archive-org.com » ORG » W » WIKISOURCE.ORG

Total: 1648

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • A Study in Scarlet - Wikisource, the free online library
    so many staghounds Page 54 A STUDY IN SCARLET BY SIR A CONAN DOYLE AUTHOR OF ADVENTURES OF SHERLOCK HOLMES THE SIGN OF FOUR ETC WITH A NOTE ON SHERLOCK HOLMES BY DR JOSEPH BELL ILLUSTRATED BY GEORGE HUTCHINSON LONDON WARD LOCK AND CO LIMITED CONTENTS PAGE Publishers Note to this Edition 7 Mr Sherlock Holmes By Dr Joseph Bell 8 PART I Being a Reprint from the Reminiscences of John H Watson M D late of the Army Medical Department CHAPTER PAGE I Mr Sherlock Holmes 13 II The Science of Deduction 18 III The Lauriston Gardens Mystery 25 IV What John Rance had to Tell 33 V Our Advertisement Brings a Visitor 37 VI Tobias Gregson Shows What He Can Do 42 VII Light in the Darkness 48 PART II The Country of the Saints I On the Great Alkali Plain 56 II The Flower of Utah 63 III John Ferrier Talks with the Prophet 68 IV A Flight for Life 71 V The Avenging Angels 78 VI A Continuation of the Reminiscences of John Watson M D 84 VII The Conclusion 92 This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published before January 1 1923 The author died in 1930 so this work is also in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author s life plus 80 years or less This work may also be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works Public domain Public domain false false Retrieved from https en wikisource org w index php title A Study in Scarlet oldid 4475171 Categories Featured texts 1887 works PD old 80 1923 Mystery novels Navigation menu

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/A_Study_in_Scarlet (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Arthur Conan Doyle - Wikisource, the free online library
    Brazilian Cat 1898 XIII The Usher of Lea House School 1899 XIV The Brown Hand 1899 XV The Fiend of the Cooperage 1897 XVI Jelland s Voyage 1892 XVII B 24 1899 The Last Galley Tales and Impressions 1911 Green A35 The Last Galley 1910 The Contest 1911 Through the Veil not separately published An Iconoclast 1911 Giant Maximin 1911 The Coming of the Huns 1910 The Last of the Legions 1910 The First Cargo 1910 The Home Coming 1909 a k a The Homecoming The Red Star 1911 The Silver Mirror 1908 The Blighting of Sharkey 1911 The Marriage of the Brigadier 1910 The Lord of Falconbridge 1909 Out of the Running 1892 De Profundis 1892 The Great Brown Pericord Motor 1892 The Terror of Blue John Gap 1910 Danger and Other Stories 1918 Green A41 Danger 1914 One Crowded Hour 1911 A Point of View 1918 The Fall of Lord Barrymore 1912 The Horror of the Heights 1913 Borrowed Scenes 1913 The Surgeon of Gaster Fell 1890 How It Happened 1913 The Prisoner s Defence 1916 Three of Them 1918 Speculations 1918 The Leatherskin Tribe 1918 Tales of the Ring and Camp U S edition The Croxley Master and Other Tales of the Ring and Camp 1922 Green A50 Tales of Pirates and Blue Water U S edition The Dealings of Captain Sharkey and Other Tales of Pirates 1922 Green A51 Tales of Terror and Mystery U S edition The Black Doctor and Other Tales of Terror and Mystery 1922 Green A52 all but The Nightmare Room appeared in previous other collections Tales of Terror The Horror of the Heights 1913 The Leather Funnel 1902 The New Catacomb 1898 The Case of Lady Sannox 1893 The Terror of Blue John Gap 1910 The Brazilian Cat 1898 Tales of Mystery The Lost Special 1898 The Beetle Hunter 1898 The Man with the Watches 1898 The Japanned Box 1899 The Black Doctor 1898 The Jew s Breastplate 1899 The Nightmare Room 1921 Tales of Twilight and the Unseen U S edition The Great Keinplatz Experiment and Other Tales of Twilight and the Unseen 1922 Green A53 all but The Lift appeared in previous other collections The Brown Hand The Usher of Lea House School B 24 The Great Keinplatz Experiment Cyprian Overbeck Wells Playing with Fire The Ring of Thoth The Los Amigos Fiasco How It Happened Lot No 249 De Profundis The Lift Tales of Adventure and Medical Life U S edition The Man from Archangel and Other Tales of Adventure 1922 Green A54 Tales of Long Ago U S edition The Last of the Legions and Other Tales of Long Ago 1922 Green A55 cowrote The Fate of Fenella 1892 The Maracot Deep and Other Stories 1929 Copyrighted in the United States until 2024 due to Renewal R177201 Stage Material edit Jane Annie 1893 libretto co authored A Story of Waterloo 1894 The Fires of Fate 1909 dramatization of The Tragedy of the Korosko The House of Temperley

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Arthur_Conan_Doyle (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • File:Plato or Protagoras.djvu - Wikisource, the free online library
    Jamaica has 95 years Colombia has 80 years and Guatemala and Samoa have 75 years This image may not be in the public domain in these countries which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term Côte d Ivoire has a general copyright term of 99 years and Honduras has 75 years but they do implement the rule of the shorter term Copyright may extend on works created by French who died for France in World War II more information Russians who served in the Eastern Front of World War II known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia and posthumously rehabilitated victims of Soviet repressions more information This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law including all related and neighboring rights This media file is uncategorized Please help improve this media file by adding it to one or more categories so it may be associated with related media files how and so that it can be more easily found Please notify the uploader with subst Please link images File Plato or Protagoras djvu File history Click on a date time to view the file as it appeared at that time Date Time Thumbnail Dimensions User Comment current 20 30 28 May 2009 1 583 2 617 31 pages 2 86 MB Ingram Information Description en 1 Book in the public domain Source Google Book Search Author Ferdinand Canning Scott Schiller Date 1908 Permission other versions ImageUpload full Category Ferdinand Canning Scott Schiller File usage The following 34 pages link to this file User William Maury Morris II Wikisource Proofread of the Month Page Plato or Protagoras djvu 1 Page Plato or Protagoras djvu 10 Page Plato or Protagoras djvu 11 Page Plato or Protagoras djvu 12 Page Plato or Protagoras djvu

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:Plato_or_Protagoras.djvu (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Plato or Protagoras? - Wikisource, the free online library
    the Protagoras Speech will I believe bear out all these contentions The Speech falls into three parts 1 166 A C 2 166 D 167 D and 3 167 D 168 B 1 Protagoras begins with a protest against the verbalism of the Socratic contentions that have preceded The memory of a perception must not be lumped together with the perception It is in no wise absurd that the same person should know and not know the same thing at least we must add if as in Plato s examples 165 etc the thing is taken in a different reference As for the difficulty of the change in the knower which results from his interaction with the object we can if you insist that he cannot be identical in change regard him as an infinite plurality 3 No says Protagoras face the real point deny outright that we have peculiar and individual perceptions which we alone experience In part 2 he expounds his true doctrine and refutes the misinterpretations put upon it While I affirm that each man is the measure of what is true for him I do not deny that one man may be 10 000 times as good as another in this very point of what appears to him and is to him true It is thus that the wise man is distinguished from the fool he is one who is able when things appear to us and are bad to make them appear and be good I e who teaches us how to make the best of a bad job and to adjust ourselves to