CHAPTER XI

SCIENCE AND RELIGION--KANT, LAMBERT, LAPLACE, SIR WILLIAM HERSCHEL

Hutton had advanced the study of geology by concentrating attention on

the observable phenomena of the earth's crust, and turning away from

speculations about the origin of the world and the relation of this

sphere to other units of the cosmos. In the same century, however, other

scientists and philosophers were attracted by these very problems which

seemed not to promise immediate or demonstrative solution, and through

their studies they arrived at conclusions which profoundly affected the

science, the ethics, and the religion of the civilized world.

Whether religion be defined as a complex feeling of elation and

humility--a sacred fear--akin to the æsthetic sense of the sublime; or,

as an intellectual recognition of some high powers which govern us

below--of some author of all things, of some force social or cosmic

which tends to righteousness; or, as the outcrop of the moral life

touched with light and radiant with enthusiasm; or, as partaking of the

nature of all these: it cannot be denied that the eighteenth century

contributed to its clarification and formulation, especially through the

efforts of the German philosopher, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). Yet it is

not difficult to show that the philosophy of Kant and of those

associated with him was greatly influenced by the science of the time,

and that, in fact, in his early life he was a scientist rather than a

philosopher in the stricter sense. His _General Natural History and

Theory of the Heavens_, written at the age of thirty-one, enables us to

follow his transition from science to philosophy, and, more especially,

to trace the influence of his theory of the origin of the heavenly

bodies on his religious conceptions.

For part of this theory Kant was indebted to Thomas Wright of Durham

(1711-1786). Wright was the son of a carpenter, became apprenticed to a

watchmaker, went to sea, later became an engraver, a maker of

mathematical instruments, rose to affluence, wrote a book on navigation,

and was offered a professorship of navigation in the Imperial Academy of

St. Petersburg. It was in 1750 that he published, in the form of nine

letters, the work that stimulated the mind of Kant, _An Original Theory

or New Hypothesis of the Universe_. The author thought that the

revelation of the structure of the heavens naturally tended to propagate

the principles of virtue and vindicate the laws of Providence. He

regarded the universe as an infinity of worlds acted upon by an eternal

Agent, and full of beings, tending through their various states to a

final perfection. Who, conscious of this system, can avoid being filled

with a kind of enthusiastic ambition to contribute his atom toward the

due admiration of its great and Divine Author?

Wright discussed the nature of mathematical certainty and the various

degrees of moral probability proper for conjecture (thus pointing to a

distinction that ultimately became basal in the philosophy of Kant).

When he claimed that the sun is a vast body of blazing matter, and that

the most distant star is also a sun surrounded by a system of planets,

he knew that he was reasoning by analogy and not enunciating what is

immediately demonstrable. Yet this multitude of worlds opens out to us

an immense field of probation and an endless scene of hope to ground our

expectation of an ever future happiness upon, suitable to the native

dignity of the awful Mind which made and comprehended it.

The most striking part of Wright's _Original Theory_ relates to the

construction of the Milky Way, which he thought analogous in form to the

rings of Saturn. From the center the arrangement of the systems and the

harmony of the movements could be discerned, but our solar system

occupies a section of the belt, and what we see of the creation gives

but a confused picture, unless by an effort of imagination we attain the

right point of view. The various cloudy stars or light appearances are

nothing but a dense accumulation of stars. What less than infinity can

circumscribe them, less than eternity comprehend them, or less than

Omnipotence produce or support them? He passes on to a discussion of

time and space with regard to the known objects of immensity and

duration, and in the ninth letter says that, granting the creation to be

circular or orbicular, we can suppose in the center of the whole an

intelligent principle, the to-all-extending eye of Providence, or, if

the creation is real, and not merely ideal, a sphere of some sort.

Around this the suns keep their orbits harmoniously, all apparent

irregularities arising from our eccentric view. Moreover, space is

sufficient for many such systems.

