mental integration or coordination. But it is after all, the condition which life seeks to establish through its struggles. The genesis of the modern concept of God in the social life of man took place in gradual steps which may be broadly divided into three significant stages. The first stage was the stage of approach to the concept. The second was the stage of the concept of superior beings. And the third stage marked the beginning of the evolution of the monotheistic doctrine as we know it today. Earliest man was bereft of any notion regarding the creation and the continuation of the various bold and palpable objects of Nature, which he saw around him. But he afterwards developed a peculiar notion to the effect that everything in the world was living; he developed the spirit of animism. Gradually however, he came to believe in the presence of various spirits in trees, mountains, rivers, storms, winds, thunders and the like; he then also found reasons to believe that there were spirits also in the sun, the moon, stars and clouds. The concepts of gods in time grew out of these concepts of spirits. The number of these gods or presiding deities over various regions gradually decreased and the idea of greater power of one or a few of these gods developed. It was in this way that the idea of the presence of God, the Supreme Being ultimately came in the social mind of man. But it is instructive to note that the highest form of the monotheistic doctrine often appeared in the minds of individuals belonging even to primitive groups of people. But such doctrines were never accepted by the general members of these groups, who stuck to the traditional form of belief of the community. Normally the nature of the concept of God of a social group has depended upon the stage of the mental development of its people. But astute thinkers, visionaries, dreamers and futurists" have always been present even in primitive societies. 66 3 The Buddha did not preach anything regarding his concept of God, probably because he thought it was beyond the comprehension of common people for whom he specially simplified his religious teachings. Individuals he suggested, must establish discipline in their lives and achieve their salvation with the aid of their own activities. It was Christianity which made the monotheistic doctrine extremely popular amongst peoples with varying forms of culture and different stages of mental development. Although it was a profound characteristic of early Greek Philosophers to try to explain things without falling back upon the necessity of depending upon divine activities they generally believed in God. 3 Vide Primitive man as a Philosopher-Paul Radin. Most of them accepted the popular ideas of gods or God. Socrates 66 Spinoza's concept of God was that He was everything in the universe; mind, body, thought and extension were all his attributes. All the presentations of the universe, whether in the form of thoughts in the mind of man or in the form of material objects like trees or mountains, were really the manifestations of God. And all the ideas and thoughts in the universe combined together formed the thinking process of God. Locke suggested that man could not have an innate idea of God but he could however, form an idea of His nature if he would extend all his ideas regarding power, happiness, duration etc. to infinity and combine them together to form a single unit. Leibnitz also suggested a similar idea; he suggested that man by raising the qualities of knowledge, power, goodness etc. to infinity and adding them together could get an idea of God. Spinoza, Locke and Leibnitz it seems, sought to form the idea of God by taking advantage of the spirit of coordination in their thoughts. Hume felt the difficulty of proving the existence of God but he understood the importance of man's belief in Him; this belief in God was vitally necessary for man for its moral, social and inspirational values. He suggested therefore, a therefore, a theory of God for it was indispensable for the emotional life of man to have Him. Perhaps the monumental volumes of Critique of Pure Reason and Critique of Practical Reason for which Kant became immortal in the field of Philosophy, owe their origin to the influence of Hume's thinking in this vein. Kant conceived God as the entity of the highest unity of one Absolute Whole which comprised all conceivable objects and forms in the universe. The personified idea of this wholeness was God to Kant;" it was obviously a major idea formed by coordination. Kant criticized the arguments that had been put forward by previous Philosophers for proving the existence of God; he said, they were all inconsistent and incongruous. The existence of God, he suggested, could not be proved by reason; but man needed a belief in His existence for his healthy living. Kant's influence found expression in various forms in the thinking process of many thinkers who followed. Fichte conceived God as a sort of universally active reason and Schelling as a sort of creative energy. Hegel elaborated an interesting idea regarding his concept of God. God for him was the entire process of evolution with the coordination of its past, present and future phases. Hegel's God was then not a finished but a developing entity. The idea that it was not possible to know anything about God specially because the ultimate was unconditioned and that man could know only the conditioned or the related gained ground in the field of Philosophy. Herbert Spencer declared that the Absolute was unknowable; but Bradley opined that it could be known. The Absolute according to Bradley was a harmonious whole. But we know that a whole can become harmonious only when its component parts are coordinated. William James could develop a