life Your own illustration of the sick man to whom what is sweet to the healthy seems bitter tells against you Socrates It is futile to make either of them any wiser than they are or to declare that the sick man is uninstructed in judging as he does what he needs is to be altered for the contrary condition is the better Thus the sophist s task is practical like the doctor s but his ministrations use words instead of drugs to produce a better state of mind There is no question therefore of turning false opinions into true all we opine is always true in so far as it expresses what we experience But whereas a soul in bad condition opines badly a good one produces good thoughts Some mistakenly call such better appearances truer but I merely better or worse but not truer Wise men therefore are they who like the physicians of bodies or the cultivators of plants train men to perceive aright And the sage or sophist performs a similar service also for cities wherefore he earns his pay 3 We see therefore that in a sense though no one can be said to opine falsely some are wiser than others The Speech concludes with a grave admonition to Socrates to cease from arguing disputatiously and points out the harm this does by disgusting people with philosophy and the perils of arguing from the current usage of words which only lead to puzzles IV edit In its whole tone and contents this Speech seems to me exactly what we should expect from an attempt at authentic reproduction The anti intellectualism the emphasis on the practical side the defence of pay for intellectual work the didactic tone the high moral seriousness which Plato attests also in the Protagoras the disgust with the endless and often aimless dialectics of the Greek boulevardier the consciousness of the dangers of verbal traps these are all characteristics we might expect to find in the veteran teacher whose mission it was to guide the education of a democratic age Why then should we hesitate to attribute to him also what is the cardinal point of his defence viz the distinction between the formal claim to truth which every judgment makes and its value This point is made lucidly repeatedly and emphatically and if my paraphrase has brought it out still more the reason is merely that thanks to Plato most philosophers have become involved in so dense an intellectualistic bias that anything which runs counter to it has to be made very clear indeed But the distinction is quite clearly in the Greek It is also quite clearly the complete answer to the attacks on the humanism miscalled the subjectivism of Protagoras and the solution of the problem of a common truth It explains how we pass from individual claims to social values and attribute to them an objective validity The bricks out of which the temple of Truth is built are the individual judgments which supply the material Every one is continually making them But of these a large proportion are half baked or broken or of the wrong shapes So these have to be rejected They may still seem to their makers subjectively true but they are objectively useless Whoever on the other hand has the skill to devise a form of brick which is useful finds hosts of imitators He becomes an architectonic authority and is called in to mould or re mould the bricks of others And so dominant patterns arise which prevail and attain an objective validity But this validity is the reward of value and the result of selections based on experience The validity of a claim to truth is neither logically nor etymologically other than its strength There is no need to presuppose any inaccessible supercelestial archetype which ratifies and sanctifies by a suprasensible communion the human imitations we inexplicably make Still less do we need any deus ex machina supernaturally to establish by his fiat any initial commonness of truth We do not even need any independent object magically authenticating its true copy in our thoughts 4 All we need is that there should be de facto differences in the value and therefore in the subsequent validity of different people s judgments And of these we have of course abundance It is noticeable however that Protagoras is represented as declining to call these superior values truths They are better but not truer If so he did not yet perceive that all truths are values and therefore goods even though an individual s truths are good and satisfying only to him and their value is very restricted because their currency is small Nor again can he have seen that the same ambiguity which pervades truth values pervades also all the rest Many things are judged good which are not really good just as they are judged true without being really true Everywhere there is needed a bridge of validation by use to cross the gap between claim and validity But it is also possible either that Plato has not here reproduced the full subtlety of Protagoras s argument or that Protagoras was hindered from expressing himself fully only by the poverty of Greek philosophic language not yet enriched by the genius of Plato Anyhow the difference between Protagorean and modern Humanism concerns only a subordinate point of terminology 5 What now we may proceed to inquire does Plato make of this important philosophic distinction he has attributed to Protagoras It is astounding to find that he makes nothing of it whatsoever He treats it almost as badly as the other three un Platonic points made in the Protagoras Speech 1 the repudiation of intellectualism and of the doctrine that badness is simply ignorance 166 E 167 A 2 the demand for an alteration of reality by practical action and not by dialectics 166 D and 168 A and 3 the declaration that the State may err morally like the individual and may need the services of the moral expert 168 B These three points the Platonic Socrates totally ignores in the sequel The conception of truth values he just refers to but his reference to it is worse than none at all For it only shows that Plato had no conception of the meaning and scope of the argument he had just stated In 169 D he starts again from the bare dictum as if the Speech had done nothing to explain its real meaning nor given it a philosophic context And the reasons Protagoras had given for the dictum are actually treated as concessions derogating from its validity and inconsistent with his original assertion Nothing could be more unfair and unenlightened or even more contrary to the very wording of the Speech For in the Speech Protagoras emphatically puts his doctrine forward as his very own and distinguishes it from the laxer use of popular language 167 B 6 And well he might for it is the vindication not only of his whole career as a skilled adviser and educator but of the liberty which he concedes to every one to hold by his own experience Such a profound misconstruction seems possible only in one who was reproducing with imperfect success an argument he did not understand There follows immediately afterwards a still more extraordinary proof of the discomfort which the Protagorean mode of thought had occasioned in Plato s mind For in 169 E it is suggested that as Protagoras is not present to confirm the concessions made on his behalf it will perhaps be better to restrict the discussion to his own words the original dictum By this master stroke of dialectical manipulation the whole defence of Protagoras is declared invalid and set aside and we are once more reduced to the bare dictum and stripped of all knowledge of what it really meant in its context This procedure is so arbitrary that even Plato s literary art cannot quite reconcile his readers to it But on our hypothesis it is at least intelligible On the hypothesis that Plato has concocted the Protagoras Speech it becomes utterly unthinkable For how can one believe that after propounding a defence of Protagoras which was at least novel and striking even if it was not completely adequate Plato should at once have dropped it merely because he