Transcriber's Note
The author's classification of footnotes has been preserved, but
footnotes have been located at the end of chapters
THE PHILOSOPHY
OF
NATURAL THEOLOGY.
AN ESSAY,
IN CONFUTATION OF THE SCEPTICISM
OF THE PRESENT DAY,
WHICH OBTAINED A PRIZE AT OXFORD, NOV. 26TH, 1872.
BY THE REVEREND
WILLIAM JACKSON, M.A., F.S.A.,
FORMERLY FELLOW OF WORCESTER COLLEGE,
AUTHOR OF "POSITIVISM," "RIGHT AND WRONG,"
"THE GOLDEN SPELL," ETC.
NEW YORK:
A. D. F. RANDOLPH & CO.,
BROADWAY.
MDCCCLXXV.
TO THE MOST NOBLE
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY,
CHANCELLOR
OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD,
&c., &c., &c.,
THE FOLLOWING PAGES ARE,
WITH HIS LORDSHIP'S PERMISSION,
RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED
BY THEIR AUTHOR.
_From the "Oxford University Gazette" of June 14th, 1870._
PRIZE ESSAY.
Circumstances have induced an Individual, who wishes to remain
unknown, to offer a Prize of £100, to be competed for by Members of
the University of Oxford of not less standing than Master of Arts, and
by any above that standing, for the best Essay in confutation of the
Materialism of the present day by arguments derived from Evidences of
Intelligence, Design, Contrivance, and Adaptation of Means to Ends, in
the Universe, and especially in Man considered in his Moral Nature, his
Religious Aptitudes, and his Intellectual Powers; and in all Organic
Nature. The observation also to be made and supported in the course of
the Essay that the Will and Wisdom of the Creator may be a sufficient
cause for deviations from the established course of nature, and that
the Free-will of man, in things within his power and influence, may be
a cause of similar deviations.
It is desired that all arguments used against Materialism should be
independent of those of Hegel, and of what is called the Spiritual
Philosophy, which had its rise in Germany.
A period of two years will be allowed after the Public Announcement of
the subject before the competing Essays will be required to be sent
in to the Judges: and it is a condition of the competition that the
Copyright of the successful Essay shall be the property of the Donor
of the Prize; but that if published, the profits (if any) shall belong
to the Writer.
The Very Reverend the Dean of St. Paul's, the Regius Professor of
Divinity, and the Rev. C. Pritchard, Savilian Professor of Astronomy,
have consented to act as Judges.
Essays must be sent to the Registrar of the University on or before
the 12th of June, 1872. The Essays are to be distinguished by mottoes,
the writer's name being sent at the same time in a sealed envelope, in
the manner prescribed for the Chancellor's Prizes.
F. K. LEIGHTON,
Vice-Chancellor.
ALL SOULS COLLEGE,
_June 13, 1870_.
After the decease of Dean Mansel the last clause but one of the above
notice was thus modified in the _Gazette_ for Dec. 5th, 1871:--
The Very Reverend the Dean of Canterbury, the Regius Professor of
Divinity, and the Rev. C. Pritchard, Savilian Professor of Astronomy,
have consented to act as Judges.
The following announcement appeared in the _Gazette_ for Nov. 26th,
1872:--
PRIZE ESSAY.
The Judges appointed to award a Prize of £100 offered for the best
Essay in confutation of Materialism have adjudged the Prize to the
Rev. W. JACKSON, M.A., F.S.A., late Fellow of Worcester
College.
H. G. LIDDELL,
Vice-Chancellor.
_November 25, 1872._
In a letter dated Dec. 26th, 1872, the Donor of the Prize surrendered
any claim that he might have upon the Copyright of the Essay, and
requested the Author to proceed with its publication.
PREFACE.
The Essay now published is the expansion of a thin volume by the
present writer, which was printed more than four years ago.[1] Natural
Theology, considered as a science, had been at that time pronounced
extinct and impossible by very eminent authorities. From this decision
I felt myself constrained to differ; and thought it worth while to put
on record a plea for what appeared to me an unduly neglected branch of
Philosophy.
