t any aw ard o f h a p p i n e s s t o v i r t u e can n e v e r
s e r v e as a m o tiv e t o d u ty w i t h o u t r e n d e r i n g t h e v o l i t i o n
12 4
d e s t i t u t e o f m o ra l v a l u e .
The c h a r g e o f a r t i f i c i a l i t y i s made by t h o s e who
c la im t h a t t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God i s m e r e ly i n f e r r e d t o a v o id
f r u s t r a t i o n i n o u r i n t e n d e d d u t i f u l a c t i o n s and t h i s p r o
d u c e s no c o n v i c t i o n — c e r t a i n l y n o t t h e r e l i g i o u s m an’s
c o n v i c t i o n o f t h e r e a l i t y o f God. Webb a n s w e re d t h i s
c h a r g e ( l e s s s u c c e s s f u l l y , I b e l i e v e , b e c a u s e he a g r e e d
w i t h i t i n p a r t ) by r e s p o n d i n g t h a t t h e e s s e n c e o f
r e l i g i o n t o Kant was t h e r e c o g n i t i o n o f a l l d u t i e s as
123C. C. J , Webb, God and P e r s o n a l i t y (New Y ork:
M a c m illa n C o ., 1 9 1 9 ) , p p .
12^We^b 9 K a n t 1s P h i l o s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n , p . 6 k .
101
d i v i n e commands w hich a re n o t a r b i t r a r y o r d i n a n c e s im posed
on us by an e x t e r n a l w i l l , b u t law s common t o r a t i o n a l
. . 125
b e i n g s .
Webb b e l i e v e d t h a t K a n t 's m o ra l a rg u m e n t a c t u a l l y
w a r r a n t s b e l i e f i n a p e r s o n a l God.
Now t h i s i d e a ( o f God as c o n c e iv e d i n t h e
m o ral a rg u m e n t) can h a r d l y be p r e s e n t e d
e x c e p t i n t h e g u is e o f a p e r s o n , a t once
t h e g i v e r o f t h e law and t h e a u t h o r and
c o n t r o l l e r o f n a t u r e . F o r o n ly i n p e r s o n s
do we know o f a n y t h i n g o f su ch u s e s o f
means t o r a t i o n a l ends as t h i s i d e a i n v o l v e s .
And th u s a p r a c t i c a l n e e d o r p o s t u l a t e seems 126
t o w a r r a n t us i n t h e b e l i e f i n a p e r s o n a l God.. . .
H ow ever, i n Webb’ s o p i n i o n , K ant was u n a b le t o ad v an ce i n
t h e d i r e c t i o n i m p l i e d by b e l i e f i n a p e r s o n a l God f o r
s e v e r a l r e a s o n s . K ant had a " d e f e c t i v e " s e n s e f o r th e
s p e c i f i c a l l y r e l i g i o u s f a c t o r , an d a " h a u n t i n g d r e a d o f th e
f a n a t i c i s m w hich m ig h t be f o s t e r e d by b e l i e f i n a p e r s o n a l
12 7
i n t e r c o u r s e w ith t h e S u p r e m e .. ." Webb s t a t e d t h a t :
I t i s one o f K a n t 's g r e a t e s t s e r v i c e s t o
th e o lo g y t h a t . . . he d i s a l l o w e d t h e e x i s t e n c e
o f a c l a s s o f d u t i e s , i n o u r d i s c h a r g e o f
w h ic h , as owed t o h i m s e l f , God s h o u ld be
125 I b i d .
126
C. C. J . Webb, "The I d e a o f P e r s o n a l i t y as
A p p lie d t o God" i n J o u r n a l o f T h e o l o g i c a l S t u d i e s , 1900,
Oct., v o l . I I , p . 58.
12 7
Webb, D iv in e P e r s o n a l i t y and Human L i f e , p. 129.
102
e s p e c i a l l y I n t e r e s t e d . I n h i s d e s i r e to
I n s i s t upon t h i s p o i n t , he i s in d e e d i n c l i n e d
to lo o k upon t h e 'warm and i n t i m a t e ' r e l a t i o n
to God, i n o u r e x p e r ie n c e o f which I have
p la c e d th e t r u e ground o f o u r d o c t r i n e o f d i v i n e
p e r s o n a l i t y , as a d a n g e ro u s I l l u s i o n ; d an g ero u s
b e c a u s e i t may s u g g e s t t o us th e p o s s i b i l i t y
o f g e t t i n g a t God, I f I may so e x p r e s s i t ,
b e h in d th e b ack o f th e m o ra l law . T here was no
doubt a c e r t a i n te m p e rm e n ta l d e f i c i e n c y i n Kant
h i m s e l f , w hich p r e v e n te d him from d o in g j u s t i c e
t o th o s e a s p e c t s o f R e l i g i o n w hich d i s t i n g u i s h
i t from M o r a l i t y . . . . 128
A cco rd in g to Webb we f i n d i n human p e r s o n a l i t y th e
12 9
p r i n c i p a l c lu e t o th e u l t i m a t e n a t u r e o f r e a l i t y .
F u rth e rm o re , th e r e c o g n i t i o n o f P e r s o n a l i t y i n God im p a rts
to r e l i g i o u s id e a s g e n e r a l l y an i n c r e a s e o f i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y
l 30
and o f e t h i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e .
13 1
S in c e only p e r s o n a l i t i e s can p h i l o s o p h i z e , we
can n o t e s c a p e th e e f f o r t o f a c c o u n tin g f o r p e r s o n a l i t y in
th e scheme o f t h i n g s ; and i n a t t e m p t i n g t o e x p lo r e th e
n a t u r e o f know ledge, we a re c o n f r o n te d by th e f a c t o f p e r
s o n a l i t y as t h e p r e s u p p o s i t i o n o f t h a t w hich we a re
13 2
e x p l o r i n g .
P h ilo so p h y i s bound t o ta k e a c c o u n t o f
p e r s o n a l i t y . I t c a n n o t n e g l e c t t h e p r e
s u p p o s i t i o n s o f i t s own a c t i v i t y , and
12 8
Webb, " O u tlin e o f a P h ilo s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n
PP. 35-4 .-355.
129
I b i d . , p. 356.
1 3 o
Webb, God and P ers on a l l ' t y , p . 259*
13 1
I b i d . , p. 177-
132
' I b i d . , p. 24.
103
P e r s o n a l i t y I s a t l e a s t one o f t h e s e . A gain
i t c a n n o t n e g l e c t any r e g i o n o f e x p e r i e n c e ,
n e i t h e r t h a t o f p e r s o n a l i n t e r c o u r s e b e tw e e n
man and m a n ,n o r t h a t o f r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e ,
w h ich as we know, o f t e n t a k e s t h e form o f a
c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f p e r s o n a l i n t e r c o u r s e . 133
I n W ebb's o p i n i o n a p e r s o n a l i t y i s a c o n s c i o u s n e s s
su c h as we a l l h av e o u r s e l v e s , w h ich d i s t i n g u i s h e s w i t h i n
1 34
i t s c o n t e n t a s e l f and a n o t - s e l f . C o n s c io u s n e s s i s
13 5
a w a r e n e s s o f u n i t y o f s e l f and n o t - s e l f . P e r s o n a l i t y i s
a c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f s e p a r a t e n e s s from a l l e l s e , o f p a r t i c u
l a r i t y . B u t, on t h e o t h e r h a n d , i t i s a l s o a c o n s c i o u s n e s s
o f u n i v e r s a l i t y , o f c o n c e r n i n an i n f i n i t e b a c k g ro u n d
" a g a i n s t w hich o n e 's own s e p a r a t e s e l f s t a n d s o u t as b u t
one o f an e n d l e s s p r o c e s s i o n o f form s w h ich p a s s , as i t
.,1 36
w e r e , a c r o s s i t .
' P e r s o n a l i t y ' i s so m etim es r e g a r d e d as
s o m e th in g w h ich d i v i d e s one p e r s o n from
a n o t h e r , b u t t h e more we s u p p o se a c o n s c i o u s
n e s s im m ersed i n i t s e l f , i n c a p a b l e o f r e l a t i n g
i t s e l f t o o t h e r s t h r o u g h a common o b j e c t o f
c o n s c i o u s n e s s , t h e l e s s we s h o u ld c a l l t h a t
c o n s c i o u s n e s s p e r s o n a l . T h is name we g i v e o n ly
t o a s e l f - d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c o n s c i o u s n e s s , a
c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f o b j e c t s w h ich i t r e c o g n i z e s
a s d i s t i n c t fro m i t s e l f , and as b e i n g c a p a b le
o f b e i n g o b j e c t s a l s o t o a n o t h e r c o n s c i o u s n e s s . 137
13 3
Webb, D iv in e P e r s o n a l i t y and Human L i f e , p . 86.
1 34
Webb, "The I d e a o f P e r s o n a l i t y a s A p p lie d t o
God" p . ^9.
13 5
I b i d . , p . 50.
1 36
lb i d .
1 37
C. C. J . Webb, P ro b le m s i n t h e R e l a t i o n s o f God
and Man (London: W isb e t and Co., 1915) 5 p"^ 278 •
104
A cco rd in g t o Webb, a p e r s o n I s u n iq u e and y e t
c a p a b le o f s h a r i n g c o n te n t o f c o n s c io u s n e s s w ith o t h e r s .
Though we a r e c o n s c io u s o f o u r s e l v e s as d i s t i n g u i s h e d from
o t h e r s , we a re n o t s h u t up w i t h i n o u r s e l v e s l i k e o y s t e r s .
Sym pathy, m oral a g re e m e n t, l o v e , a l l t h e s e i n c r e a s e th e
13 8
r i c h e s o f p e r s o n a l i t y .
A p e r s o n i s aware o f h i m s e l f as u n i q u e , and
a l s o t h a t he i s a u n iq u e p a r t o f a whole which
i s a l l o f i t h i s c o n c e rn and a p a r t from which