suddenly felt a conscientious qualm lest Protagoras himself should not have approved of it Surely whether the argument of the Speech was Protagoras s or Plato s once it was stated it should have been answered and in the latter case at least it could have been answered the presumption therefore is that Plato dispensed himself from this duty because he perceived that it surpassed his powers For it is worth noting that though the Speech is evicted it is never refuted Its points are almost ostentatiously ignored henceforth but no attempt is made to answer any one of them and the argument becomes almost farcical in its unfairness The logical value therefore of the ensuing argument is slight For example 1 in 170 A Socrates insists on treating the difference between the authority and the fool as merely one in knowledge despite the protest in 167 A against this very trick of intellectualism Protagoras having denied that differences in truth value were merely intellectual Plato makes a point of reaffirming his intellectualist analysis dogmatically and in the very same words The protest of the Speech therefore has been wholly vain 2 So too were the protest against relying too much on popular language and the explanation of the apparently unfamiliar assertion that all always judge truly For as 170 C shows Plato continues to base his objections on the current use of the words true and false 3 The argument in 170 D which seems a clincher to Plato is almost ludicrously inconclusive to one who has grasped the manifest meaning of the Protagoras Speech It is in no wise absurd that an opinion which you may roughly call the same should be true to me and false to you nor that one man should be right and 10 000 wrong For a it may well be true to a lover that his mistress is the most beauteous creature in the world but it by no means follows that this is true to the rest of the world nor is it even desirable that it should be If then it is true that there is a peculiar and personal side to every piece of knowledge he who has the experience alone can judge of its value He alone feels where the shoe pinches or sees the subjective glow which transfigures the landscape b Even where we feel entitled to abstract sufficiently from this individuality of concrete experiences to speak of a common situation it may be perfectly legitimate for different minds to evaluate it differently All views may be right from their several standpoints and they generally are so more or less To deny that the true mode of attaining the Good varies according to the circumstances of the agent is both intolerance and ineptitude c Athanasius contra mundum and the fact that all new truth necessarily starts in a minority of one should moderate our reliance on numbers as a test of truth Universal consensus is a consequence and not a cause of truth 4 It is in vain therefore that Plato attempts in 170 E 171 C to show that on his own principles Protagoras must bow to the verdict of the majority who reject his dictum Plato s argument here is completely vitiated by the ambiguity of truth 7 and as it completely ignores the distinction made by the Protagoras Speech it is a mere ignoratio elenchi For Protagoras has already explained how on his theory scientific authority was constituted He could therefore reply My dictum may be true claim for me even though it is not true for all the world besides There is no contradiction in this for we are different I am Protagoras you to put it mildly are not And I may already be right though no one else perceives it yet For eventually men may come to see that my view is really better And then the validity of the truth I now claim will be admitted 5 In 171 E 172 C Plato propounds a restriction of the dictum s claim to matters of sense perception exempting matters of health and disease from its sway and he identifies this restricted claim with the position of the Protagoras Speech This passage ᾑ ἡμεῖς ὑπεγράψαμεν βοηθοῦντες Πρωταγόρᾳ which has already been referred to p 14 at first sight seems direct evidence in favour of the view that the Speech is really a Platonic invention and if this were the only or the best interpretation of the remark it would be almost fatal to the contention of this study But in point of fact it may be shown that it is only part of Plato s misconstruction of the Speech and that upon examination it tells strongly in favour of the view that the Speech is genuinely Protagorean and has been utterly misunderstood by Plato To put the matter quite bluntly it is not true that the Speech said what Plato s Socrates now says it said The discrepancies between what was said and what is now alleged may doubtless look small but they are not insignificant and it is obvious that nothing very glaring could be expected For if Plato had become aware of any considerable divergence between the text of the Speech and his subsequent version of it he would have modified one or the other a The assertion that the restriction now proposed is a concession to common sense on the part of Protagoreanism is merely a repetition of the remark in 169 D It does not become more plausible thereby And it has already been explained how profound a misconception of the chief distinction made in the Speech is implied in this assertion b Nothing is said in the Speech about a division of territories whereby the sphere of perception would be left to the dictum while that of good and evil and of health and disease would be assigned to the control of authority The contention of the Speech was that of judgments equally true one might be better than another And this was laid down universally Neither subjectivity nor valuation was confined to sense perceptions thus implicitly giving the lie to Plato s attempt to fuse the humanism of Protagoras with the sensationalism of his day an attempt the arbitrary nature of which is as good as confessed in Socrates s remark in 152 C that he is divulging a secret doctrine to an astonished world No restriction therefore of the personal implication in all knowing to the sphere of mere perception can for a moment be entertained by any logical Protagoreanism and this implication must carry the universality of valuations with it If e g I am short sighted and you are not your visual perceptions will be better than mine But this will not make them true to me The fact that you can read print at a distance impossible to me does not enable me to do so though the manifest superiority of your practical adjustments will induce me to admit and to envy the superiority of your perceptions I shall continue to see a blur where you see clearly as before It would seem therefore that in attempting to apply the distinction of the Speech Plato has restricted it in a way which the Speech does not warrant and the facts refute Surely a curious fact on the hypothesis that he was himself the author of the distinction c Plato s quotation of the words of the Speech is seriously inaccurate He substitutes healthful and diseased for better and worse But in the Speech these were merely illustrations of the general principle and the distinction was not restricted to them d The argument about the cities in 172 A B is both inaccurate and absurd Nothing was said in the Speech about the advantageous the terms used were good and evil Moreover the compromise proposed is impossible as Plato must have

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Plato_or_Protagoras%3F (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Ferdinand Canning Scott Schiller - Wikisource, the free online library