Such contempt of a pursuit possessing so many claims on the favourable
attention of educated minds, seemed a fact to be accounted for in some
way. After considerable thought, I ventured on asserting that the
method latterly employed in treatises on this once popular science,
furnished the true reason of its decline and fall. That method I could
not avoid condemning as both inadequate and suicidal.
The publication of my Sermon in 1870, was followed by a number of
letters and critiques from scientific and literary men. Not one amongst
them alleged any worse fault than novelty against the matter of my
book, and undue compression against its manner. Many of their remarks
were of the most encouraging description, and affected me deeply by
reason of the celebrity of their writers, whom I had previously known
only by their works and their reputation. One most generous letter
from the Author who, above all others, had called my own intellectual
life into active energy, excited, in my mind, a warmth of feeling
absolutely indescribable.
When, therefore, a Prize on this subject was offered for adjudication
subject to the appointment of my own University, I felt glad to embrace
an occasion which might be called in the truest sense an "Opportunity."
What I have produced is to be found in the following pages. When
engaged in writing them, it was my most anxious wish and endeavour to
be _honest_: to advocate what I thought and still think true, without
disguising the difficulties of my own conclusion, or assailing its
antagonists by gratuitous insinuations or unfairnesses of any sort.
Should such a meanness appear, I would earnestly desire the leaf on
which it is printed to be torn from my book.
The delays which have befallen these pages since they were first sent
to press in the former half of 1873, have caused much regret to both
author and publishers. Our troubles began with a singular misadventure
to a quantity of MS.; which, together with other circumstances, delayed
printing till after the time originally fixed for publication. The next
season was lost in consequence of severe domestic affliction. Those of
my readers who have ever gone into print, will most readily commiserate
the anxiety caused by such unlooked for disappointments.
* * * * *
The ensuing line of argument was suggested to my mind when a young
Oxonian, in consequence of circumstances with which it is needless
to trouble my readers. What I then thought its special strength,
lay in the point of its combining two totally different kinds of
proof:--one, drawn from a survey of the world we live in,--the other,
from what is nearer to ourselves--the moral truth given us by our
personal consciousness. I also thought that any particular weakness
alleged against one proof, could not be incident to the other; and,
therefore, that since both lines of evidence, (kept apart while under
examination), met at last in one and the same result, my inquiry had
arrived at a demonstrably certain conclusion. At the same time, I could
not but feel a wholesome distrust of my reasonings on a subject, which,
though often discussed, had never, as I then believed, been looked at
exactly from my own point of view.
Somewhat later in life, I learned from Paley's commentators and
continuators, that the attack and defence of Natural Theology had for
years been conformed to the position taken up by the Archdeacon, so
far at least as the popular science of this country was concerned. But
the sceptical tactics of Hume shewed me a much wider plan of assault;
and in studying his great German antagonist I saw that a double line
of defence had been contemplated by him. I have since observed that no
part of Kant's philosophy is less commonly known to English readers
than his method and results in those most priceless of his critical
investigations, the treatises forming a ground-work of Moral Science.
As may at once be supposed, the discovery that I really had a sort of
sympathiser in Kant, was the greatest possible encouragement to my mind.
Yet there remained a very heavy discouragement. Evidently, any one
who should try to pursue two very separate but convergent lines of
reasoning, must undergo a most toilsome task, and one little likely
to be performed without long and continued effort. And, harder yet to
answer was the question next following: Who will read your patiently
obtained results, to say nothing of the collateral topics which must
in logical fairness be argued by the way? After all, the inevitable
drawback to Natural Theology lies in the fact that, in order to be held
a valid science, it must necessarily become a complex one.
This last difficulty remains my chiefest apprehension still. Neither
in the Essay itself, nor yet in the additions made to it, have I
introduced any one point which it seemed permissible to omit with
justice to the real issue. Yet I dare not hope that many eyes, except
those of the practised student, will easily perceive how germane to
that issue are several among the subjects discussed. One class of
thinkers will, however, welcome the whole of these inquiries; and this
class contains the earnest men for whom above all others I have written.
