340
PARTISAN REVIEW
unity through an empire. But Jaspers argues, with considerable plausi–
bility, that the parallelism of their spiritual development cannot be wholly
explained in rationalistic terms, and regards it as a significant illustra–
tion of the unity of mankind. Human beings have been living ever since
on the spiritual capital accumulated during the Axial Period, and only
those societies that have been permeated with its spirit have been able
to make any further contribution to human progress.
After the Axial Period the three areas continued to develop along
roughly parallel lines for fifteen hundred years. India and China then fell
into decadence, but the West, on the other hand, experienced another
major transformation through the discovery of science and technology.
This has made world unity not only possible but also necessary, but at the
same time it has led
to
forms of economic organization in which the in–
dividual has lost his sense of transcendence and of unity with others and
become a depersonalized puppet of a mass society. Our civilization can be
regenerated only through a rediscovery of the truths proclaimed during
the Axial Period. It is possible that the human race may end by de–
stroying itself. On the other hand, we may be approaching a new Axial
Period in which man's spiritual vitality will revive, and lead to a reasser–
tion of individual freedom and to the political unification of mankind.
It is easy to point out stretches of low-pressure thinking in this book.
Much of what Jaspers says, for example, about the virtues of a mixed
economic system that will promote social welfare while avoiding the de–
struction of freedom through over-all planning, or about the need for
a world federation based on the rule of law and allowing for cultural
diversities, is neither particularly new nor particularly helpful. But the
whole is more impressive than the parts. Jaspers is careful never to twist
facts in order to find corroboration for his view of man, and the validity
of his sketch of world history does not depend on the philosophy with
which he interprets it. Though he believes that spiritual truths are beyond
the scope of scientific knowledge, he understands scientific method and
gives an acute analysis of its development. And though his bent is mys–
tical, he insists that man's knowledge of God is always imperfect and
hence condemns any form of theological or ethical intolerance. In an
age of fanaticisms he still maintains the sanity and comprehensive sym–
pathies characteristic of the Humanist tradition. At a time when pro–
fessional philosophy in England and the United States has largely abdi–
cated from any position of leadership and narrowed itself to the analysis
of semantic conundrums, one feels especially inclined to applaud an
academician who still believes that philosophy's proper function is to deal
with the central problems of the human predicament.
Henrv Bamford Parkes