    in Humanism 1908 Examination v Research in Nature Vol 77 No 1997 1908 322 324 1908 Plato or Protagoras 1911 Nietzsche Friedrich Wilhelm in Encyclopædia Britannica 11th ed 1911 Pragmatism in Encyclopædia Britannica 11th ed 1911 Spencer Herbert in Encyclopædia Britannica 11th ed 1911 1912 Formal Logic 1924 Problems of Belief 1929 Logic for Use 1939 Our Human Truths Works about F C S Schiller edit F C S Schiller in Four and Twenty Minds 1922 by Giovanni Papini F C S Schiller in Six Major Prophets 1917 by Edwin E Slosson Mr F C S Schiller in The Problem of Personality 1916 by Ernest Northcroft Merrington Some or all works by this author are in the public domain in the United States because they were published before January 1 1923 The author died in 1937 so works by this author are also in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author s life plus 75 years or less Works by this author may also be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works Public domain Public domain false false Authority control VIAF 19791730 LCCN n79060546 ISNI 0000 0001 2123 1500 GND 11726718x SUDOC 034743855 BNF cb12546596t NLA 35480234 NDL 00518403 NKC kup20030000087537 PTBNP 917513 NTA 072987030 NUKAT n2004044451 Project Gutenberg 35735 BNE XX1435012 Open Library OL6209182A Freebase m 05xp4l ODNB 101035969 GEC 0061340 English Wikisource 284668 WorldCat Retrieved from https en wikisource org w index php title Author Ferdinand Canning Scott Schiller oldid 5666238 Categories 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica contributors Authors Sc 1864 births Early modern authors 1937 deaths Modern authors Male authors Author PD old 75 1923 English philosophers Pragmatists Hidden categories Author pages with Wikidata image

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Ferdinand_Canning_Scott_Schiller (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • File:The Idea of Progress.djvu - Wikisource, the free online library
    not be in the public domain in these countries which moreover do not implement the rule of the shorter term Côte d Ivoire has a general copyright term of 99 years and Honduras has 75 years but they do implement the rule of the shorter term Copyright may extend on works created by French who died for France in World War II more information Russians who served in the Eastern Front of World War II known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia and posthumously rehabilitated victims of Soviet repressions more information This file has been identified as being free of known restrictions under copyright law including all related and neighboring rights File history Click on a date time to view the file as it appeared at that time Date Time Thumbnail Dimensions User Comment current 14 45 25 May 2009 2 748 4 446 42 pages 1 56 MB Mkoyle Information Description Book The Romanes Lecture 1920 The Idea of Progress Published by Oxford Clarendon Press Source http www archive org details ideaofprogress00ingeuoft Date 1920 Author w William Ralph Inge Willi File usage The following 45 pages link to this file User William Maury Morris II Wikisource Proofread of the Month Page The Idea of Progress djvu 1 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 10 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 11 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 12 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 13 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 14 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 15 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 16 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 17 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 18 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 19 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 2 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 20 Page The Idea of Progress djvu 21

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/File:The_Idea_of_Progress.djvu (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • The Idea of Progress - Wikisource, the free online library
    which it was supposed to support Leaving for the present the German and the French thinkers we observe with astonishment that many leading men in Queen Victoria s reign found it possible to use the great biological discovery of Darwin to tyrannize over the minds of their contemporaries to give their blessing to the economic and social movements of their time and to unite determinism with teleology in the highly edifying manner to which I have already referred Scientific optimism was no doubt rampant before Darwin For example Herschel says Man s progress towards a higher state need never fear a check but must continue till the very last existence of history But Herbert Spencer asserts the perfectibility of man with an assurance makes us gasp Progress is not an accident but a necessity What we call evil and good must disappear It is certain that man must become perfect The ultimate development of the ideal man is certain as certain as any conclusion in the most implicit faith for instance that all men will die Always towards perfection is the mighty movement towards a complete development and a more unmixed good It has been pointed out by Mr Bradley that these apocalyptic prophecies have nothing whatever to do with Darwinism If we take the so called doctrine of evolution in Nature as a metaphysics of existence which Darwin never intended it to be there is in the world nothing like value or good or evil Anything evolution in the ordinary sense of development or progress is wholly rejected The survival of the fittest does not mean that the most virtuous or the most useful or the most beautiful or even the most complex survive there is no moral or aesthetic judgement pronounced on the process or any part of it Darwinism Mr Bradley goes on to say often recommends itself because it is confused with a doctrine of evolution which is radically different Humanity is taken in that doctrine as a real being or even as the one real being and humanity it is said advances continuously Its history is development and progress towards a goal because the type and character in which its reality consists is gradually brought more and more into fact That which is strongest on the whole must therefore be good and the ideas which come to prevail must therefore be true This doctrine though I certainly cannot accept it for good or evil more or less dominates or sways our minds to an extent which most of us perhaps are dangerously unaware Any such view of course conflicts radically with Darwinism which only teaches that the true idea is the idea which prevails and this leaves us in the end with no criterion at all It may further be suggested that Spencer s optimism depends on the transmissibility of acquired characters but this is too dangerous a subject for a layman in science to discuss Although the main facts of cosmic evolution and the main course of human history from Pithecanthropus downwards are well known to all my hearers and to some of them much better than to myself it may be worth while to recall to you in bald and colourless language what science really tells us about the nature and destiny of our species It is so different from the gay colours of the rhapsodists whom I have just quoted that we must be amazed that such doctrines should ever have passed for scientific Astronomy gives us a picture of a wilderness of space probably boundless sparsely sewn with aggregations of elemental particles in all stages of heat and cold These heavenly bodies are in some cases growing hotter in other cases growing colder but the fate of every globe must be sooner or later to become cold and dead like the moon Our sun from which we derive the warmth which makes our life possible is I believe an elderly star which has long outlived the turbulent heats of youth and is on its way to join the most senile class of luminiferous bodies in which the star Antares is placed When a star has once become cold it must apparently remain dead until some chance collision sets the whole cycle going again From time to time a great conflagration in the heavens which occurred perhaps in the seventeenth century becomes visible from this earth and we may imagine if we will that two great solar systems have been reduced in a moment to incandescent gas But space is