The amount of MS. sent to the Registrar was much less in compass than
the present volume. But Notes and Illustrations were intended from
the first, and, had there existed a doubt as to their propriety, it
would have been at once removed by the counsel of competent advisers.
The risks attaching to the Essay in its smaller shape were said to
be two: (1) An evident appearance of unwilling brevity, and (2) a
possible charge of novel thought, bordering on paradox. In attempting
to overcome these obstacles to favourable attention, I have pursued the
following course:--
The text of the Essay is printed as originally written, with only a
very few verbal changes for the sake of improved clearness. A number of
foot-notes belonging to its first draft, remain distinguished by the
ordinary marks of reference.[2]
In reperusing the text, I set myself to consider how many sympathisers
I could find. The best answer to any possible charge of Paradox,
seemed to be a roll-call of thinkers who, for their own purposes, have
asserted positions more or less approaching those I had attempted
to maintain. The number of auxiliaries I have thus succeeded in
assembling, is, I confess, a matter of considerable self-gratulation.
Yet, I do not appeal to such opinions as _authorities_, in any other
sense than so far forth as they are the decisions of _experts_
in different provinces of knowledge. In whatever concerns his own
department, each scientific worker has assuredly a right to be heard.
The weight of confirmation thus given to my own previous results, is
enhanced by the fact that most of the authors cited, pursued different
objects from mine, and wrote without any bias favourable to Natural
Theology. Respecting more than one of them, I feel inclined to repeat
the ancient adage, "My antagonist has become my helper."
The Quotations themselves have been divided into separate classes.
The greatest number illustrate particular expressions, sentences, and
paragraphs. These are arranged as foot-notes on the several pages of
Text, and are referred to by the _small_ letters of the alphabet.
Others, explaining or confirming principles, of general importance to
the argument, have been distinguished by _capital_ letters, and placed
at the end of the chapters to which they appertain. With this latter
division are classed a third set of extracts, which aim at expounding
certain special thoughts, and opening out to the real student useful
paths of prolonged investigation.
One circumstance connected with the Additional Notes, is alluded to at
the bottom of page 27. Originally, I had made only a few citations from
thoroughly sceptical writers. But, against this plan were urged the
following objections. (1.) In arguing questions of all kinds, definite
points are present to the mind of every disputant, and against them he
directs his argument. His expressions are always antithetic to these
points, and should they be left in the shadow, all antithesis is lost,
and the real force of the argument obscured. Sometimes it is even
mistaken;--a truth which may be illustrated by comparing the positions
of great leaders in politics or theology with the positions occupied
by their disciples. The former always speak by way of antithesis,--the
latter seldom construe their leaders' words antithetically. Hence,
the disciples never fail to outrun their teachers. Antithesis is
in truth a verbal counterpoise; and where it disappears, balance is
not seldom overthrown. Thus, said my advisers, your reasoning must
necessarily suffer by a general loss of clear definition. Again, (2)
they continued;--Since the time when you began your Essay, Scepticism
in general, Materialism and Mechanism in particular, or, to speak
briefly, the various denials of Theism, have ceased to be subjects on
which reticence is feasible. An Address of Mr. Gladstone's delivered
in a room, and spoken to a company of youths, soon became world-wide;
it has been, and will be read, quoted, and commented on, wheresoever
the English language is understood. One daily newspaper attractively
written, devotes many of its clever pages to making known in a forensic
manner the many different phases of sceptical opinion. And some
religious journals explain, with complete freedom, what the disbeliefs
are which they consider most reprehensible. Reticence, therefore, is
simply thrown away. Some may desire to see it practised towards young
people, but such "economizers" are, in effect, theoretical. They forget
that the Battle of Thought comes to educated young minds along with the
Battle of Life; and woe to the unprepared either way! They become, one
and all, bewildered.