Kant resembled his predecessor in his recognition of the bearing on

moral and religious conceptions of the study of the heavens and also in

his treatment of many astronomical details, sometimes merely adopting,

more frequently developing or modifying, the teachings of Wright. He

held that the stars constitute a system just as much as do the planets

of our solar system, and that other solar systems and other Milky Ways

may have been produced in the boundless fields of space. Indeed, he is

inclined to identify with the latter systems the small luminous

elliptical areas in the heavens reported by Maupertuis in 1742. Kant

also accepted Wright's conjecture of a central sun or globe and even

made selection of one of the stars to serve in that office, and taught

that the stars consist like our sun of a fiery mass. One cannot

contemplate the world-structure without recognizing the excellent

orderliness of its arrangement, and perceiving the sure indications of

the hand of God in the completeness of its relations. Reason, he says in

the _Allgemeine Naturgeschichte_, refuses to believe it the work of

chance. It must have been planned by supreme wisdom and carried into

effect by Omnipotence.

Kant was especially stimulated by the analogy between the Milky Way and

the rings of Saturn. He did not agree with Wright that they, or the

cloudy areas, would prove to be stars or small satellites, but rather

that both consisted of vapor particles. Giving full scope to his

imagination, he asks if the earth as well as Saturn may not have been

surrounded by a ring. Might not this ring explain the supercelestial

waters that gave such cause for ingenuity to the medieval writers? Not

only so, but, had such a vaporous ring broken and been precipitated to

the earth, it would have caused a prolonged Deluge, and the subsequent

rainbow in the heavens might very well have been interpreted as an

allusion to the vanished ring, and as a promise. This, however, is not

Kant's characteristic manner in supporting moral and religious truth.

To account for the origin of the solar system, the German philosopher

assumes that at the beginning of all things the material of which the

sun, planets, satellites, and comets consist, was uncompounded, in its

primary elements, and filled the whole space in which the bodies formed

out of it now revolve. This state of nature seemed to be the very

simplest that could follow upon nothing. In a space filled in this way a

state of rest could not last for more than a moment. The elements of a

denser kind would, according to the law of gravitation, attract matter

of less specific gravity. Repulsion, as well as attraction, plays a part

among the particles of matter disseminated in space. Through it the

direct fall of particles may be diverted into a circular movement about

the center toward which they are gravitating.

Of course, in our system the center of attraction is the nucleus of the

sun. The mass of this body increases rapidly, as also its power of

attraction. Of the particles gravitating to it the heavier become heaped

up in the center. In falling from different heights toward this common

focus the particles cannot have such perfect equality of resistance that

no lateral movements should be set up. A general circulatory motion is

in fact established ultimately in one direction about the central mass,

which receiving new particles from the encircling current rotates in

harmony with it.

Mutual interference in the particles outside the mass of the sun

prevents all accumulation except in one plane and that takes the form of

a thin disk continuous with the sun's equator. In this circulating

vaporous disk about the sun differences of density give rise to zones

not unlike the rings of Saturn. These zones ultimately contract to form

planets, and as the planets are thrown off from the central solar mass

till an equilibrium is established between the centripetal and

centrifugal forces, so the satellites in turn are formed from the

planets. The comets are to be regarded as parts of the system, akin to

the planets, but more remote from the control of the centripetal force

of the sun. It is thus that Kant conceived the nebular hypothesis,

accounting (through the formation of the heavenly bodies from a cloudy

vapor similar to that still observable through the telescope) for the

revolution of the planets in one direction about the sun; the rotation

of sun and planets; the revolution and rotation of satellites; the

comparative densities of the heavenly bodies; the materials in the tails

of comets; the rings of Saturn, and other celestial phenomena. Newton,

finding no matter between the planets to maintain the community of their

movements, asserted that the immediate hand of God had instituted the

arrangement without the intervention of the forces of Nature. His

disciple Kant now undertook to explain an additional number of

phenomena on mechanical principles. Granted the existence of matter, he

felt capable of tracing the cosmic evolution, but at the same time he

maintained and strengthened his religious position, and did not assume

(like Democritus and Epicurus) eternal motion without a Creator or the

coming together of atoms by accident or haphazard.