distinct way of Philosophical thinking while trying seriously to bring the idea of the utility of faith in God into bold relief. Ever since the attainment of a particular stage of mental development, which occurred long ago, man has been seriously trying to coordinate all materials, in the shape of his knowledge and experience at his disposal to build up his concept of God; all his attempts, specially those that were based upon reason, have been baffled. The only definite information which Science can give is that the existence of God can never be proved. But this does not go to indicate that God does not exist; it only points out man's inability, due to his inferior equipments, to go beyond certain limits. Science may not go far, but whatever it conquers during its march it conquers thoroughly. It settles only on subjugated territories. So the only valuable service which Science can do here is to supply us with a reliable knowledge regarding man's limitations in this line. Scientific thought requires experimental data and reasons for its development. But for reaching the Absolute they are not adequate because both of them have their tethers beyond which they cannot transcend. Their scopes are extremely limited evidently because experimental data are coordinated to objective and traditional elements of human experiences. To show as to how human reasons depend upon traditional elements we may turn to the concept of the direction of time in us. We have our conventional concepts of the past and the future; and the side of the scale from which a new sensation or something new comes is our future. Our concept of the past, present and future is similar to our concept of a stream; it has a fixed direction. But is this the only reasonable direction possible in the universe? Bradley insists that we can imagine of lives in the universe, in whom this direction is opposite but is still reasonable to them. This opposite direction of time will precipitate results that will appear preposterous to us. It would cause deaths to appear before birth and falling of trees before they are actually cut down and so on; but such experiences would not be unreasonable to them. Reason like truth then, depends upon circumstances for its formation. All these give us the correct impression that man will never be able either to know or to prove the existence of God through his intellect. Intellect cannot carry him far. The universe is infinite; it is vast beyond human imagination. Telescopic observations have revealed the existence of a cluster of nebulae containing thousands of millions of stars or their materials in Coma Berenices in which most of the objects are at such a distance that light takes 50 million years to come to us from them. And although a single nebula contains millions and millions of stars in various stages of their formation, there are numberless nebulae in the sky, most of which are outside the range of any telescope. This does not give a picture of the entire spread of space in the universe; it speaks only of a minute piece of the limitless area. It gives us however, a definite idea regarding the vastness of the universe. But despite its vastness the universe is a harmoniously consistent whole. Can a harmony like this appear by chance? Where is the difficulty in accepting the idea that this harmony is due to the activity of a Master Mind, a cosmic force which is after coordination? ♦ Appearance and Reality -F. H. Bradley; pp. 50-52. AN AMERICAN CRITIQUE OF A DOGMA ARTHUR W. MUNK Albion, Michigan, U.S.A. In a day when he has the means of building a new world, manlike an idiot-stands on the very edge of the precipice ready for the final plunge. Experts have warned us that, while in the crises of the past the destinies of nations and even of civilizations were at stake, today, for the first time in history, not only the very possibility of civilization but even of the existence of the race itself hangs in the balance. Yet, in spite of all this, though the nations continue to accelerate their destructive power at a frightening rate, all attempts at disarmament and peace still creep at a snail's pace. Deluded by fears and prejudices and, above all, ignorance, both leaders and people are still enthralled by ancient dogmas. Chief among these is the doctrine: "If you want peace prepare for war"; or, better still, its modern version-peace through the "balance of mutual terror." Suffice it to say that in what follows an attempt will be made to expose the dangers of this popular dogma. Moreover, since the writer is an American and knows his own country best, since by virtue of a mutual friendship-Indian readers are naturally interested in things American, and, most of all, since, until recently at least, the United States Las, perhaps, been more secure than any other country, most of the illustrations will be drawn from the American scene. At the same time, however, the entire international perspective will be constantly kept in mind; for, in this the Nuclear Age-which is also the Global Age-no nation can live to itself. Nationalism, in the narrow sense, is archaic. Today, in the countries which comprise both of the hostile camps which threaten to divide the world, two fat hogs-militarism and war-are eating us out of house and home. In 1915 (before the entrance of the United States into the First World War) the national debt was less than two billion dollars or roughly $11.85 per capita; by 1919 (as a result of the War) it had risen to over twenty-five billion or $242.54 per capita; in 1941 (before its entrance into the Second World War) the debt stood at less than fifty billion or $367.09 per capita; but by 1946 it had risen to nearly two hundred seventy billion, that is, to almost $2000 per capita. 10-2016P-IV |