These reasons have satisfied my own judgment up to a certain point. I
have consequently added _such_ quotations from sceptical authors, as
seemed desirable for the purpose of _limiting_ my several positions
with antithetic distinctness; a kind of definition which I admit to
be the most distinct of all. And to these extracts I have appended
some others, plainly expressing the conclusions which the opponents
of Theism _ought_ to reach, provided their views are carried out with
fairness and consistency. Conclusions of this kind can only be obtained
from Sceptics themselves. In what are called "logical consequences"
put by an author into the mouth of his adversaries, I, for one, have
no confidence whatever. To draw such inferences and glory in their
wrong-headedness, is like inventing both sides of a controversial
dialogue, defeating the party destined to defeat, and then laying claim
to a philosophic victory. Or, we may take the reverse supposition. A
writer is too honest for such ill-gotten triumph. This same quality of
candour will, most probably, induce him to put the case he opposes in a
light so advantageous, as to throw fresh doubt upon his own.
If, then, I have erred in over-quoting upon these accounts, I cannot
plead that the error is committed unadvisedly.
It seems right to say, that, in mustering auxiliaries, I found the best
friends to my argument were the most truly philosophic Biologists.
It would indeed be strange and sad, should the genuine leaders of
thought in any among the Natural Sciences be reckoned real adversaries
of Natural Theology. But, in order to convey an exact impression to
the reader's mind, I must beg him to peruse, in connection with this
statement, the note on Materialism appended to Chapter III.; and,
more particularly, its concluding pages. Towards the hybrid class
mentioned p. 246, I cannot help entertaining a sentiment the reverse of
complimentary.
To several distinguished persons who have bestowed upon this
undertaking the aids of advice or sympathy, I offer a tribute of
respectful gratitude. In one particular they will, I hope, think their
kindness not utterly thrown away; since, unlike many recipients of
good counsel, I have followed the opinions given me. It is with a
deep solemnity of emotion, I thus venture on recording my heartfelt
indebtedness. One, who was glad that words of his had helped me, now
adorns no longer the noblest of assemblies by his eloquence. To my
personal sorrow, he will not cast a glance on the pages over which his
favour threw a ray of encouragement.
That same last change, O half-sceptical yet whole-earnest Reader,
awaits both thee and myself. To thee, I am no more than the unseen
utterer of certain thoughts, nourished through a period of blended hope
and anxiety. It is now thine, to take unto thyself such reasonings
as may fairly lay claim to some serious consideration. It is mine to
accept the mixed consequences of their utterance;--the kindness and
contempt which follow believing advocacy always. Through all, and above
all, there will remain with me--and perchance with thee also--the sense
of a new Responsibility.
These two shares in this slight book on the largest of subjects, belong
in a fashion to earnest reader and anxious author for the time present.
Soon they will be ours, and not ours. As days pass by, thought and
utterance will bring less to both of us. We shall both have tinctured
our lives more deeply with the Divine, or the Not-Divine; we shall both
have sealed the secret fountains of our hearts, in readiness for the
Grave and its inevitable Futurities.
* * * * *
[asterism] "Natural Theology attempts to demonstrate the existence of
a personal First Cause, supreme Reason, and Will. The relations of
mankind towards such a Being, are called natural religion.
* * * * *
We look upon the starry heavens and say, _as_ man creates within his
own soul, and gives to airy nothing a thought, a name, a purpose, and
a reality, _so_ Almighty God created the Divine poem of this universal
frame; His will is its substance, His majestic thought and purpose
shine out in its adornment, and we--we are hidden in the hollow of His
hand. Every marvel of the visible raises our sense of the infinite
variety and beauty of the invisible, until, attracted by Him Who is
the first mover of the outward and the inward alike, we make of this
wonderful orb we tread upon a solid ground of support from which to
mount, to fly to God and be at rest."