It might be objected, he says, that Nature is sufficient unto itself;

but universal laws of the action of matter serve the plan of the Supreme

Wisdom. There is convincing proof of the existence of God in the very

fact that Nature, even in chaos, cannot proceed otherwise than regularly

and according to law. Even in the essential properties of the elements

that constituted the chaos, there could be traced the mark of that

perfection which they have derived from their origin, their essential

character being a consequence of the eternal idea of the Divine

Intelligence. Matter, which appears to be merely passive and wanting in

form and arrangement, has in its simplest state a tendency to fashion

itself by a natural development into a more perfect constitution. Matter

must be considered as created by God in accordance with law and as ever

obedient to law, not as an independent or hostile force needing

occasional correction. To suppose the material world not under law would

be to believe in a blind fate rather than in Providence. It is Nature's

harmony and order revealed to our understanding that give us a clue to

its creation by an understanding of the highest order.

In a work written eight years later Kant sought to furnish people of

ordinary intelligence with a proof of the existence of God. It might

seem irrelevant in such a production to give an exposition of physical

phenomena, but, intent on his method of mounting to a knowledge of God

by means of natural science, he here repeats in summarized form his

theory of the origin of the heavenly bodies. Moreover, the influence of

his astronomical studies persisted in his maturest philosophy, as can be

seen in the well-known passage at the conclusion of his ethical work,

the _Critique of the Practical Reason_ (1788): "There are two things

that fill my spirit with ever new and increasing awe and reverence--the

more frequently and the more intently I contemplate them--the

star-strewn sky above me and the moral law within." His religious and

ethical conceptions were closely associated with--indeed, dependent

upon--an orderly and infinite physical universe.

In the mathematician, astronomer, physicist, and philosopher, J. H.

Lambert (1728-1777), Kant found a genius akin to his own, and through

him hoped for a reformation of philosophy on the basis of the study of

science. Lambert like his contemporary was a disciple of Newton, and in

1761 he published a book in the form of letters expressing views in

reference to the Milky Way, fixed stars, central sun, very similar to

those published by Kant in 1755. Lambert had heard of Wright's work, so

similar to his own, a year after the latter was written.

Comets, now robbed of many of the terrors with which ancient

superstition endowed them, might, he says, seem to threaten catastrophe,

by colliding with the planets or by carrying off a satellite. But the

same hand which has cast the celestial spheres in space, has traced

their course in the heavens, and does not allow them to wander at

random to disturb and destroy each other. Lambert imagines that all

these bodies have exactly the volume, weight, position, direction, and

speed necessary for the avoidance of collisions. If we confess a Supreme

Ruler who brought order from chaos, and gave form to the universe; it

follows that this universe is a perfect work, the impress, picture,

reflex of its Creator's perfection. Nothing is left to blind chance.

Means are fitted to ends. There is order throughout, and in this order

the dust beneath our feet, the stars above our heads, atoms and worlds,

are alike comprehended.

Laplace in his statement of the nebular hypothesis made no mention of

Kant. He sets forth, in the _Exposition of the Solar System_, the

astronomical data that the theory is designed to explain: the movements

of the planets in the same direction and almost in the same plane; the

movements of the satellites in the same direction as those of the

planets; the rotation of these different bodies and of the sun in the

same direction as their projection, and in planes little different; the

small eccentricity of the orbits of planets and satellites; the great

eccentricity of the orbits of comets. How on the ground of these data

are we to arrive at the cause of the earliest movements of the planetary

system?

A fluid of immense extent must be assumed, embracing all these bodies.

It must have circulated about the sun like an atmosphere and, in virtue

of the excessive heat which was engendered, it may be assumed that this

atmosphere originally extended beyond the orbits of all the planets, and

was contracted by stages to its present form. In its primitive state

the sun resembled the nebulæ, which are to be observed through the

telescope, with fiery centers and cloudy periphery. One can imagine a

more and more diffuse state of the nebulous matter.

Planets were formed, in the plane of the equator and at the successive

limits of the nebulous atmosphere, by the condensation of the different

zones which it abandoned as it cooled and contracted. The force of

gravity and the centrifugal force sufficed to maintain in its orbit each

successive planet. From the cooling and contracting masses that were to

constitute the planets smaller zones and rings were formed. In the case

of Saturn there was such regularity in the rings that the annular form

was maintained; as a rule from the zones abandoned by the planet-mass

satellites resulted. Differences of temperature and density of the parts

of the original mass account for the eccentricity of orbits, and

deviations from the plane of the equator.

