The problem of necessity lurks at the bottom of all problems, and
according as we accept or reject the idea of necessity we shall be led to
two entirely different world-conceptions.
The conception of indeterminism generally offers itself first to the
doubting mind; and it is apparently a pleasant idea. It promises
freedom, it leaves room for the imagination, it makes the world and
its possibilities wide, much wider than it could be on the plan of
determinism. Determinism is at first sight an oppressive notion and we
naturally shrink from it. It seems to destroy the freedom of the will
and all moral responsibility. From infinite possibilities it narrows the
world down to one single actuality; and thus it seems to destroy all the
charms of life.
The former view may be represented as conceiving the all-power of
the whole in which and through which we live as a well meaning and
yielding ruler or a kind-hearted parent who if strongly plied with
prayer, will for a trifle in order to please an importune favorite
change his decisions. The dispensations of his government will be
full of exceptions, of private cabinet decrees, of counter orders and
irregularities. The latter view, however, would represent the entirety
of the All as an inexorable and uncompromising sovereign, or as a severe
educator, a stern father who unfalteringly clings to his principles.
He leaves full independence to his children, he does not prevent their
mistakes, yet rigidly lets them bear the consequences of their actions.
He never answers prayers except that the prayer itself has its educating
effects upon him who prays; but he never alters objective facts for the
sake of him who requests his interference, and he never makes exceptions
either in favor or disfavor of anybody. In brief; the God of him who
accepts the former view, will be Chance, while the God of him who accepts
the latter view will be Law.
The choice between the two views seems to remind us of the choice left
to the heroes of our fairy tales. He who chooses that which appears
pleasant will be led into inextricable confusion, he who chooses that
which appears rigid and oppressive will be led on a path where in spite
of many difficulties he will be able to make firm and certain steps and
will arrive at clearness as well as moral freedom. It is not the golden
casket that contains Portia’s picture.
Science constantly operates on the basis of the maxim that there is no
chance, that everything that happens, happens as it does with necessity.
The question is, Is this maxim a mere assumption, a non-verifiable
working hypothesis; or is there any reliable evidence in its favor? Is it
true, and if it is, how can it be proved?