按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
sum total of whatsoever at any given time we may be thinking of；
the subjective part is the inner 〃state〃 in which the thinking
comes to pass。 What we think of may be enormousthe cosmic
times and spaces； for example whereas the inner state may be
the most fugitive and paltry activity of mind。 Yet the cosmic
objects； so far as the experience yields them； are but ideal
pictures of something whose existence we do not inwardly possess
but only point at outwardly； while the inner state is our very
experience itself； its reality and that of our experience are
one。 A conscious field PLUS its object as felt or thought of
PLUS an attitude towards the object PLUS the sense of a self to
whom the attitude belongssuch a concrete bit of personal
experience may be a small bit； but it is a solid bit as long as
it lasts； not hollow； not a mere abstract element of experience；
such as the 〃object〃 is when taken all alone。 It is a FULL fact；
even though it be an insignificant fact； it is of the KIND to
which all realities whatsoever must belong； the motor currents of
the world run through the like of it； it is on the line
connecting real events with real events。 That unsharable feeling
which each one of us has of the pinch of his individual destiny
as he privately feels it rolling out on fortune's wheel may be
disparaged for its egotism； may be sneered at as unscientific；
but it is the one thing that fills up the measure of our concrete
actuality； and any would…be existent that should lack such a
feeling； or its analogue； would be a piece of reality only half
made up。＇336＇
＇336＇ Compare Lotze's doctrine that the only meaning we can
attach to the notion of a thing as it is 〃in itself〃 is by
conceiving it as it is FOR itself； i。e。； as a piece of full
experience with a private sense of 〃pinch〃 or inner activity of
some sort going with it。
If this be true； it is absurd for science to say that the
egotistic elements of experience should be suppressed。 The axis
of reality runs solely through the egotistic placesthey are
strung upon it like so many beads。 To describe the world with
all the various feelings of the individual pinch of destiny； all
the various spiritual attitudes； left out from the
descriptionthey being as describable as anything else would
be something like offering a printed bill of fare as the
equivalent for a solid meal。 Religion makes no such blunder。
The individual's religion may be egotistic； and those private
realities which it keeps in touch with may be narrow enough； but
at any rate it always remains infinitely less hollow and
abstract； as far as it goes； than a science which prides itself
on taking no account of anything private at all。
A bill of fare with one real raisin on it instead of the word
〃raisin；〃 with one real egg instead of the word 〃egg；〃 might be
an inadequate meal； but it would at least be a commencement of
reality。 The contention of the survival…theory that we ought to
stick to non…personal elements exclusively seems like saying that
we ought to be satisfied forever with reading the naked bill of
fare。 I think； therefore； that however particular questions
connected with our individual destinies may be answered； it is
only by acknowledging them as genuine questions； and living in
the sphere of thought which they open up； that we become
profound。 But to live thus is to be religious； so I
unhesitatingly repudiate the survival…theory of religion； as
being founded on an egregious mistake。 It does not follow；
because our ancestors made so many errors of fact and mixed them
with their religion； that we should therefore leave off being
religious at all。＇337＇ By being religious we establish ourselves
in possession of ultimate reality at the only points at which
reality is given us to guard。 Our responsible concern is with
our private destiny； after all。
＇337＇ Even the errors of fact may possibly turn out not to be as
wholesale as the scientist assumes。 We saw in Lecture IV how the
religious conception of the universe seems to many mind…curers
〃verified〃 from day to day by their experience of fact。
〃Experience of fact〃 is a field with so many things in it that
the sectarian scientist methodically declining； as he does； to
recognize such 〃facts〃 as mind…curers and others like them
experience； otherwise than by such rude heads of classification
as 〃bosh；〃 〃rot；〃 〃folly；〃 certainly leaves out a mass of raw
fact which； save for the industrious interest of the religious in
the more personal aspects of reality； would never have succeeded
in getting itself recorded at all。 We know this to be true
already in certain cases； it may； therefore； be true in others as
well。 Miraculous healings have always been part of the
supernaturalist stock in trade； and have always been dismissed by
the scientist as figments of the imagination。 But the
scientist's tardy education in the facts of hypnotism has
recently given him an apperceiving mass for phenomena of this
order； and he consequently now allows that the healings may
exist； provided you expressly call them effects of 〃suggestion。〃
Even the stigmata of the cross on Saint Francis's hands and feet
may on these terms not be a fable。 Similarly； the time…honored
phenomenon of diabolical possession is on the point of being
admitted by the scientist as a fact； now that he has the name of
〃hystero…demonopathy〃 by which to apperceive it。 No one can
foresee just how far this legitimation of occultist phenomena
under newly found scientist titles may proceedeven 〃prophecy；〃
even 〃levitation；〃 might creep into the pale。
Thus the divorce between scientist facts and religious facts may
not necessarily be as eternal as it at first sight seems； nor the
personalism and romanticism of the world； as they appeared to
primitive thinking； be matters so irrevocably outgrown。 The
final human opinion may； in short； in some manner now impossible
to foresee； revert to the more personal style； just as any path
of progress may follow a spiral rather than a straight line。 If
this were so； the rigorously impersonal view of science might one
day appear as having been a temporarily useful eccentricity
rather than the definitively triumphant position which the
sectarian scientist at present so confidently announces it to be。
You see now why I have been so individualistic throughout these
lectures； and why I have seemed so bent on rehabilitating the
element of feeling in religion and subordinating