probably so empty that the most pugnacious of astral knights errant might wander for billions of years without meeting an opponent worthy of its bulk If time as well as space is infinite worlds must be born and die innumerable times however few and far between their periods of activity may be Of progress in such a system taken as a whole there cannot be a trace Nor can there be any doubt about the fate of our own planet Man and all his achievements will one day be obliterated like a child s sand castle when the next tide comes in Lucretius who gave us the word progress has told us our ultimate fate in sonorous lines Quorum naturam triplicem tria corpora Memmi tres species tam dissimiles tria talia texta una dies dabit exitio multosque per annos sustentata ruet moles et machina mundi The racial life of the species to which we happen to belong is a brief episode even in the brief life of the planet And what we call civilization or culture though much older than we used to suppose is a brief episode in the life of our race For tens of thousands of years the changes in our habits must have been very slight and chiefly those which were forced upon our rude ancestors by changes of climate Then in certain districts man began as Samuel Butler says to wish to live beyond his income This was the beginning of the vast series of inventions which have made our life so complex And we used to be told the law of all progress is the same the evolution of the simple into the complex by successive differentiations This is the gospel according to Herbert Spencer As a universal law of nature it is ludicrously untrue Some species have survived by becoming more complex others like the whole tribe of parasites by becoming more simple On the whole perhaps the parasites have had the best of it The progressive species have in many cases flourished for a while and then paid the supreme penalty The living dreadnoughts of the Saurian age have left us their bones but no progeny But the microbes one of which had the honour of killing Alexander the Great at the age of thirty two and so changing the whole course of history survive and flourish The microbe illustrates the wisdom of the maxim λάθε βιώσας It took thousands of years to find him out Our own species being rather poorly provided by nature for offence and defence had to live by its wits and so came to the top It developed many new needs and set itself many insoluble problems Physiologists like Metchnikoff have shown how very ill adapted our bodies are to the tasks which we impose upon them and in spite of the Spencerian identification of complexity with progress our surgeons try to simply our structure by forcibly removing various organs which they assure us that we do not need If we turn to history for a confirmation of the Spencerian doctrine we find on the contrary that civilization is a disease which is almost invariably fatal unless its course is checked in time The Hindus and Chinese after advancing to a certain point were content to mark time and they survive But the Greeks and Romans are gone and aristocracies everywhere die out Do we not see to day the complex organization of the ecclesiastic and college don succumbing before the simple squeezing and sucking organs of the profiteer and trade unionist If so called civilized nations show any protracted vitality it is because they are only civilized at the top Ancient civilizations were destroyed by imported barbarians we breed our own It is also an unproved assumption that the domination of the planet by our own species is a desirable thing which must give satisfaction to its Creator We have devastated the loveliness of the world we have exterminated several species more beautiful and less vicious than ourselves we have enslaved the rest of the animal creation and have treated our distant cousins in fur and feathers so badly that beyond doubt if they were able to formulate a religion they would depict the Devil in human form If it is progress to turn the fields and woods of Essex into East and West Ham we may be thankful that progress is a sporadic and transient phenomenon in history It is a pity that our biologists instead of singing paens to Progress and thereby stultifying their own speculations have not preached us sermons on the sin of racial self idolatry a topic which really does arise out of their studies L anthropolatrie voilà l ennemi is the real ethical motto of biological science and a valuable contribution to morals It was impossible that such shallow optimism as that of Herbert Spencer should not arouse protests from other scientific thinkers Hartmann had already shown how a system of pessimism resembling that Schopenhauer may be built upon the foundation of evolutionary science And in this place we are not likely to forget the second Romanes Lecture when Professor Huxley astonished his friends and opponents alike by throwing down the gauntlet in the face of Nature and bidding mankind to find salvation by accepting for itself the position which the early Christian writer Hippolytus gives as a definition of the Devil he who resists the cosmic process ὁ ἀντιτάττων τοῖς κοσμικοῖς The revolt was not in reality so sudden as some of Huxley s hearers supposed He had already realized that so far from gradual progress forming any necessary part of the Darwinian creed it appears to us that it is perfectly consistent with indefinite persistence in one state or with a gradual retrogression Suppose e g a return of the glacial period or a spread of polar climatical conditions over the whole globe The alliance between determinism and optimism was thus dissolved and as time went on Huxley began to see in the cosmic process something like a power of evil The natural process he told us in this place has no tendency to bring about the good of mankind Cosmic nature is no school of virtue but the head quarters of the enemy of ethical nature Nature is the realm of tiger rights it has no morals and no ought to be its only rights are brutal powers Morality exists only in the artificial world man is a glorious rebel a Prometheus defying Zeus This strange rebound in to Manicheism sounded like a blasphemy against all the gods whom the lecturer was believed to worship and half scandalized even the clerics in his audience It was bound to raise the question whether this titanic revolt against the cosmic process has any chance of success One recent thinker who accepts Huxley s view that the nature of things is cruel and immoral is willing to face the probability that we cannot resist it with any prospect of victory Mr Bertrand Russell in his arresting essay A Free Man s Worship shows us Prometheus again but Prometheus chained to the rock and still hurling defiance against God He proclaims the moral bankruptcy of naturalism which he yet holds to be forced upon us That man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving that his origin his growth his hopes and fears his loves and beliefs are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms that no fire no heroism no intensity of thought and feeling can preserve an individual beyond the grave that all the labours of the ages all the devotion all the inspiration all the noonday brightness of human genius are destined to extinction in the vast death of the Solar system and that the whole temple of man s achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins all these things if not quite beyond dispute are yet so nearly certain that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand Only with the scaffolding of these truths only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair can the soul s habitation henceforth be safely build Man belongs to an alien and inhuman world alone amid hostile forces What is man to do The God who exists is evil the God whom we can worship is the creation of our own conscience and has no existence outside it The free man will worhsip the latter and like John Stuart Mill to hell