Vol. 10 No. 2 1943 - page 207

LETTERS
207
perience
is
exclusively personal for
him.
Whether James' account does justice to
the religious experience of most human
beings, which is oriented towards dogma
or doctrine as James' is not, is another
question. Speaking for myself alone, I
do not regard James' approach as a
fruitful one in understanding either the
religion or the religious experience of
most of mankind. His own "overbeliefs"
and ·"piecemeal supernaturalism" are in·
compatible both with the best strains of
bis
Psychology and with the logic of
pragmatism. When Miss Spackman tells
us flatly that religion is not dogma or
theory, she is wrong or else she is using
words in a violently strange way. Nor
bave we fallen into the converse error of
declaring that religion is
only
a matter
of dogma or theory as she implies. Le•
Miss
Spackman set her heart at rest.
Naturalists have their experiences, too;
they have no objection to other people
having them. But two points must be
mentioned here. (a) Although
all
sorts
of cognitive claims may arise from ex–
perience or be based upon it, in the sense
thst the claim could not be made or
anderstood without the experience, the
/act
of the experience is no evidence for
the
truth
of the claims. And (b) an
empirical approach towards religion fur–
Diabes even less warrant for the absolute
dualism between religious experience and
religious belief-action-institutions than, to
ue ber own illustration, between love and
lllll'riage.
2.
In
auswer to Mr. Fitzgerald's three
qaeations.
(1)
We have not said that
tbe cause of present disorders is "the
lack
of scientific method" in social
af.
fain.
We have said that the causes of
oar present disorders, including the new
failure of nerve, is to be found pri–
lllrily
in a whole complex of
material
flctors. See p. 8. The social, economic
ad
educational changes required to
eliminate these present disorders were not
carried out for a variety of reasons. Only
• of them is the antagon'ism of vested
lltereats
to the application of scientific
.-bod
in resolving social problems in
ICCOrdance with commonly professed
pia.
Another is the intrinsic difficulty
tl
tbe problems which should be a spur
to further scientific study and application
instead of abandoning, as Mr. Fitzgerald's
friends urge, incomplete knowledge for
myths and superstition. Another
is
the
failure of intelligence and courage of the
two great wings of the socialist movement
which should be a spur to reconstituting
this movement fortified by the lessons of
the past. And there are other reasons.
(2) No. Nor have we identified those
who raise questions of this sort with
people who exhibit intellectual panic_
(3) It is true that in addition to the
revival of the doctrine of original sin,
there has been a decline in the belief
in "speedy· perfectability of human na–
ture." The latter is intelligent, a healthy
reaction to the superficial optimism of
the expanding capitalist economy in pre–
War I days. After 1914 it was realized
by many others besides Spengler that
"optimism was cowardice." The doctrine
of original sin, on th.e other hand, is a
mischievous myth; it encourages indiffer–
entism and defeatism.
1. Erasmus Minor misreads the pas·
sage he quotes from Mr. Nagel.
It
refers
to the activities of
some
philosophers. He
is also guilty of a
non-sequitur
in assum–
ing that the evaluation of scientific
method as opposed to other modes of
settling doubt or fixing belief (Peirce),
is to be carried on by "specific skills
and routines," i.e., the special procedures
of the individual sciences. Nor is the
scientific evaluation of the methods of
the sciences and their rivals and substi–
tutes viciously circular
if
taken in the
context of their respective claims.
The uses and functions of philosophy
are many. Here are half a dozen which
do not include "writing advertising copy"
either for the scientific industries (or for
God) or serving as the well-ridden hand–
maiden of theology. These functions are
not exclusive or exhaustive.
a) imaginative anticipations and prefigur–
ings of scientific discovery (e.g. evolu–
tion, relativity) ; also cosmological syn·
theses.
b) clarification of the basic categories of
various disciplines.
c) logical analysis of language.
d) critique of abstractions in science, of
values in social life.
112...,197,198,199,200,201,202,203,204,205,206 208
Powered by FlippingBook