he would l o s e h i s s i g n i f i c a n c e ] w h ile i t would
be a d i f f e r e n t w hole a p a r t from h im . The more
h i g h l y t h i s c o n s c io u s n e s s i s d e v e lo p e d t h e
g r e a t e r (as we sa y ) th e p e r s o n a l i t y ; i t i s a t
once more ' o r i g i n a l ’ and more ' u n i v e r s a l ' .
The g r e a t e s t p e r s o n a l i t y i s most f u l l y c o n s c io u s
o f i t s c h a r a c t e r as an o rg a n o f t h e u n i v e r s a l
and o f th e s p e c i a l and incom m u n icab le o r
u n t r a n s f e r a b l e n a t u r e o f t h e f u n c t i o n w h ic h , i n
t h e economy o f th e u n i v e r s a l l i f e , i t d i s c h a r g e s
and i t a l o n e . 13 9
The o r i g i n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s o f t h e word " p e rso n "
were w ith t h e p e rfo rm a n c e o f f u n c t i o n s i n s o c i a l i n t e r
c o u r s e Webb c la im e d . One need n o t w onder t h a t t h e th o u g h t
o f p e r s o n a l i t y c a n n o t e a s i l y be d i s c o n n e c t e d from t h a t o f
14 0
s o c i a l a c t i v i t y o r th e re a lm o f m o r a l i t y . But human
p e r s o n a l i t i e s a r e n o t th e h i g h e s t form o f i n d i v i d u a l i t y
13 8
C. C. J . Webb, "The P e r s o n a l E lem ent i n
P h ilo s o p h y " in P r o c e e d in g s o f t h e A r i s t o t e 11an S o c i e t y ,
1 905, v o l . V, new s e r i e s , p . 112,
139I b i d . , p p . 1 15-16.
14 0
Webb, God and P e r s o n a l i t y , p. 103-
105
p o s s i b l e j a l t h o u g h h i g h e r t h a n any we a t t r i b u t e - * t o b e a s t
14 1
o r p l a n t o r i n a n i m a t e b o d y .
P e r s o n a l i t y i s n o t m e r e ly s o m e t h i n g w h ich
we o b s e r v e i n men; r a t h e r i t i s s o m e th in g
w h ic h , th o u g h s u g g e s t e d t o u s by w h a t we
f i n d i n men, we p e r c e i v e t o be o n ly
i m p e r f e c t l y r e a l i z e d i n th e m ; and t h i s ca n
o n ly b e b e c a u s e we a r e somehow a w a re o f a
p e r f e c t i o n o r i d e a l w i t h w h ic h we c o n t r a s t
w hat we f i n d i n men a s f a l l i n g s h o r t o f i t . 142
Webb t h u s a g r e e d w i t h t h e t h o u g h t o f D e s c a r t e s ' t h i r d
m e d i t a t i o n . I n t h e c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f o u r i n c o m p l e t e n e s s
an d i m p e r f e c t i o n t h e r e i s i m p l i c i t a c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f t h a t
w i t h w h ic h we a r e c o n t r a s t e d . I n o t h e r w o r d s , a
„ „ 143
c o n s c i o u s n e s s o f God.
Good w i l l c o n s t i t u t e s t h e t r u e w o r th o f e v e r y one o f
us and i s "more t r u l y my own w i l l t h a n a s e l f i s h w i l l ,
w h ic h i s d r a g g e d a t t h e h e e l s , as i t w e r e , o f my a n im a l
14 4
a p p e t i t e s , can p o s s i b l y b e . . . . " H o w ev er, i n W ebb's
o p i n i o n , K ant d e p e r s o n a l i z e d roan i n t h e a t t e m p t t o s t r e s s
t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n and t h e good w i l l ,
1 4 5
t a k i n g no a c c o u n t o f w h at i s p e c u l i a r t o i n d i v i d u a l s .
A m o ra l o r d e r i n w h ic h p e r s o n s a r e s a c r i f i c e d t o w hat i s
i t s e l f i m p e r s o n a l i s r e a l l y r o b b e d o f t h e c l a i m t o
14 1
I b i d . , p . 100 .
14 2
I b i d . , p . 21.
14 3
Webb, D iv in e P e r s o n a l i t y a n d Human L i f e , p . 1 8 7 .
14 4
I b i d . , p . 130.
145Webb, God and ’ P e r s o n a l i t y , p p . 1 2 0 - 2 1 .
106
14 6
r e v e r e n c e . "Must we n o t a d m it t h a t t h e p i c t u r e o f a
m o ra l c h a r a c t e r w hich s h o u ld be t h e m ere embodiment o f i n -
147
d i f f e r e n t R eason w ould be u n l o v e l y and u n v e n e r a b l e ? Ir
When t h e i d e a o f p e r s o n a l i t y i s a p p l i e d to God,
Webb c a u t i o n e d , i t m ust be d e n ie d t h a t th e " e s s e n c e o f th e
d o c t r i n e . . . l i e s i n t h e s u p p o s i t i o n t h a t God h a s a p r i v a t e
1^8
l i f e o f f e e l i n g s , w i l l and k n o w l e d g e ...! ' R a t h e r , t h e
e s s e n c e o f t h e d o c t r i n e o f d i v i n e p e r s o n a l i t y l i e s i n t h e
r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e o f an i n t e r c o u r s e w ith God p o s s e s s i n g
t h e "w arm th and in tim a c y " c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f o u r i n t e r c o u r s e
14 9
w ith e a c h o t h e r .
. . . We can a t t r i b u t e p e r s o n a l i t y t o God
o n ly p r o v id e d t h a t we do so i n a s e n s e
w hich p e r m it s o f o u r d w e l l i n g i n him and
h i s d w e l l i n g i n us as we c a n n o t d w e ll i n one
a n o t h e r ; . . . t h e d o c t r i n e o f d i v i n e p e r s o n a l i t y
i s n o t an i n f e r e n c e from m e t a p h y s i c a l o r o t h e r
n o n - r e l i g i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , b u t t h e t h e o l o g i c a l
e x p r e s s i o n o f a f a c t o f r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e . 150
R e l i g i o n n e i t h e r n e e d s n o r a d m its d e f i n i t i o n , Webb
15 1
c la im e d . H owever, e ls e w h e r e he s t a t e d t h a t r e l i g i o n i s
1 46I b id .. , p . 123-
147
I b i d .
14BWebb, " O u t l i n e o f a P h ilo s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n "
p . 353-
1^ 9I b i d .
1 50I b i d . , pp. 3 5 3 -5 ^ .
151Webb, P roblem s i n t he R e l a t i o n s o f God and Man,
p. 5-
107
" th e e x p e r i e n c e i n which t h e s o u l i s aware o f i t s e l f as
15 2
one o r as c a p a b le o f b e in g one w ith h e a r t o f R e a l i t y . "
Webb m a i n t a i n e d t h a t i t i s o n ly i n r e l i g i o u s ex -
153
p e r i e n c e t h a t we have know ledge o f God. F u r t h e r , r e l i
g io u s e x p e r i e n c e o f p e r s o n a l communion w ith God i s t h e s o l e
15 4
g e n u in e e v id e n c e o f d i v i n e p e r s o n a l i t y . However, r e l i
g io u s e x p e r ie n c e n e e d n o t be so i n t e n s e as t h a t o f t h e
m y s tic s o r s a i n t s . Webb c o n te n d e d t h a t v a s t num bers o f p e o
p l e whose r e l i g i o u s e x p e r ie n c e s a r e n o t m y s t i c a l r a p t u r e s
p a s s t h e i r l i v e s a g a i n s t t h e b a c k g ro u n d o f a
c o n s t a n t c o n s c io u s n e s s o f b e in g i n t h e p r e s e n c e
o f a Power b e h in d a p p e a r a n c e s , a D is p o s e r o f
e v e n t s , a Judge o f c o n d u c t, t o whom— o r t o w h ic h - -
th e y a r e r e s p o n s i b l e , and owe r e v e r e n c e . . . } 55
These p e o p le have f e e l i n g s o f sham e, t h a n k f u l n e s s , and
t r u s t w hich q u a l i f y as r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e s even th o u g h
l e s s a b s o r b i n g and c a t a s t r o p h i c th a n t h a t o f p r o p h e t s o r
. ^ 156
s a i n t s .
I t was W ebb's b e l i e f t h a t God i s "immanent i n o ur
15 7
r e a s o n and w i l l , w hich n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g he t r a n s c e n d s . "
152
Webb, D iv in e P e r s o n a l i t y and Human L i f e , p . 111.
1 5 3
Webb, God and P e r s o n a l i t y , p. 152.
1 54
Webb, D iv in e P e r s o n a l i t y and Human L i f e , p . 158.
1 55
C. C. J . Webb, R e l i g i o u s E x p e rie n c e (London:
O xford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 19^55, p . 38.
15 6
I b i d .
1 57
Webb, D iv in e P e r s o n a l i t y and Human L i f e , p . 182.
108
And by 'G o d ’ I mean— t o s t a r t w i t h - - j u s t , t h a t
u l t i m a t e r e a l i t y , t h a t b a c k g r o u n d , i n t h e
p r e s e n c e o f w hich we f i n d o u r s e l v e s and w h a t e v e r
we t a k e k n o w led g e o f t h a t i s n o t o u r s e l v e s ;
t h e a p p r e h e n s i o n o f w hich i s t h e v e r y h e a r t
o f o u r p e r s o n a l i t y , o u r s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s :
w h ic h i n one s e n s e we f i n d p r e s e n t i n u s , b u t
o f w hich i t w ould be t r u e r t o s a y t h a t we f i n d
o u r s e l v e s p r e s e n t i n i t . 158