In his _Celestial Mechanics_ (1825) Laplace states that, according to

Herschel's observations, Saturn's rotation is slightly quicker than that

of its rings. This seemed a confirmation of the hypothesis of the

_Exposition du Système du Monde_.

When Laplace presented the first edition of this earlier work to

Napoleon, the First Consul said: "Newton has spoken of God in his book.

I have already gone through yours, and I have not found that name in it

a single time." To this Laplace is said to have replied: "First Citizen

Consul, I have not had need of that hypothesis." The astronomer did not,

however, profess atheism; like Kant he felt competent to explain on

mechanical principles the development of the solar system from the point

at which he undertook it. In his later years he desired that the

misleading anecdote should be suppressed. So far was he from

self-sufficiency and dogmatism that his last utterance proclaimed the

limitations of even the greatest intellects: "What we know is little

enough, what we don't know is immense" (_Ce que nous connaissons est peu

de chose, ce que nous ignorons est immense_).

Sir William Herschel's observations, extended over many years, confirmed

both the nebular hypothesis and the theory of the systematic arrangement

of the stars. He made use of telescopes 20 and 40 feet in focal length,

and of 18.7 and 48 inches aperture, and was thereby enabled, as Humboldt

said, to sink a plummet amid the fixed stars, or, in his own phrase, to

gauge the heavens. _The Construction of the Heavens_ was always the

ultimate object of his observations. In a contribution on this subject

submitted to the Royal Society in 1787 he announced the discovery of 466

new nebulæ and clusters of stars. The sidereal heavens are not to be

regarded as the concave surface of a sphere, from the center of which

the observer might be supposed to look, but rather as resembling a rich

extent of ground or chains of mountains in which the geologist discovers

many strata consisting of various materials. The Milky Way is one

stratum and in it our sun is placed, though perhaps not in the very

center of its thickness.

By 1811 he had greatly increased his observations of the nebulæ and

could arrange them in series differing in extent, condensation,

brightness, general form, possession of nuclei, situation, and in

resemblance to comets and to stars. They ranged from a faint trace of

extensive diffuse nebulosity to a nebulous star with a mere vestige of

cloudiness. Herschel was able to make the series so complete that the

difference between the members was no more than could be found in a

series of pictures of the human figure taken from the birth of a child

till he comes to be a man in his prime. The difference between the

diffuse nebulous matter and the star is so striking that the idea of

conversion from one to the other would hardly occur to any one without

evidence of the intermediate steps. It is highly probable that each

successive state is the result of the action of gravity.

In his last statement, 1818, he admitted that to his telescopes the

Milky Way had proved fathomless, but on "either side of this assemblage

of stars, presumably in ceaseless motion round their common center of

gravity, Herschel discovered a canopy of discrete nebulous masses, such

as those from the condensation of which he supposed the whole stellar

universe to be formed."

In the theory of the evolution of the heavenly bodies, as set forth by

Kant, Laplace, and Herschel, it was assumed that the elements that

composed the earth are also to be found elsewhere throughout the solar

system and the universe. The validity of this assumption was finally

established by spectrum analysis. But this vindication was in part

anticipated, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, by the analysis

of meteorites. In these were found large quantities of iron,

considerable percentages of nickel, as well as cobalt, copper, silicon,

phosphorus, carbon, magnesium, zinc, and manganese.

REFERENCES

G. F. Becker, Kant as a Natural Philosopher, _American Journal of

Science_, vol. V (1898), pp. 97-112.

W. W. Bryant, _A History of Astronomy_.

Agnes M. Clerke, _History of Astronomy during the Nineteenth Century_.

Agnes M. Clerke, _The Herschels and Modern Astronomy_.

Sir William Herschel, Papers on the Construction of the Heavens

(_Philosophical Transactions_, 1784, 1811, etc.).

A. R. Hinks, _Astronomy_ (Home University Library).

E. W. Maunders, _The Science of the Stars_ (The People's Books).

An Introduction to the History of Science · 第 11 / 20 章