he will go If I wished to criticize this defiant pronouncement which is not without a touch of bravado I should say that so complete a separation of the real from the ideal is impossible and that the choice which the writer offers us of worshipping a Devil who exists or a God who does not is no real choice since we cannot worship either But my object in qhoting from this essay is to show how completely naturalism has severed its alliance with optimism and belief in progress Professor Huxley and Mr Russell have sung their palinode and smashed the old gods of their creed No more proof is needed I think that the alleged law of progress has no scientific basis whatever But the superstition has also invaded and vitiated our history our political science our philosophy and our religion The historian is a natural snob he sides with the gods against Cato and approves the winning side He lectures the vanquished for their wilfulness and want of foresight sometimes rather prematurely as when Seeley looking about for an example of perverse refusal to recognize facts exclaims Sedet aeternumque sedebit unhappy Poland The nineteenth century historian was so loath to admit retrogression that he liked to fancy the river of progress flowing underground all through the Dark Ages and endowed the German barbarians who overthrew Mediterranean civilization with all its manly virtues If a nation or a religion or a school of art dies the historian explains why it was not worthy to live In political science the corruption of the scientific spirit by the superstition of progress has been flagrant It enables the disputant to overbear questions of right and wrong by confident prediction a method which has the double advantage of being peculiarly irritating and incapable of refutation On the theory of progress what is coming must be right Forms of government and modes of thought which for the time being are not in favour are assumed to have been permanently left behind A student of history who believed in cyclical changes and long swings of the pendulum would take a very different and probably much sounder view of contemporary affairs The votaries of progress mistake the flowing tide for the river of eternity and when the tide turns they are likely to be left stranded like the corks and scraps of seaweed which mark the high water line This has already happened though few realize it The praises of Liberty are mainly left to Conservatives who couple it with Property as something to be defended and to conscientious objectors who dissociate it from their country which is not to be defended Democracy the magic ballot box has few worshippers any longer except in America where men will still shout for about two hours and indeed much longer that she is great But our pundits will be slow to surrender the useful words progressive and reactionary The classification is however a little awkward If a reactionary is any one who will not float with the stream and a progressive anyone who has the flowing tide with him we must classify the Christian Fathers and the French Encyclopaedists as belonging to the same type the progressive while the Roman Stoics under the Empire and the Russian bureaucrats under Nicholas II will be placed together under the opposite title as reactionaries Or is the progressive not the supporter of the winning cause for the time being but the man who thinks with a distinguished Head of a College who as I remember affirmed his Convocation that any leap in the dark is better than standing still and is the reactionary the man whose constitutional timidity would deter him from performing this act of faith when caught by a mist on the Matterhorn Machiavelli recognizes fixed types of human character such as the cautious Fabius and the impetuous Julius II and observes that these qualities lead sometimes to success and sometimes to failure If a reactionary only means an adherent of political opinions which we happen to dislike there is no reason why a bureaucrat should not call a republican a reactionary Maecenas may have applied the name to Brutus and Cassius Such examples of evolution as that which turned the Roman Republic into a principate and then into an empire of the Asiatic type are inconvenient for those who say It is coming and think that they have vindicated the superiority of their own theories of government We have next to consider the influence of the superstition of progress on the philosophy of the last century To attempt such a task in this place is a little rash to prove the charge in a few minutes would be impossible even for one much better equipped than I am But something must be said Hegel and Comte are often said to have been the chief advocates of the doctrine of progress among philosophers Both of them give definitions of the word a very necessary thing to do and I have not yet attempted to do it Hegel defines progress as spiritual freedom Comte as true or positive social philosophy The definitions are peculiar and neither theory can be made to fit past history though that of Comte at any rate falls to the ground if it does not fit past history Hegel is perhaps more independent of facts his predecessor Fichte professes to be entirely indifferent to them The philosopher he says follows the a priori thread of the world plan which is clear to him without any history and if he makes use of history it is not to prove anything since his theses are already proved independently of all history Certainly Hegel s dialectical process cannot easily be recognized in the course of European events and what is more fatal to the believers in a law of progress who appeal to him he does not seem to have contemplated any further marked improvements upon the political system of Prussia in his own time which he admired so much that his critics have accused him of teaching that the Absolute first attained full self consciousness at Berlin in the nineteenth century He undoubtedly believed that there has been progress in the past but he does not it appears look forward to further changes as a politician at any rate he gives us something like a closed system Comte can only bring his famous three stages into history by arguing that the Catholic monotheism of the Middle Ages was an advance upon pagan antiquity A Catholic might defend such a thesis with success but for Comte the chief advantage seems to be that the change left the Olympians with only one neck to cut off But Comte himself is what his system requires us to call a reactionary he is back in the theological stage he would like a theocracy if he could have one without a God The state is to be subordinate to the Positive Church and he will allow no unlimited freedom of thought The connection of this philosophy with the doctrine of progress seems very slender It is not so easy to answer the question in the case of Hegel because his contentment with the Prussian government may be set down to idiosyncrasy or prudence but it is significant that some of his ablest disciples have discarded the belief To say that the world is as it ought to be does not imply that it goes on getting better though some would think it was not good if it was not getting better It is hard to believe that a great thinker really supposed that the universe as a whole is progressing a notion which Mr Bradley has stigmatized as nonsense unmeaning or blasphemous Mr Bradley may perhaps be interpreting Hegel rightly when he says that for a philosopher progress can never have any temporal sense and explains that a perfect philosopher would see the whole world of appearance as a progress by which he seems to mean only a rearrangement in terms of ascending and descending value and reality But it might be objected that to use progress in this sense is to lay a trap for the unwary Mathematicians undoubtedly talk of progress or rather of progression without any implication of temporal sequence but outside this science to speak of progress without any temporal