God may b e v iew ed as "one w i t h o u r n a t u r e a t i t s h i g h e s t
15 9
and a t i t s b e s t . " We c o n f r o n t God as " t h e i d e a l r e a l i z e d
by us i n so f a r as we e x h i b i t t h e good d i s p o s i t i o n w h ich
a l o n e c o n s t i t u t e s any m o ra l w o rth w h e r e u n to we can
p r e t e n d . " 160 T hese n o t i o n s r e s e m b le K a n t ’ s i d e a s a b o u t t h e
" s e e d o f g o o d n e s s " and d i v i n e im m anence.
Webb c i t e d S t . P a u l ’ s t h o u g h t t h a t t h e l a r g e r l i f e
16 1
o f an i n d i v i d u a l m ust f i n d c o m p le tio n i n God. The
l i m i t e d i n d i v i d u a l m ust d i e t o t h e s e l f i s h a t t a c h m e n t t o
t h e f l e s h , and becom e a new man l i v i n g i n t h e s p i r i t o f
16 2
C h r i s t J e s u s . By m y s t i c a l u n io n w i t h C h r i s t , t h e
s e l f i s h e g o no l o n g e r l i v e s : C h r i s t l i v e s i n t h e
16 3
i n d i v i d u a l . The i n d i v i d u a l who i s t h u s a d o p t e d as G o d 's
so n s h a r e s t h e d i v i n e n a t u r e b u t i s d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e fro m
God.
158Webb, "The I d e a o f P e r s o n a l i t y a s A p p lie d t o G od,"
p . 50.
15 9
Webb, K a n t ’ s P h ilo s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n , p . 200.
1 6 o
I b i d . , E m p h asis m in e.
1 6 1
Rom. 8 :1 5 and G al. 4 :5 -
16 2 16 3
Rom. 6 . 3 f f . G al. 2 : 2 0 .
109
The d i s t i n c t i o n from God w hich R e l i g i o n
i m p l i e s re m a in s t o t h e e n d ; b u t t h e d i f f e r e n c e
o f t h e c r e a t e d n a t u r e from t h e d i v i n e i s
t r a n s c e n d e d th r o u g h t h e i n t i m a t e u n i o n . . .
w ith a S p i r i t e s s e n t i a l l y one w i t h God,
th o u g h d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from him , t h e a r c h e t y p e
o f t h e c r e a t e d s p i r i t s , who o b t a i n i n t h e i r
u n io n w i t h t h i s S p i r i t w hat i s d e s c r i b e d as a
s o n s h i p , n o t , l i k e t h a t S p i r i t ' s own, by n a t u r e ,
b u t by a d o p t i o n . 164
When we do what i s o u r b e s t c o n s c i o u s l y as G od's w i l l ,
" t h e n we l i v e as so n s o f G o d ." 165
The i n f l u e n c e o f K a n t 's m o ra l arg u m en t on Webb i s
c l e a r ; b u t i t re m a in s f o r us t o c o n s i d e r i f Webb a c c u r a t e
ly a p p r a i s e d K a n t 's v ie w s , e s p e c i a l l y t h o s e w hich Webb
c r i t i c i z e d .
As s t a t e d b e f o r e , Webb m a i n t a i n e d t h a t K a n t 's
t h e o r y was d e f e c t i v e b e c a u s e i t l e f t no room f o r a p e r s o n a l
r e l a t i o n s h i p w ith God. To Kant God i s
an ' i d e a l ' B e in g , i n t h e s e n s e t h a t he
c a n n o t be an o b j e c t o f s e n s i b l e e x p e r i e n c e
(and f o r Kant t h i s w ould c a r r y w i t h i t t h e
c o n se q u e n c e t h a t he c a n n o t be th e o b j e c t o f
such p e r s o n a l i n t e r c o u r s e as I hav e c o n te n d e d
t h a t God do es i n R e l i g i o n b e c o m e ) . . . 1 .66
I s t h i s an a c c u r a t e view o f K a n t 's n o t i o n ? A c c o rd in g t o
A lle n Wood i t i s n o t . Wood c o n te n d s t h a t Kant h a s o f t e n
b e e n d e s c r i b e d by i n t e r p r e t e r s as a " d e is t," a b e l i e v e r i n
164
I b i d . , p . 166.
16 5
Webb, P ro b lem s i n t h e R e l a t i o n s o f God and.M an,
p . 2 8 l .
166
Webb, D iv in e P e r s o n a l i t y and Human L i f e , p. 123-
110
an a b s t r a c t c o n c e p tio n o f God, w ith Whom no r e l a t i o n s h i p
o f a p e r s o n a l k in d i s p o s s i b l e . T h is view g a in s s u p p o rt
from t h e a b s t r a c t way i n w hich Kant u s u a l l y w ro te o f God.
But i t i s a g r e a t m is ta k e t o se e i n th e God o f K a n t's
m o ra l f a i t h no more th a n an a b s t r a c t i d e a , Wood c la im s .
"F or Kant' m o ra l f a i t h i n God i s , i n i t s most p ro fo u n d and
167
p e r s o n a l s i g n i f i c a t i o n , t h e m o ra l m an 's t r u s t ' in' God."
What i s m ost s i g n i f i c a n t ab o u t K a n t’ s u se o f t h e term
" t r u s t " i s t h a t i t d e n o t e s , i n some o f i t s u s e s , a p e r
s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p b etw een man and God, o r a p e r s o n a l
16 8
a t t i t u d e o f a m o ra l man to w ard God.
Wood m a i n t a i n s t h a t Kant combined th e p e r s o n a l and
t r a n s c e n d e n t a l a s p e c t s o f God, c o n c e iv in g God as "b o th
t h a t o f ' l i v i n g G o d ,' a p e r s o n a l b e i n g , and a t th e same
16 9
tim e t h a t o f a p e r f e c t and i n f i n i t e b e i n g . "
Kant w a n te d t o a v o id cru d e a n th ro p o m o rp h ism ,
s u p e r s t i t i o n , and f a n a t i c i s m . The d a n g e r o f f a n a t i c i s m
o c c u rs when p e o p le b e l i e v e t h a t th e y have r e c e i v e d commands
d i r e c t l y from h e a v e n i n p e r s o n a l com m u n icatio n . Kant
c i t e d t h e c ase o f Abraham t o i l l u s t r a t e th e p ro b le m .
16 7
A lle n Wood, K a n t 's M oral R e l i g i o n ( I t h a c a :
C o r n e ll U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 7 0 ), p . l 6 l .
168I b i d . , p. 1 6 2 .
16,9I b i d . , p. 165.
I l l
c l a i m i n g t h a t i f t h e command t o s l a u g h t e r I s a a c a p p e a r e d
t o h a v e come fro m God, " i t i s a t l e a s t p o s s i b l e t h a t i n
17 0
t h i s i n s t a n c e a m i s t a k e h a s p r e v a i l e d . "
T h is i s t h e c a s e w i t h re s-p e c t t o a l l h i s t o r i c a l
a n d v i s i o n a r y f a i t h ; t h a t i s , t h e p o s s i b i l i t y
e v e r r e m a in s t h a t an e r r o r may be d i s c o v e r e d
i n i t . Hence i t i s u n c o n s c i e n t i o u s t o f o l l o w
s u c h a f a i t h w i t h t h e p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t p e r h a p s
w h at i t commands o r p e r m i t s may be w ro n g , i . e . ,
w i t h t h e d a n g e r o f d i s o b e d i e n c e t o a human
d u ty w h ich i s c e r t a i n i n and o f i t s e l f . 171
. . . e v e n th o u g h s o m e th in g i s r e p r e s e n t e d
a s commanded by God, th r o u g h a d i r e c t
m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f Him, y e t , i f i t f l a t l y
c o n t r a d i c t s m o r a l i t y , i t c a n n o t , d e s p i t e a l l
a p p e a r a n c e s , be o f God ( f o r e x a m p le , w ere a
f a t h e r o r d e r e d t o k i l l h i s son who i s , so f a r
a s h e know s, p e r f e c t l y i n n o c e n t ) . 172
Webb c la im e d t h a t w h i l e Kant was c o r r e c t i n w a r n in g
us o f t h e d a n g e r s o f f a n a t i c i s m i n h e r e n t i n t h e n o t i o n o f
p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h God, we m ust n o t i c e t h e
f o l l o w i n g :
Y et t h e moment t h a t we a t t e m p t t o d i s t i n g u i s h
i n t h e w i l l o f t h i s P e r s o n a l Law g i v e r th e
o b j e c t w h ich he w i l l s fro m t h e w i l l i t s e l f
(s o t h a t we c o u l d c o n c e iv e him a s w i l l i n g w h at
we s h o u l d ' n o t ’ r e g a r d as o b l i g a t o r y ) , i t
c e a s e s t o be t h e a u t h o r i t y o f w h ic h t h e m o ra l
1 7 o
K a n t, R e l i g i o n , p . 175*
l 7 1
I b i d .
1 7 2lb i d ., pp. 8 1 -8 2 .
112
e x p e r i e n c e i s t h e c o n s c i o u s n e s s . 173
A c c o rd in g t o Kant i t i s n o t o u r t a s k t o know w hat
God i s b u t r a t h e r t o know what God m ust be f o r us as m o ra l
a g e n t s .
I t c o n c e rn s us n o t so much t o know w hat God
i s i n H im s e lf (H is n a t u r e ) as w hat He i s f o r
us as m o ra l b e i n g s ; a l t h o u g h i n o r d e r t o know
t h e l a t t e r we m u st c o n c e iv e and com prehend
a l l t h e a t t r i b u t e s o f t h e d i v i n e n a t u r e ( f o r
i n s t a n c e , th e u n c h a n g e a b l e n e s s , o m n i s c i e n c e ,
o m n ip o te n c e , e t c . o f s u c h a B e in g ) w h ic h , i n
t h e i r t o t a l i t y , a r e r e q u i s i t e t o t h e c a r r y i n g
o u t o f t h e d i v i n e w i l l i n t h i s r e g a r d . A p a rt
from t h i s c o n t e x t we can know n o t h i n g ab o u t