These paragraphs are taken from the Appendix to my little volume on
Natural Theology alluded to in the beginning of this Preface. They
were intended as comments on the words with which the Sermon itself
concluded:--
"I have only to add that time could not permit my carrying this
fruitful subject beyond its obscure and dry first principles. There
is a brighter district of thought, an upland territory, as it were,
rising towards our highest inheritance; a border country where Natural
Theology melts into Spiritual Religion, and where the true offspring
of God learn the lineaments of their Father's divine love. I turn with
regret from this land of living light."
Such, then, were the feelings with which I could not help regarding
the scientific limits of Natural Theology. I felt it nothing less than
a disappointment to traverse the paths of positive fact and argument,
and to close just at the very point where the human head gains a
response from the human heart. It seemed like the task of a landscape
painter, who, after depicting successive plains made shadowy by tangled
brushwood and dark forest-growth, should be compelled to lay down his
pencil, and forbear transferring to his canvas the beautiful downs and
sun-lighted hills overlooking those more obscure regions. Compared with
the painter's regrets, were mine, I asked, less natural? The attributes
of Deity already dwelt upon through the chain of my argument, were
not only fitted to bring His existence home to Reason, but also to
move earnest spirits by a strong sense of elevated hopes and duties,
devotion and aspiration. These religious sentiments might have yielded
the purest lights of my landscape. All that had gone before seemed more
negative than affirmative;--rather to have been sketched in neutral
tints than in radiant and glowing colours.
A similar feeling of deep concern attended the conclusion of the
present Essay; increased by an inevitable thought that the reiterated
disappointment seemed likely to be a disappointment always. It was,
therefore, a very great gratification to find in the honour of an
election to the Bampton Lectureship for 1875, the possibility of adding
a crown and completion to all my foregone work. The scheme of these
Lectures enables me to treat of Natural Religion; to penetrate the
upland territory, the border country where Man may view, as he walks
heavenwards, the lineaments of his Father's Divine love.
* * * * *
Before this time next year, I may, therefore, hope to have realized my
purpose. The volume of Bampton Lectures for 1875, may then have become
the appropriate conclusion of this present book.
OXFORD,
_Nov., 1874_.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Right and Wrong. A Sermon upon the Question Under what Conditions
is a Science of Natural Theology possible? Preached before the
University of Oxford, March 6, 1870.
[2] All citations made in the original draft, or in the foot-notes
belonging to it, have been revised and altered to suit later editions
of the authorities cited. Thus there are several extracts from
books which may appear to be recent publications, but are, in fact,
authorized _rifaccimenti_.
CONTENTS.
CHAP. PAGES
I.--INTRODUCTORY: MOTIVES OF ESSAY--DIVISION
INTO CHAPTERS--METHOD OF STUDY--CONSILIENT
PROOFS 1-18
ADDITIONAL NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS 18-39
II.--PHILOSOPHY OF DESIGN: HOSTILE CRITICISMS
EXAMINED--EXPLANATIONS AND RESTATEMENTS 41-82
ADDITIONAL NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS 83-138
III.--CONDITIONS OF HUMAN KNOWLEDGE: ITS DISABILITIES
AND FIRST PRINCIPLES--IDEALISM--POSITIVISM--MATERIALISM--WE
MUST ACCEPT ULTIMATE TRUTHS 139-181
ADDITIONAL NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS 182-248
IV.--BELIEFS OF REASON: PRINCIPLE OF INDUCTION
--THEISM--CONFIRMATIONS AND ILLUSTRATIONS 249-289
V.--PRODUCTION AND ITS LAW: CONDITIONS OF
ACTIVITY--WILL AND REASON IN CONTRAST
WITH MATERIALISM AND MECHANISM--CREATIVE
MIND CHARACTERISED BY VISIBLE PRODUCTS 291-348
ADDITIONAL NOTE 349
VI.--CAUSATION: LIMITS OF PHYSICAL LAW--THE
BEGINNING--CAUSE AND WILL--MIRACLES 351-373
VII.--RESPONSIBILITY: RIGHT AND WRONG--A
FUTURE STATE--SUPREME WILL AND PERSONALITY--
POSSIBLE RELATIONS OF THE
DIVINE BEING WITH MANKIND--EXPECTATION
OF SUPERNATURAL AIDS TO KNOWLEDGE
AND PRACTICE--THE BALANCE 375-396
L'ENVOY 396-398
LIST OF
ADDITIONAL NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS.