sense is to use a phrase which some would call self contradictory Be that as it may popularized Hegelianism has laid hold of the idea of a self improving universe of perpetual and universal progress in a strictly temporal sense The notion of an evolving and progressing cosmos with a Creator who is either improving himself though we do not put it quite so crudely or who is gradually coming into his own has takan strong hold of the popular imagination The latter notion leads straight to ethical dualism of the Manichean type The theory of a single purpose in the universe seems to me untenable Such a purpose being infinite could never have been conceived and if conceived could never be accomplished The theory condemns both God and man to the doom of Tantalus Mr Bradley is quite right in finding this belief incompatible with Christianity It would not be possible without transgressing the limits set for lecturers on this foundation to show how the belief in a law of progress has prejudicially affected the religious beliefs of our time I need only recall to you the discussions whether the perfect man could have lived in the first and not in the nineteenth or twentieth century although one would have thought that the ancient Greeks one nation only have produced many examples of hitherto unsurpassed genius the secularization of religion by throwing its ideals into the near future a new apocalyptism which is doing mischief enough in politics without the help of the clergy and the unauthorized belief in future probation which rests on the queer assumption that if a man is given time enough he must necessarily become perfect In fact the superstition which is the subject of this lecture has distorted Christianity almost beyond recognition Only one great Church old in worldly wisdom knows that human nature does not change and acts on the knowledge Accordingly the papal syllabus of 1864 declares Si quis dixerit Romanus pontifex potest ac debet cum progressu cum liberalismo et cum recenti civilitate sese reconciliare et componere anathema sit Our optimists have not made it clear to themselves or others what they mean by progress and we may suspect that the vagueness of the idea is one of its attractions There has been no physical progress in our species for many thousands of years The Cro Magnon race which lived perhaps twenty thousand years ago was at least equal to any modern people in size and strength the ancient Greeks were I suppose handsomer and better formed than we are and some unprogressive races such as the Zulus Samoans and Tahitians are envied by Europeans either for strength or beauty Although it seems not to be true that the sight and hearing of civilized peoples are inferior to those of savages we have certainly lost our natural weapons which from one point of view is a mark of degeneracy Mentally we are now told that the men of the Old Stone Age ugly as most of them must have been had as large brains as ours and he would be a bold man who should claim that we are intellectually equal to the Athenians or superior to the Romans The question of moral improvement is much more difficult Until the Great War few would have disputed that civilized man had become much more humane much more sensitive to the sufferings of others and so more just more self controlled and less brutal in his pleasures and in his resentments The habitual honesty of the Western European might also have been contrasted with the rascality of inferior races in the past and present It was often forgotten that if progress means the improvement of human nature itself the question to be asked is whether the modern civilized man behaves better in the same circumstances than his ancestor would have done Absence of temptation may produce an appearance of improvement but this is hardly what we mean by progress and there is an old saying that the Devil has a clever trick of pretending to be dead It seems to me very doubtful whether when we are exposed to the same temptations we are more humane or more sympathetic or juster or less brutal than the ancients Even before this war the examples of the Congo and Putumayo and American lynchings proved that contact with barbarians reduces many white men to the moral condition of savages and the outrages committed on the Chinese after the Boxer rebellion showed that even a civilized nation cannot rely on being decently treated by Europeans if its civilization is different from their own During the Great War even if some atrocities were magnified with the amiable object of rousing a good natured people to violent hatred it was the well considered opinion of Lord Bryce s commission that no such cruelties had been committed for three hundred years as those which the Germans practised in Belgium and France It was startling to observe how easily the blood lust was excited in young men straight from the fields the factory and the counter many of whom had never before killed anything larger than a wasp and that in self defence As for the Turks we must go back to Genghis Khan to find any parallel to their massacres in Armenia and the Russian terrorists have reintroduced torture into Europe with the help of Chinese experts in the art With these examples before our eyes it is difficult to feel any confidence that either the lapse of time or civilization has made the bête humaine On biological grounds there is no reason to expect it No selection in favour of superior types is not going on on the contrary civilization tends now as always to an Ausrottung der Besten a weeding out of the best and the new practice of subsidizing the unsuccessful by taxes extorted from the industrious is cacogenics erected into a principle The best hope of stopping this progressive degeneration is in the science of eugenics But this science is still too tentative to be made the basis of legislation and we are not yet agreed what we should breed for The two ideals that of the perfect man and that of the perfectly organized State would lead to very different principles of selection Do we want a nation of moderately efficient Greek gods or do we want mastiffs for policemen human greyhounds for postmen and so on However the opposition which eugenics has now to face is based on less respectable grounds such as pure hedonism would the superman be any happier indifference to the future welfare of the race posterity has done nothing for me why should I do anything for posterity and in politics the reflection that the unborn have no votes We have then been driven to the conclusion that neither science nor history gives us any warrant for believing that humanity has advanced except by accumulating knowledge and experience and the instruments of living The value of these accumulations is not beyond dispute Attacks upon civilization have been frequent from Crates Pherecrates Antisthenes and Lucretius in antiquity to Rousseau Walt Whitman Thoreau Ruskin Morris and Edward Carpenter in modern times I cannot myself agree with these extremists I believe that the accumulated experience of mankind and his wonderful discoveries are of great value I only point out that they do not constitute real progress in human nature itself and that in the absence of any real progress these gains are external precarious and liable to be turned to our own destruction as new discoveries in chemistry may easily be But it is possible to approach the whole question of progress from another side and from this side the results will not be quite the same and may be more encouraging We have said that there can be no progress in the macrocosm and no single purpose in a universe which has neither beginning nor end in time But there may be an infinite number of finite purposes some much greater and others much smaller than the span of an individual life and within each of these some Divine thought may be working itself out bringing some life or series of lives some nation or race or species to that perfection which is