H im .174
P e rh a p s a q u a s i - p e r s o n a l view o f God was s u f f i c i e n t to
s a t i s f y t h e r e l i g i o u s n e e d s o f K a n t 's p r a c t i c a l r e a s o n ,
w h e re a s Webb f e l t t h e n e e d o f a f u l l e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n
s h i p w ith God.
Webb ack n o w led g ed th e g r e a t n e s s o f K a n t 's m o ra l
a rg u m e n t, b u t drew from i t i m p l i c a t i o n s w h ich Kant was
u n w i l l i n g t o make.
Webb, D evine P e r s o n a l i t y and Human L i f e , p . 134.
1?ltK a n t, R e l i g i o n , pp. 1 3 0 -1 3 1 .
VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
K a n t 's m o ra l argum ent f o r t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God
i n f l u e n c e d t h e B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t s t o ad o p t some
form o f t h e i m p r e s s i v e a rg u m e n t. They d e v e lo p e d and
m o d ifie d p a r t s o f t h e a rg u m e n t, b u t th e y r e t a i n e d i t s
e s s e n c e : th e u n d o u b ta b le m o ra l law l e a d s to th e d is c o v e r y
o f a l a r g e r s p i r i t u a l r e a l i t y w hich r e q u i r e s th e p o s t u l a
t i o n o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f God. They were a t t r a c t e d to
K a n t 's view by th e b r i l l i a n t l i g h t o f t h e m oral law . T his
u n b l i n k i n g l i g h t s e r v e d as t h e s o u rc e o f i l l u m i n a t i o n f o r
th e i n n e r r e a lm o f s p i r i t u a l r e a l i t y w hich t h e s e t h i n k e r s
e x p l o r e d . They f o llo w e d somewhat d i f f e r e n t t r a i l s , b u t
e ach a r r i v e d a t a v a n ta g e p o i n t from w hich t h e r e was a
view o f what th e y to o k t o be t h e d i v i n e s o u rc e o f t h e .
l i g h t . S in c e e ach view ed t h e s o u rc e from a s l i g h t l y
d i f f e r e n t p e r s p e c t i v e t h e i r a c c o u n ts v a r i e d somew hat; b u t
each a g r e e d t h a t th e s o u r c e o f t h e m o ral l i g h t was God.
Kant view ed t h e l i g h t from two d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s .
His f i r s t view l e d him t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e must be a
d i v i n e s o u rc e f o r t h e m o ra l la w , a lth o u g h he had no d i r e c t
view o f t h e s o u r c e . He p o s t u l a t e d t h a t t h e s o u rc e m ust be
i n t e l l i g e n t , p o w e r f u l , and good; and i t must be c o n c e iv e d
as God. A l a t e r view c o n v in c e d him t h a t t h e r e i s no
s o u rc e beyond t h e d i v i n e l i g h t I t s e l f : t h e m o ral law i s God.
113
114
P r i n g l e - P a t t l s o n saw t h e d i v i n e s o u r c e a s , a t
f i r s t , an a t t r a c t i n g A b s o l u t e t h a t m ig h t a b s o r b t h e h a p
l e s s i n d i v i d u a l draw n i n t o i t s c o n su m in g p r o c e s s . L a t e r
he saw t h e d i v i n e s o u r c e a s an i n f i n i t e s p i r i t n e e d i n g
communion w i t h f i n i t e s p i r i t s . R a t h e r t h a n t h r e a t e n i n g
i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h a b s o r p t i o n , God o f f e r s t h e i n d i v i d u a l t h e
o p p o r t u n i t y f o r e t e r n a l l i f e and p e r s o n a l i m m o r t a l i t y .
S o r l e y c o n t i n u e d t o v ie w t h e o u t e r w o r ld w h i l e he
s e a r c h e d t h e s p i r i t u a l r e a l m , e x p e c t i n g t h e r e b y t o g a i n
g r e a t e r p e r s p e c t i v e f o r a t o t a l v ie w . He r e a s o n e d t h a t
t h e s o u r c e o f t h e i n n e r l i g h t c o u l d b e u n d e r s t o o d b e s t i f
i t i s a l s o r e g a r d e d a s t h e s o u r c e o f t h e o u t e r w o r l d . The
i n n e r an d o u t e r r e a lm s an d t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e tw e e n them
m u st be e x p l a i n e d i n any a d e q u a t e p h i l o s o p h y . From t h i s
p e r s p e c t i v e S o r l e y c l a i m e d t h a t t h e d i v i n e s o u r c e m u st be
s e e n a s an i n t e l l i g e n t s p i r i t , p o w e r f u l , w i s e , and l o v i n g .
The o u t e r r e a lm i s t h e medium f o r t r a i n i n g m o ra l b e i n g s
to w a r d p e r f e c t i o n . I n t h e i n n e r r e a l m t h e i n d i v i d u a l
d i s c o v e r s t h e d i v i n e p u r p o s e and t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f r e e l y t o
s t r u g g l e to w a r d p e r f e c t i o n a n d t h e r e b y g a i n d i v i n e u n i o n .
Webb saw t h e d i v i n e s o u r c e o f t h e m o ra l law as a
p e r s o n a l God w i t h Whom one may s h a r e a warm and i n t i m a t e
i n t e r c o u r s e . Webb s t r e s s e d t h e p e r s o n a l n a t u r e o f God
m ore t h a n K a n t, P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , o r S o r le y h ad d o n e . He
c l a im e d t h a t h i s own p e r s o n a l e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e s p i r i t u a l
re a lm i s b e s t d e s c r i b e d by a P a u l i n e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f
C h r i s t i a n i t y . God i s t h e p e r f e c t p e r s o n a l i t y . The
i n d i v i d u a l who s e e k s t h e l a r g e r l i f e m ust be r e b o r n and
a d o p te d a s G od's so n , t h e r e b y s h a r i n g t h e d i v i n e n a t u r e .
T hese i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f th e s p i r i t u a l r e a lm
o f f e r e d by th e B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l I d e a l i s t s are. open t o
q u e s t i o n , o f c o u r s e ; b u t th e i n f l u e n c e o f t h e i r t h o u g h t
s u r v i v e s . The s t r e s s t h e y p l a c e d on t h e im p o rta n c e o f
e a c h i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l i t y s t i l l a p p e a ls t o many modern
t h i n k e r s . T h e i r c r i t i c i s m s o f n a t u r a l i s m a r e s t i l l
s i g n i f i c a n t . T h e i r e m p h a sis on t h e deep r e l i g i o u s im
p l i c a t i o n s o f K a n t 's m o ra l arg u m en t s t i l l l e a d s a p p r e c i a
t i v e r e a d e r s t o r e c o g n i z e more f u l l y t h e im p o rta n c e o f
m o ra l e x p e r i e n c e f o r p h i l o s o p h y and r e l i g i o n . P r o f e s s o r
M acGregor says "We do n o t m eet God beyond o r o u t s i d e t h e
m o ra l l i f e ; we m eet Him i n i t . . . . " 1
I t i s p r o b a b ly s a f e t o a g r e e w i t h A. E. T a y l o r ' s
view t h a t " i n o u r tim e i t i s m a in ly upon t h e m o ra l argum ent
2
t h a t p o p u l a r t h e i s t i c p h i l o s o p h y c o n t i n u e s t o b a s e i t s e l f . "
However, t h e m o ra l a rg u m en t d o es n o t c l a i m t o p ro v e G od's
1M acG regor, I n t r o d u c t i o n t o R e lig io u s ' P h i l o s o p h y ,
p . 247.
2A. E. T a y l o r , "Theism " i n H a s t i n g ' s E n c y c lo p e d ia
o f R e l i g i o n and E t h i c s , v o l . X I I , p . 280.
116
3
e x i s t e n c e , n o r does I t p r o f e s s pow er t o compel a s s e n t .
Kant a d m itte d t h a t th e m o ra l argument, does n o t p ro v e t o a
s k e p t i c t h a t God e x i s t s . F u r t h e r , i t w ould n o t be m o ra lly
5
d e s i r a b l e f o r one t o know t h a t God e x i s t s . The m o ral
argum ent c la im s on ly t h i s : I f one w ish e s t o t h i n k i n a way
c o n s o n a n t w ith m o r a l i t y , t h e n one m ust s’ Uppose t h e e x i s t
en ce o f God. T h is s u p p o s i t i o n i s a m oral a t t i t u d e o f
r e a s o n c a l l e d f a i t h .
The m o ra l arg u m e n t, i n my o p i n i o n , i s s t i l l v i a b l e ,
a lth o u g h i t i s o f t e n c r i t i c i z e d . The p o s i t i v i s t s c o n te n d
t h a t t h e argum ent i s u n s c i e n t i f i c b e c a u s e s c ie n c e d e a l s
w ith f a c t s o n ly , and one c a n n o t d e r i v e an " o u g h t" from an
" i s " . F u r t h e r , from t h e added e v id e n c e o f f e r e d by th e
modern s o c i a l s c i e n c e s i t i s c l e a r t h a t v a lu e ju d g m en ts
a r e s u b j e c t i v e , and th e " u n q u e s tio n a b le " m o ra l law i s t h e
r e s u l t o f v a r i o u s c u l t u r a l c o n d i t i o n i n g .
I n r e s p o n s e i t can be s a i d t h a t s c ie n c e i t s e l f