PAGE
The Right Honourable W. E. Gladstone and others on Modern
Scepticism 19
On Corruption of the Judgment by misdirected Moral
Sentiments 28
Special Pleading in History and Morals 29
The Method employed throughout this Essay 31
On the Effect of Consilient Proofs 37
The abstract reasonings involved in Natural Theology 83
On the phrase "Design implies a Designer" 98
Hume on the Analogies of Art and Nature 101
The Pantheistic consequences charged upon Physical
Speculations 103
The extent and divisions of the Science of Natural
Theology 104
On Teleology 107
Account of some theories respecting our Personal Identity 182
Helmholtz, Popular Lectures on Recent Progress of the
Theory of Vision 190
Helmholtz on Specialties of Sensibility 199
Popular account of Pure Idealism with critical remarks 204
On the Relations of Fact and Theory 215
On the "Unknowable" 217
Mr. J. S. Mill as an Independent Moralist 223
Archebiosis, or Spontaneous Generation 226
On Materialism 237
The Doctrine of Chances applied to the Structural
Development of the Eye 349
THE PHILOSOPHY OF NATURAL THEOLOGY.
"Finis vitæ in primis noscendus est, ut ad eum actiones omnes dirigere
valeamus; non minus quàm naviganti portus ad quem deveniat ante omnia
statuendus."
_Ficinus in Platonis Philebum_, Cap. I.
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTORY.
"Flower in the crannied wall,
I pluck you out of the crannies;--
Hold you here, root and all, in my hand,
Little flower--but if I could understand
What you are, root and all, and all in all,
I should know what God and man is."
_Tennyson._
"I have written under the conviction that no Philosophy of the Universe
can satisfy the minds of thoughtful men which does not deal with such
questions as inevitably force themselves on our notice, respecting the
Author and the Object of the Universe; and also under the conviction
that every Philosophy of the Universe which has any consistency, must
suggest answers, at least conjectural, to such questions. No _Cosmos_
is complete from which the question of Deity is excluded; and all
Cosmology has a side turned towards Theology."--_Whewell, Philosophy of
Discovery_, Preface, p. vi.
"All science is but the intercalation, each more comprehensive than
that which it endeavours to explain, between the great Primal Cause
and the ultimate effect."--_Professor Allman's Address to the British
Association at Bradford_, 1873.
"Glory about thee, without thee; and thou fulfillest thy doom,
Making Him broken gleams, and a stifled splendour and gloom.
Speak to Him, thou, for He hears, and Spirit with Spirit can meet,--
Closer is He than breathing, and nearer than hands and feet."
_Tennyson._
SYNOPSIS OF CHAPTER I.
This Introductory Chapter consists of three parts. The first lays down
the questions proposed, and shows the necessity of asking them. The
second illustrates what may be termed in Art-phrase the _motives_ of
the Essay. The third briefly describes its method, and explains the
readiest mode of studying Natural Theology.
_Analysis_--Inquiries underlying Natural Theology--Way in which they
are answered by our Instinctive Persuasions--How far this answer is
sufficing; how far influential.
Phases of Doubt; undeclared Scepticism and Indifferentism--Origin and
leaders of the modern Sceptical and Materialistic Schools--Doubts of
Intellect distinguished from Scepticism of Immorality--Social dangers
and alarms exemplified.
Method of this Essay, and requests as to the mode of reading
it--Divisions of Argument; their separate and consilient effect.
_Additional Notes and Illustrations._
A.--The Right Honourable W. E. Gladstone and others on Modern
Scepticism.
B.--On Corruption of the Judgment by misdirected Moral Sentiments.
C.--On Special Pleading in History and Morals.
D.--On the Method employed throughout this Essay.
E.--On the Effect of Consilient Proofs.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF NATURAL THEOLOGY.