natural to it what the Greeks called its nature The Greeks saw no contradiction between this belief and the theory of cosmic cycles and I do not think that there is any contradiction It may be that there is an immanent teleology which is shaping the life of the human race towards some completed development which has not yet been reached To advocate such a theory seems like going back from Darwin to Lamarck but vitalism if it be a heresy is a very vigorous and obstinate one we can hardly dismiss it as unscientific The possibility that such a development is going on is not disproved by the slowness of the change within the historical period Progress in the recent millennia seems to us to have been external precarious and disappointing But let this last adjective give us pause By what standard do we pronounce it disappointing and who gave us this standard This disappointment has been a constant phenomenon with a very few exceptions What does it mean Have those who reject the law of progress taken it into account The philosophy of naturalism always makes the mistake of leaving human nature out The climbing instinct of humanity and our discontent with things as they are are facts accounted for no less than the stable instincts of nearly all other species We all desire to make progress and our ambitions are not limited to our own lives or our own lifetimes It is part of our nature to aspire and hope even on biological grounds this instinct must be assumed to serve some function The first Christian poet Prudentius quite in the spirit of Robert Browning names Hope as the distinguishing characteristic of mankind Nonne hominum et pecudum distantia separat una quod bona quadrupedum ante oculossitasunt ego contra spero We must consider seriously what this instinct of hope means and implies in the scheme of things It is of course possible to dismiss it as fraud Perhaps this was the view most commonly held in antiquity Hope was regarded as a gift of dubious value an illusion which helps us to endure life and a potent spur to action but in the last resort an ignis fatuus A Greek could write for his tombstone I ve entered port Fortune and Hope adieu Make game of others for I ve done with you And Lord Brougham chose this epigram to adorn his villa at Cannes So for Schopenhauer hope is the bait by which Nature gets her hook in our nose and induces us to serve her purposes which are not our own This is pessimism which like optimism is a mood not a philosophy Neither of them needs refutation except for the adherent of the opposite mood and these will never convince each other for the same arguments are fatal to both If our desires are clearly contrary to the nature of things of which we are a part it is our wisdom and our duty to correct our ambitions and like the Bostonian Margaret Fuller to decide to accept the universe Gad she d better was Carlyle s comment on this declaration The true inference from Nature s law of vicarious sacrifice is not that life is a fraud but that selfishness is unnatural The pessimist can only condemn the world by a standard which he finds somewhere if only in his own heart in passing sentence upon it he affirms an optimism which he will not surrender to any appearances The ancients were not pessimists but they distrusted Hope I will not follow those who say that they succumbed to the barbarians because they looked back instead of forward I do not think it is true If the Greeks and Romans had studied chemistry and metallurgy instead of art rhetoric and law they might have discovered gunpowder and poison gas and kept the Germans north of the Alps But St Paul s deliberate verdict on pagan society that is had no hope cannot be lightly set aside No other religion before Christianity ever erected hope into a moral virtue We are saved by hope was a new doctrine when it was pronounced The later Neoplatonists borrowed St Paul s triad Faith Hope and Love adding Truth as a fourth Hopefulness may have been partly a legacy from Judaism but it was much more a part of the intense spiritual vitality which was disseminated by the new faith In an isolated but extremely interesting passage St Paul extends his hope of redemption into the glorious liberty of the children of God to the whole creation generally In the absence of any explanation or parallel passages it is difficult to say what vision of cosmic deliverance was in his mind Students of early Christian thought must be struck by the vigour of hope in the minds of men combined with great fluidity in the forms or moulds into which it ran After much fluctuation it tended to harden as belief in a supramundane future a compromise between Jewish and Platonic eschatology since the jews set their hopes on a terrestrial future the Platonists on a supramundane present Christian philosophers inclined to the Platonic faith while popular belief retained the apocalyptic Jewish idea under the form of Millenarianism Religion has oscillated between these two types of belief ever since and both have suffered considerably by being vulgarized In times of disorder and decadence the Platonic ideal world materialized into a supraterrestrial physics and geography has tended to prevail in times of crass prosperity and intellectual confidence the jewish dream of a kingdom of the saints on earth has been coarsened into promises of a good time coming At the time when we were inditing the paeans to Progress which I quoted near the beginning of my lecture we were evolving a Deuteronomic religion for ourselves even more flattering than the combination of determinism with optimism which science was offering at the same period We almost persuaded ourselves that the words the meek spirited shall possess the earth were a prophecy of the expansion of England Our new privileged class organized Labour is now weaving

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Idea_of_Progress (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • William Ralph Inge - Wikisource, the free online library
    Personal Idealism and Mysticism Paddock Lectures 1906 All Saints Sermons 1907 Faith and its Psychology Jowett Lectures 1909 Speculum Animae 1911 The Church and the Age 1912 Types of Christian Saintliness 1915 The Philosophy of Plotinus 2 vols Gifford Lectures 1918 ISBN 1 59244 284 6 softcover ISBN 0 8371 0113 1 hardcover The Idea of Progress 1922 djvu Outspoken Essays I 1919 II 1922 The Victorian Age Rede Lecture 1922 Personal Religion and the Life of Devotion 1924 Lay Thoughts of a Dean 1926 The Platonic Tradition in English Religious Thought 1926 ISBN 0 8414 5055 2 The Church in the World 1927 Assessments and Anticipations 1929 Christian Ethics and Modern Problems 1930 More Lay Thoughts of a Dean 1931 Things New and Old 1933 God and the Astronomers 1933 Our Present Discontents 1938 ISBN 0 8369 2846 6 A Pacifist in Trouble 1939 ISBN 0 8369 2192 5 The Fall of the Idols 1940 Talks in a Free Country 1942 ISBN 0 8369 2774 5 Mysticism in Religion 1947 ISBN 0 8371 8953 5 The End of an Age 1948 Diary of a Dean 1949 Authority control VIAF 102318396 LCCN n79065324 ISNI 0000 0001 1156 4651 GND 143248375 SUDOC 083703977 NDL 00550416 NTA 068309864 Project Gutenberg 1534 ODNB 101034098 English Wikisource 453502 WorldCat Retrieved from https en wikisource org w index php title Author William Ralph Inge oldid 5659476 Categories Authors In 1860 births Early modern authors 1954 deaths Modern authors Male authors English authors United Kingdom authors Anglicans Hidden categories Author pages with image Author pages with gender in Wikidata Author pages connected to Wikidata Author pages with authority control data Pages using authority control with parameters Author pages with VIAF on Wikidata Navigation menu Personal tools Not logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Namespaces

    Original URL path: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:William_Ralph_Inge (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive



  •