o p e r a t e s on th e " u n s c i e n t i f i c " v a lu e judgm ent t h a t t r u t h
3
I t seems t h a t no argum ent can compel a s s e n t , f o r
t h e o r e t i c a l o r a r m c h a ir d i s c u s s i o n s a re " u n r e a l i s t i c . "
Only e x i s t e n t i a l e n c o u n te r s a r e c o n v in c in g . See M acG regor,
I n t r o d u c t i o n to R e l i g i o u s P h i l o s o p h y , p . 128.
i+
See a b o v e , p . 2 5 .
See above, p. 2k.
117
I s v a l u a b l e . F u r t h e r , i f d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s d i f f e r in
o p in io n s ab o u t th e t r u t h o f a m a t t e r o f f e e t (su ch as th e
o r i g i n o f t h e m oon), we do n o t doubt t h a t t h e r e i s an
o b j e c t i v e l y c o r r e c t view o f th e m a t t e r , even i f we have
n o t as y e t e s t a b l i s h e d what we b e l i e v e i s th e c o r r e c t
o p in io n . L ik e w is e , t h e n , i f d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e s d i f f e r in
o p in io n ab o u t th e m oral r i g h t n e s s o f an i s s u e (su ch as
■ sla v e ry ), why s h o u ld we doubt t h a t t h e r e i s an o b j e c t i v e l y
c o r r e c t view o f th e is s u e ?
Two o t h e r c r i t i c i s m s o f th e m oral argum ent a re
o f f e r e d by E r i c h F ra n k . The f i r s t c r i t i c i s m he s t a t e s as
fo llo w s :
The s u p p o se d ly i n d e s t r u c t i b l e m oral n a t u r e
o f man p ro v e s to be e x tre m e ly v u l n e r a b l e
when c o n f r o n te d w ith th e n e c e s s i t i e s o f
p r a c t i c a l l i f e . 6
A d e f e n d e r o f th e m oral argum ent must admit t h a t th e m oral
e le m e n t i n man v a r i e s in i n t e n s i t y , j u s t as th e l o g i c a l
a b i l i t y v a r i e s . In a c r i s i s s i t u a t i o n one may abandon h is
i
u s u a l l o g i c a l a b i l i t y and a s s e n t to a f a l l a c i o u s argum ent
w hich would n o t p e rs u a d e him o r d i n a r i l y . N o n e t h e l e s s , we
have c o n f id e n c e t h a t man has a r a t i o n a l n a t u r e . Even i f
t h e r e a r e some humans w ith o u t l o g i c a l a b i l i t y we c la im t h a t
man i n g e n e r a l has r a t i o n a l c a p a c i t y . So to o some men may
6E r ic h F ra n k , P h i l o s o p h i c a l U n d e rs ta n d in g and
R e l i g i o u s T r u th (New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 6 6 ),
p . -37.-
118
l a c k e t h i c a l c o n s c i o u s n e s s a l t o g e t h e r ] b u t t h e r e i s a
m o ra l c a p a c i t y i n human n a t u r e i n g e n e r a l .
The s e c o n d c r i t i c i s m o f t h e m o ra l a rg u m e n t
o f f e r e d by F r a n k i s a s f o l l o w s :
. . . i f we m a i n t a i n t h e p o s t u l a t e o f e t h i c a l
a u to n o m y , we f i n d t h a t m o ra l in d e p e n d e n c e
may b e u s e d a s an arg u m en t a g a i n s t t h e
e x i s t e n c e o f God r a t h e r t h a n f o r i t . . . . W h y
s h o u l d . . . a s o v e r e i g n p e r s o n a l i t y n e e d an
o v e r l o r d ? Why s h o u ld he n o t g i v e h i m s e l f h i s
own law a n d f o l l o w i t i n h i s a c t i o n s , j u s t
b e c a u s e t h i s law i s h i s own t h e e x p r e s s i o n o f
h i s own n o b le n a t u r e f o r w h ic h o t h e r w i s e he
c o u ld h av e no r e s p e c t ? 7
W h ile i t i s t r u e t h a t t h e m o ra l man f r e e l y im p o se s t h e
m o ra l law on h i m s e l f , n o t n e e d i n g an o v e r l o r d t o im pose i t
o r demand c o m p lia n c e w i t h i t , t h e m o ra l man n e e d s t o hav e
f a i t h t h a t God w i l l h e l p him i n h i s s t r u g g l e t o a c h ie v e
t h e summum bonum . As we saw above ( p . 2 6 ) , i f one h a s no
f a i t h i n God, t h e n one w i l l m o r a ll y d e s p a i r .
N e i t h e r P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n n o r S o r le y made u se o f
t h e " d e s p a i r " a s p e c t o f K a n t 's a rg u m e n t. P e r h a p s th e y
w ere un aw are o f i t , o r p e r h a p s t h e i r "su n n y d i s p o s i t i o n s "
p r e v e n t e d them fro m c o n s i d e r i n g a n g u i s h a s an a p p r o p r i a t e
a p p r o a c h t o God. Webb gave some a t t e n t i o n t o t h i s p a r t o f
g
K a n t ' s a r g u m e n t .
7I b i d . , p p . 3 7 -3 8 .
0
See a b o v e , p . 98 .
119
Let us c o n clu d e by c o n s i d e r i n g a p a s s a g e from
Kant w hich c o n t a i n s th e e s s e n c e o f t h a t w hich a p p e a le d to
th e B r i t i s h p e r s o n a l i d e a l i s t s .
Duty 1 Thou su b lim e and m ig h ty n a m e ...
what o r i g i n i s t h e r e w o rth y o f t h e e , and
where i s t o be found t h e r o o t o f th y
n o b le d e s c e n t . . . a r o o t t o be d e r i v e d
from w hich i s t h e i n d i s p e n s a b l e c o n d i t i o n
o f th e o n ly w o rth w hich men can g iv e
th e m s e lv e s ?
I t can be n o t h i n g l e s s th a n a power which
e l e v a t e s man above h i m s e l f (a s p a r t o f
th e w o rld o f s e n s e ) , . ... T h is power i s
n o th in g b u t p e r s o n a l i t y . . . . 9
9
K an t, P r a c t i c a l R e a so n , p . 180.
APPENDIX I
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE ON ANDREW SETH PRINGLE-PATTISON
Andrew S e th ( t h e name P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n was ad d ed
I n 1898 as a c o n d i t i o n o f a c c e p t i n g a b e q u e s t ) was b o r n a t
E d in b u rg h 20 Decem ber 1 8 5 6 , and d i e d 1 S e p te m b e r 1931- He
came o f c o u n t r y s t o c k on b o t h s i d e s o f h i s f a m i l y . He
m a r r i e d i n 188 * 1* an d t h e m a r r i a g e p r o d u c e d f o u r so n s and
t h r e e d a u g h t e r s . S o r l e y , a f e l l o w s t u d e n t a t E d in b u rg h
U n i v e r s i t y , was one o f h i s many f r i e n d s .
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n g r a d u a t e d M a s te r o f A r ts i n 1878
w i t h f i r s t c l a s s h o n o r s i n c l a s s i c s and p h i l o s o p h y a t
E d in b u rg h . He t h e n w ent t o Germany f o r tw o y e a r s w ith a
s c h o l a r s h i p aw arded by t h e H i b b e r t t r u s t e e s . He s t u d i e d
u n d e r L o tz e b r i e f l y . His f i r s t book The' D evelopm ent from
K ant to H e g e l (1882) was h i s s c h o l a r s h i p d i s s e r t a t i o n .
He t a u g h t l o g i c and p h i l o s o p h y a t U n i v e r s i t y
C o l l e g e , C a r d i f f (1 8 8 3 -1 8 8 7 ) and a t S t . Andrews U n i v e r s i t y
( 1 8 8 7 -1 8 9 1 )• He a c h i e v e d h i s a m b itio n o f s u c c e e d in g
C am pbell P r a s e r a s P r o f e s s o r o f L o g ic and M e ta p h y s ic s a t
E d in b u rg h U n i v e r s i t y ( 1 8 9 1 -1 9 1 9 )- He d e l i v e r e d G i f f o r d
L e c t u r e s a t A berdeen (1 9 1 2 -1 9 1 3 ) an d a t E d in b u rg h (1 9 2 1 -
1 9 2 3 ).
120
121
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n was a shy man, u n re a d y o f
s p e e c h . 1 He was t a l l , n o t v e r y l i t h e , w ith a s l i g h t
s t o o p . He wore a m a j e s t i c g r e y b e a r d . He was n o t a g r e a t
t e a c h e r , u s u a l l y r e a d i n g h i s m a n u s c r i p t s t o h i s c l a s s e s
2
w hich som etim es "w ere a lm o st o p e n ly r e s t i v e . " However,
i n t h e o p in io n o f Hugh M a c k in to s h , t h e h i g h e r c o u r s e s
t a u g h t by P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n c o n t a i n e d " t h e b e s t l e c t u r i n g we
it 3
have e v e r h e a r d .
The f o l l o w i n g a r e P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n 1s m ost im p o rta n t
p u b l i c a t i o n s :
S c o ti'sh P h i l os'ophy, ( B a l f o u r L e c t u r e s ) , 1885 .
H e g e lia n is m and 'P e r s o n a l i t y , ( B a l f o u r L e c t u r e s ) ,
1 8 8 7 .
The I d e a o f God i n t h e L ig h t' o f He c e n t
P h i l o s o p h y , ( G i f f o r d L e c tu re s T T 1917-
The I d e a o f I m m o r t a l i t y , ( G i f f o r d L e c t u r e s ) ,
1922 .
S t u d i e s i n t h e P h ilo s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n , 1930-
1John L a i r d , " P a t t i s o n , Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - " in
D i c t i o n a r y o f N a t i o n a l B i o g r a p h y , 1 9 3 1 -1 9 4 0 , p . 67 S.
2 I b i d . , p . 679.
3
Quoted by J . B. C ap p e r i n "Andrew S e th P r i n g l e -
P a t t i s o n " i n P r o c e e d in g s o f t h e B r i t i s h Academy, 1931,
p . 461.
APPENDIX I I
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTE ON WILLIAM RITCHIE SORLEY
W illia m R i t c h i e S o r l e y was b o r n a t S e l k i r k ,
S c o t l a n d , 4 Novem ber 1 8 5 5 , and d i e d 28 J u l y 1935- H is
f a t h e r was a m i n i s t e r o f t h e F r e e C hurch o f S c o t l a n d .
S o r l e y m a r r i e d i n 1889, an d t h e m a r r i a g e p r o d u c e d tw o s o n s
and one d a u g h t e r . .
He s t u d i e d t h e o l o g y a t E d i n b u r g h , T u b in g e n , and
B e r l i n , w i t h t h e g o a l o f e n t e r i n g t h e m i n i s t r y , b u t h e was
n o t o r d a i n e d . At age 24 h e b e g a n t o s tu d y m o ra l s c i e n c e a t
T r i n i t y C o l l e g e , C am bridge w h ere h e t o o k h i s B .A . i n 1 8 8 2 .
He a t t e n d e d t h e l e c t u r e s o f S id g w ic k , d i s a g r e e i n g w i t h
many o f h i s v i e w s . A r e m a r k , s a i d t o h a v e b e e n made by
S id g w ic k , was t h a t S o r l e y ' s a t t i t u d e i n t h e l e c t u r e room
s u g g e s t e d "a w e l l - b r e d a t h e i s t l i s t e n i n g t o a s e r m o n . " 1
S o r l e y becam e a F e l l o w o f T r i n i t y i n 1 8 8 3 . In
1888 he becam e p r o f e s s o r o f l o g i c and p h i l o s o p h y a t
U n i v e r s i t y C o l l e g e , C a r d i f f . I n 1894 he was a p p o in te d
P r o f e s s o r o f M o ra l P h i l o s o p h y a t A b e rd e e n U n i v e r s i t y .
1F. R. T e n n a n t , " W i l l i a m R i t c h i e S o r l e y " i n
P r o c e e d in g s ' o f t h e B r i t i s h A cadem y, 1 9 3 5 , p- 395*
122
123
In 1900 he s u c c e e d e d S id g w ick i n h i s c h a i r o f m o ra l p h i l o
sophy a t C am bridge. S o r le y h e l d t h a t p o s t u n t i l 1933. He
d e l i v e r e d t h e G i f f o r d L e c tu r e s a t A berdeen i n 1 9 1 4 -1 9 1 5 .
The f o l l o w i n g a r e h i s more i m p o r t a h t p u b l i c a t i o n s :
The E t h i c s o f N a t u r a l i s m , 1 8 8 5 .
H e c e n t T e n d e n c ie s i n E’ thi'c's ? 1904.
M oral V a lu e s and t h e I d e a o f God,
( G i f f o r d L e c t u r e s ) , 19lBT
A H i s t o r y o f E n g l i s h P h i l o s o p h y ,
1920 .
APPENDIX I I I
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES ON CLEMENT CHARLES JULIAN WEBB
Clement C h a rle s J u l i a n Webb was b o rn i n London
25 June 1865 s and d ie d 5 O c to b e r 1954. His f a t h e r was a
v i c a r a t S t. Andrew’ s i n London. Webb m a r r ie d i n 1905, b u t
t h e m a r r ia g e p ro d u c e d no c h i l d r e n .
Webb g r a d u a te d B a c h e lo r o f A rts i n 1888 w i t h f i r s t
c l a s s h o n o rs a t C h r i s t C hurch, O xford. He was a f e l lo w
and t u t o r i n p h ilo s o p h y a t Magdalen C o lle g e , O xford f o r
t h i r t y - t h r e e y e a r s (1 8 8 9 -1 9 2 2 ). In 1922 he became a
F e llo w o f O r i e l . He d e l i v e r e d th e G if f o r d L e c t u r e s in
A b e rd e e n , 1918-1919.
Webb p o s s e s s e d an enormous s p i r i t o f i n q u i r y . He
r e c o g n i z e d i n f a l l i b i l i t y now here— n o t i n P ope, C hurch, o r
B i b l e . 1 His c u r i o s i t y and i n t e l l i g e n c e t r i e d t o ta k e
a c c o u n t o f e v e r y t h i n g . However, he a d m itte d t h a t he
l a c k e d p e r c e p t i o n o f th e way i n which m a t e r i a l t h i n g s
s h o u ld be h a n d le d , and he f e l t no c u r i o s i t y a b o u t th e
p r i n c i p l e s o f h i s p h y s i c a l s u r r o u n d i n g s . 2 He d i s l i k e d
1
F. M. P ow icke, "Webb, Clement C h a rle s J u l i a n "
i n 'D i c t i o n a r y o f N a t i o n a l B io g ra p h y , 1951-1960.
2W. D. R o s s, "Clem ent C h a rle s J u l i a n Webb" i n
P r o c e e d in g s o f t h e B r i t i s h Academy, 1955* P* 340. A
p i c t u r e o f Webb a p p e a rs i n t h i s n o t i c e .
124
games b u t w a lk e d f o u r o r f i v e m i l e s a l m o s t e v e r y d a y .
The f o l l o w i n g a r e Webb’ s m o st i m p o r t a n t p u b l i c a
t i o n s :
P ro b le m s in' th e' R e l a t i o n s o f God and M an3 1 9 1 1 .
God an d Pe'r'son'a'l'ity, ( G i f f o r d L e c t u r e s ) 3 1 9 1 8 .
D iv in e ' Pe'rs'oh'aTi'ty a n d Human L 'i'fe ,
( G i f f o r d L e c t u r e s ) 3 1 9 2 0 .
K a n t ’ s' P h i l o s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n , 1926.
R e l i g i o u s E'xp'er'i'ehce s 1 9^5-
BIBLIOGRAPHY OP WORKS CITED
A q u in a s , Thomas. The S'umma T h eo lo 'g i c a . V ol.IX X o f G re a t
Books o f t h e W e ste rn W o rld . C h ic a g o : E n c y c lo p e d ia
B r i t a n n i c a , I n c . , 1952.
B a i l l i e , J o h n . " P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n as P h i l o s o p h e r . "
P r o c e e d in g s o f th e B r i t i s h Academy. 1931.
' . The' T r i t e r p r e t a t l o n o f R e l i g i o n . New York:
C h a r le s S c r i b n e r ' s S o n s, 19287
B e r t o c c i , P e t e r . " P e r s o n a l i s m . " E ricyclope’ d i a Arne ri'c a ria .
I n t . e d . , 1 9 6 5 , V ol.X X I.
C ap p er, B. "Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n ." P r o c e e d in g s o f
t h e B r i t i s h Academy. 1931*
C a r r e , M e y ric k . P h a s e s o f Thought' i n E n g l a n d . O x fo rd :
C la re n d o n P r e s s , 19W7
C o l e r i d g e , Samuel T a y lo r . Bi'o'gr'aphia L i t e r a r i a . New York:
E. P. D u tto n , 1906.
_________ L e t t e r s o f Samuel T a y l o r C o l e r i d g e . Ed. by
E. H. C o l e r i d g e , London: W illia m Heinem ann, 1895*
C o p le s to n , F r e d e r i c k . A H i s t o r y o f P h i l o s o p h y . Image
B ooks, New Y ork: The Newman P r e s s , 1964.
C raw fo rd , A. W. The P h ilo s o p h y o f F. H. J a c o b i . New York:
The M acm illan C o ., 1905*
C ro s s , P ra n k L. " S y n t e r e s i s ." C h a m b e rs 's E n c y c lo p e d ia .
New r e v . e d . , 1968. V ol. X I I I .
C ru s iu s , C h r i s t i a n . Anweis'ung V e r h u r i f t i g zu Leb'e'n.
L e i p z i g : 1744.
Cunningham, G. W. The I d e a l i s t i c 'Argument' in ’ R ec en t
B r i t i s h and A m erican P h i l o s o p h y . New Y ork: The
C e n tu ry C o ., 1933*
D 'A rc y , E r i c . ' C o n sc ie n c e a n d I t s ’ R ig h t to' F reed o m . New
York: Sheed and Ward, 1 961.
126
127
de Burgh, W. G. Prom M o rality , t o R e l i g i o n ■ London:
MacDonald and E v a n s, 1 93$.
E c k h a r t , M e ls t e r . Me I s t e r E c kh a r t . T r a n s , by Raymond
B lakney. New York: H a rp e r & B r o t h e r s P u b l i s h e r s ,
19*11.
E n s l i n , M orton. The E t h i c s o f P a u l . New York: H a rp e r and
B r o t h e r s , 1930.
Eucken, R u d o lf, The L i f e o f t h e S p i r i t . T r a n s , by F. L.
Pogson. 2nd e d . London: W illia m s & N o r g a te , 1913*
E v e r e t t , C h a rle s C. F i c h t e 1s S c ie n c e o f K now ledge.
C hicago: S. C. G rig g s and C o ., 1892.
F e r r e , F r e d e r i c k , B a sic Modern P h ilo so p h y o f R e l i g i o n .
New York: C h a rle s S c r i b n e r ' s Sons, 1967•
F i c h t e , Johann G o t t l i e b . Sam m tllche W erke. Ed. by I . H.
F i c h t e . B e r l i n : 184 5*
_ _ _ _ _ _ The V o c a tio n o f Man. T r a n s , by W illia m S m ith.
C hicago: The Open C o u rt P u b l i s h i n g C o ., 1906.
F ra n k , E r i c h . P h i l o s o p h i c a l U n d e r s ta n d in g and 'R e lig io u s
T r u t h . New Y ork: O x fo rd U n i v e r s i t y Press]: 1966.
H epburn, R. W . "Moral A rgum ents f o r t h e E x is te n c e o f God."
The E n c y c lo p e d ia of P h i l o s o p h y . 1967* V o l.V .
H o lle n b a c h , M. W. " S y n d e r e s i s ." New C a th o lic ' E n c y c lo p e d ia .
1967. V ol. X I I I .
H u x ley , Thomas H. Methods and R e s u l t s . New York:
D. A p p leto n and C o ., 191-7.
I n g e , W illia m R alp h . C h r i s t i a n M y s tic is m . 5 th ed. London:
Methuen & Co. L t d . , 1 9 2 1 .
’ ______ . P e r s o n a l I d e a l i s m an d M y s t i c i s m . London:
Longmans, G reen, and C o ., 1907-
J a c k s o n , F. J . , and L a k e, K. The' B e g in n in g s o f
C h r i s t i a n i t y . Vol. IV t r a n s . by K. Lake and
H. J . Cadbury. London: M acm illan & C o ., 1933.
J a c o b i , F r i e d r i c h H e in r ic h . Werke. L e i p z i g : G erhard
F l e i s c h e r , l 8 l 6 .
128
K a n t, Im m anuel. C r i t i q u e o f P r a c t i c a l Rea's'on,' and' 0 t h e r
Works' on t h e Theory' o f E t h i c s . ■ T r a n s , by Thomas
A b b o tt. 6 t h e d . London: Longuianns 3 G reen & C o .,
L t d . , 1967.
f u n d a m e n ta l'- P r i n c i p l e s' o f - t h e M eta'p h y sic o f
M o r a l s .■ C r i t i q u e o f P r a c t i c a l R e a s o n , and O th e r
Works on t h e T h e o ry o f E t h i c s . T r a n s . by Thomas
A b b o tt. 6 th e d . London: Longm ans, G reen and C o .,
L t d . , 1 9 6 7 .
K a n t ' s C r i t i q u e o f J u d g e m e n t. T r a n s , by J . H.
B e r n a r d . 2nd e d . London: M a c m illa n and C o .,
1914 .
................ L e c t u r e s on E t h i c s . T r a n s , by L o u is I n f i e l d .
H a rp e r T o rch b o o k . New York: H a r p e r and Row, 1963-
................ Opus Postumum. GesammeXte' S c h r i f t e n .
P r e u s s i s c h e n A kadem ie d e r W i s s e n s c h a f t e n . V o l s .
XXI and XXII. B e r l i n : W a l t e r de G r u n t e r & C o .,
1936.
................ P h i l o s o p h i c a l C o r re s p o n d e n c e (1 7 5 9 -9 9 ) . Ed. and
t r a n s . by A r n u l f Zw eig. C h ic a g o : U n i v e r s i t y o f
C h icag o P r e s s , 1 9 6 7 .
................ R e lig io n ' W i t h i n t h e L im its o f R eason A l o n e .
T r a n s , by T h e o d o re G reene and Hoyt H udson. H a rp e r
T o rc h b o o k . New Y o rk : H a rp e r and Row, i 9 6 0 .
' ' ' _____ . Vo r l e s un'gen' U b er d ie' p h i 1 o s'ophis che' R e l i g i o n s -
l e h r e . L e i p z i g : C a r l F r i e d r i c h F r a n z , 1817-
K i e r k e g a a r d , Sjzfren. E i t h e r / O r . T r a n s , by D av id Swenson
an d L i l l i a n Swenson "(Vol. I ) and W a l t e r L ow rie
(V o l. I I ) . A nchor B o o k s, New Y ork: D o u b led ay and
C o ., 1959.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sgfren K ie 'rk 'e g a a rd 1 s J o u r n a l s and P a p e r s . Ed.
and t r a n s . by Howard V. Hong and Edna H. Hong.
I n d i a n n a : I n d i a n n a U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 6 7 .
................ S ta g e s on Life'-' s' Way. T r a n s , by W a l t e r L o w rie .
P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 4 0 .
K nudson, A l b e r t . The D o c t r i n e o f God. New Y ork: The
A bingdon P r e s s , 1930.
129
Knudson, A l b e r t . The P h ilo s o p h y o f P e r s o n a l i s m . New
York: The' Abingdon P r e s s , 1927*
L a i r d , J o h n . " P a t t i s o n , Andrew S e th P r i n g l e - " Dl'c'ti'oha'ry
o f N a t i o n a l Biog'raphy . 1931-19*10.
L o t z e , Hermann. O u t l i n e s o f the' P h ilo s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n .
T r a n s , by G eorge Ladd. B o s to n : Ginn and .Co'. 7 T F 8 6 .
M acG regor, G eddes. In frod'u c t i o n to' R e l i g i o u s P hilo's o p h y .
B o s to n : H oughton M i f f l i n C o ., 1959*
................ P h i l o s o'ph'ical I s s u e s in' R e lig io u s ' T h o u g h t.
B o s to n : H oughton M i f f l i n C o ., 1973.
M etz, R u d o lf . A H undred Y ears o f B r i t i s h : 'Ph'll os op h'y.
T r a n s , by J , W. H a r v e y ,'T . E. J e s s o p , and H. S t u r t .
New Y ork: M a c m illa n , 1938-..
M u irh e a d , John H. The P l a t o n i c T r a d i t i o n i n A nglo-Saxon
P h i l o s o p h y . New York: M acm illan C o ., 1931*
P a t o n , H. J . The' C a t e g o r i c a l I m p e r a t i v e . H a rp e r
T o rc h b o o k s. New Y ork: H a rp e r & Row., 1967.
P a u l s e n , F r i e d r i c h . Tmma'nue 1 Kant : His' L i f e , and D o c t r i n e .
T r a n s , by J . E. C r e ig h to n and A. L e f e v r e .
New Y ork: C h a r le s S c r i b n e r ' s S o n s, 1902.
P i e r c e , C. A. C o n sc ie n c e i n the' New T e s ta m e n t. London:
SCM P r e s s L t d . , 1955.
P o w ick e, F. M. "Webb, Clem ent C h a r le s J u l i a n " . 'D i c t i o n a r y
o f N a tio n a l' B io g ra p h y , 19 5 1 -1 9 6 0 .
P r i n g l e - P a t t i s o n , Andrew S e t h . H e g e lia n is m and P e r s o n a l i t y ;
London: Blackw ood and S onsJ 1 8 8 7 .
............. ' The I d e a - o f God i n th e L i g h t o f R e c e n t.
P h i l o s o p h y . London: O xford U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1920.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ The' I d e a o f I m m o r t a l i t y . O x fo rd : The
C la re n d o n P r e s s , 1922.
R a s h d a l l , H. "The M oral. Argument f o r P e r s o n a l Im m o r ta lity ."
Kin'g' s' 'C o lle g e L e c t u r e s on' I m m o r a l i t y . Ed. by
W. H. M atth e w s. London: U n i v e r s i t y o f London
P r e s s , 1920.
R o s s , W. D. "C lem ent C h a r le s J u l i a n Webb." P r o c e e d in g s
o f t h e B r i t i s h Academy. 1955-
130
Royce^ J o s i a h . S t u d i e s o f Good a n d E v i l . New Y o rk :
A p p l e t o n & .C o., 19033
S c h r a d e r 3 G. A. nK a n t Ts P re su m e d R e p u d i a t i o n o f t h e
•M o ral A rg u m e n t’ I n t h e Opus Postum um ."
P h i l o s o p h y . V o l.X X V I,1 9 5 1 .
S o r l e y , W i l l i a m R. ' M o ra l V a lu e s' and' th e '- I'd'ea' "of 'God. -2nd
e d . C a m b rid g e : C am bridge U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1921.
' " S y n d e r e s i s . " D i c t i o n a r y o f' P h ilo 's ophy' and
P s y c h o l o g y . 1928.
S t a h l i n , L e o n h a r d . K a n t , L o t t e , and R i t s c h l . T r a n s , by
D. W. S im on. E d i n b u r g h : T. & T. C l a r k , 1 8 8 9 .
T a y l o r , A. E. T ,T h e is m . M - H a s t i n g • s' E n c y c l o p e d i a ' o f
R e l i g i o n a n d E t h i c s . 1 925. V o l. X I I .
T e n n a n t , P. R. ’'W il l i a m R i t c h i e S o r l e y . " P r o n e e d i n g s o f
t h e B r i t i s h A cadem y. 1935-
T h e o l o g i a G e r m a n ! c a . T r a n s , by S u sa n n a W in k w o rth . New
Y o rk : P a n th e o n B o o k s, I n c . , 19^9-
Thom as, E. E. L o t z e ' s T h e o ry o f R e a l i t y . L ondon: Longmans
G r e e n , an d Co. 1921.
T o n e l l i , G i o r g i o . " C r u s i u s . " E n c y c l o p e d i a o f P h i l o s o p h y .
1 9 6 7 . V o l . I I .
U n d e r h i l l , E v e l y n , ' M y'sti'ci'sm . New Y ork: The Noonday
P r e s s , 1 9 5 3 .
Webb, C. C. J . D iv in e ' P e r s o 'n a 'l i t y an d Human L i f e . L ondon:
G eo rg e A l l e n a n d Unwin L t d . , 1920.
God and P'er's'o'n'aTity. New Y ork: The M a c m illa n
Co. , 1 919.
' ' ’ " I s R e l i g i o n P r e - S u p p o s e d b y . M o r a l i t y ,■ o r
M o r a l i t y by R e l i g i o n ? " Symposium,' P'Po'c'e'e'din'gs o f
t h e A r l s t o t e l i a n S o c i e t y . V o l. I I , . ^3- 1 89 ?■
................ K a n t •s P h i l o s o p h y of* R e l i g i o n . L ondon: O x fo rd
U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 2 3 7
131
Webb, C. C. J . " O u t l i n e o f a P h i l o s o p h y o f R e l i g i o n . "
C o n te m p o ra ry B r i t i s h P h i l o s o p h y . S econd s e r i e s .
Ed. by J . H. M u irh e a d . New York: The M a c m illa n
C o ., 1926.
___________. P ro b lem s i n t h e R e l a t i o n s o f God and M an.
London: N i s b e t and C o ., 1 9 1 5 .
___________. R e l i g i o u s E x p e r i e n c e . London: O x fo rd
U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 19^5•
________"The I d e a o f P e r s o n a l i t y a s A p p lie d t o G od."
J o u r n a l o f T h e o l o g i c a l S t u d i e s . V o l. I I . O c t.
1 9 0 0 .
___________. "The P e r s o n a l E le m e n t i n P h i l o s o p h y . "
P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e A r i s t o t e l i a n S o c i e t y . New
s e r i e s V o l. V. 1905.
W e lle k , R en e . Im m anuel Kant i n E n g l a n d : 1 7 9 3 -1 8 3 8 .
P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1931.
Wood, A l l e n . K a n t 1s M o ral R e l i g i o n . I t h a c a : C o r n e l l
U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1970.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The meaning of judicium and its relation to illumination in the philosophical dialogues of augustine

PDF

The Role Of Relativity In Berkeley'S Philosophy

PDF

The Concept Of Sincerity In John Oman'S Thought

PDF

The Word Within The Word: A Literary Examination Of Lancelot Andrewes' Presentation Of The Life Of Christ

PDF

John And The Synoptics--A Discussion Of Some Of The Differences Between Them

PDF

A Reexamination Of F. H. Bradley'S Critique Of Relations

PDF

Kant'S Doctrine Of Existence As A Predicate

PDF

Friends In California--A Study Of The Effect Of Nineteenth Century Revivalism Upon Western Quakerism

PDF

A William Temple Word-Book: A Comprehensive Philosophical And Theologicalindex To His Major Published Writings

PDF

The Concept Of Agent Intelligence In Aristotle: A Solution In Accordance With The Traditional Problem Of The One And The Many

PDF

Law In The Old Stoa And Its Antecedents

PDF

Chaucer'S 'Tale Of Melibee': Its Tradition And Its Function In Fragment Vii Of The 'Canterbury Tales'

PDF

'Tertius Usus Legis' In The Theology Of Andreas Bodenstein Von Karlstadt

PDF

From Authenticity To Art: A Search For Significance In Choreographic Process

PDF

The Philosophies Of Ralph Tyler Flewelling And Edgar Sheffield Brightman: A Comparison And A Critique

PDF

A Critical Examination Of Heidegger'S And Jasper'S Interpretations Of Nietzsche

PDF

Differences In School Behavior As Influenced By Counseling Pattern

PDF

Effects Of 5-Aminodeoxyuridine And 5-Aminouridine On Metabolism Of Nucleic Acids

PDF

A Design For A Mediated First Course In Film Production

PDF

A Critical Edition Of Elkanah Settle'S 'Cambyses, King Of Persia'

Asset Metadata

Creator Mize, Johnny Melvyn (author)

Core Title The influence of Kant's moral argument on three British personal idealists: A. S. Pringle-Pattison, W. R. Sorley, C. C. J. Webb

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Philosophy

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag OAI-PMH Harvest,Philosophy

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor MacGregor, Geddes (committee chair), Mahl, Mary R. (committee member), Robb, Kevin (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-868526

Unique identifier UC11364321

Identifier 7331657.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-868526 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 7331657

Dmrecord 868526

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Mize, Johnny Melvyn

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA