261 lines
14 KiB
Plaintext
261 lines
14 KiB
Plaintext
|
4 page printout, page 173 to 176
|
|||
|
INGERSOLL, A BIOGRAPHICAL APPRECIATION
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
CHAPTER 13.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
WAS HE 'A MERE ICONOCLAST'?
|
|||
|
(Continued)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
WERE HIS TEACHINGS INIMICAL TO LAW AND MORALITY?
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
One of the most serious features of the general charge of
|
|||
|
iconoclasm which has been preferred by the critics of Ingersoll is
|
|||
|
the implication that the adoption of his teachings would destroy
|
|||
|
the social fabric. All essential ideas in the countless laws which
|
|||
|
have been formulated for the government of modern society, they
|
|||
|
say, sprang from the Mosaic code, and to discredit the book of
|
|||
|
which that code is a part would consequently plunge civilization
|
|||
|
into anarchy.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Probably a majority of Ingersoll's critics will admit,
|
|||
|
whatever their opinion as to the breadth and depth of his biblical
|
|||
|
scholarship, that his knowledge of jurisprudence was both wide and
|
|||
|
profound, and that, therefore, if there ever was a criticism to
|
|||
|
which he was peculiarly fitted to reply, it is the one in question.
|
|||
|
He says: --
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"It has been contended for many years that the Ten
|
|||
|
Commandments are the foundation of all ideas of justice and law.
|
|||
|
Eminent jurists have bowed to popular prejudice, and deformed their
|
|||
|
works by statements to the effect that the Mosaic laws are the
|
|||
|
foundations from which spring all ideas right and wrong. Nothing
|
|||
|
can be more stupidly false than such assertions. Thousands of years
|
|||
|
before Moses was born, the Egyptians had a code of laws. They had
|
|||
|
laws against blasphemy, murder, adultery, larceny, perjury, laws
|
|||
|
for collection of debts, the enforcement of contracts, the
|
|||
|
ascertainment of damages, of debts, the enforcement of contracts,
|
|||
|
the ascertainment of damages, the redemption of property pawned,
|
|||
|
and upon nearly every subject of human interest. The Egyptian code
|
|||
|
was far better than the Mosaic.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"Laws spring from the instinct of self-preservation. Industry
|
|||
|
objected to supporting idleness, and laws were made against theft.
|
|||
|
Laws were made against murder, because a very large majority of the
|
|||
|
people have always objected to being murdered. All fundamental laws
|
|||
|
were born simply of the instinct of self-defence. Long before the
|
|||
|
Jewish savages assembled at the foot of Sinai, laws had been made
|
|||
|
and enforced, not only in Egypt and India, but by every tribe that
|
|||
|
ever existed."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It would be both interesting and instructive to dwell upon
|
|||
|
Ingersoll's views of the foundations of modern jurisprudence, but
|
|||
|
it is far more vital, considering the nature of the criticism here
|
|||
|
concerned, that we devote the space involved to the presentation of
|
|||
|
his opinions and teachings regarding a different subject, -- a
|
|||
|
subject to which, however, jurisprudence itself is closely related.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It has often been asserted by his critics, that his teachings
|
|||
|
are, in the ultimate, antisocial and perverse, and that, therefore,
|
|||
|
their universal acceptance would blot out of the mind all notion of
|
|||
|
true ethics, and leave mankind without a moral standard. I shall
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Bank of Wisdom
|
|||
|
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
|||
|
173
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
INGERSOLL, A BIOGRAPHICAL APPRECIATION
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
examine this criticism somewhat at length, placing his ethical
|
|||
|
ideas in sharp contrast with those of his opponents, thus enabling
|
|||
|
us to ascertain the truth.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Now, broadly speaking, just as there are in all other branches
|
|||
|
of philosophy two directly opposed classes of thinkers, -- on the
|
|||
|
one side, the monists, who believe that the universe is the
|
|||
|
natural, necessary, and eternal all, and, on the other side, the
|
|||
|
dualists, who believe that back of the universe is the
|
|||
|
supernatural, -- so in ethics, or morals, there are two classes.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
With the dualistic school of moralists, which includes the
|
|||
|
theological critics of Ingersoll, an act is right or wrong
|
|||
|
according as it does or does not harmonize with the alleged command
|
|||
|
of a supernatural being, which command either wells up as human
|
|||
|
consciousness, or is found inscribed in some so-called sacred book,
|
|||
|
or both. This means that an act is absolutely right or absolutely
|
|||
|
wrong, regardless of its consequences; in other words, that
|
|||
|
absolute right and absolute wrong exist in themselves, just as the
|
|||
|
uoumenon, -- "the thing in itself," -- of the dualistic
|
|||
|
metaphysician is supposed to exist back of phenomena. It
|
|||
|
establishes a fiat in morals. It places ethical acts upon precisely
|
|||
|
the same artificial basis as civic acts. To-day it is lawful to
|
|||
|
throw refuse on to the street. To-morrow the governor signs a bill,
|
|||
|
and lo! the throwing of refuse on the street is "unlawful." To-day,
|
|||
|
as far as we know, stealing is right. To-morrow we read in a book,
|
|||
|
"Thou shalt not steal," and lo!stealing is absolutely wrong. Of
|
|||
|
course, if, as the theological moralists undeniably imply, stealing
|
|||
|
and certain other acts were made wrong by the commandments of
|
|||
|
Jehovah, it follows, as a necessarily unavoidable corollary, that
|
|||
|
those acts were right before, and that they would still be right
|
|||
|
had the commandments of Jehovah not been given. And this is only
|
|||
|
one side of the proposition. The assertion that a Supreme Being
|
|||
|
could by command make wrong that which before was right,
|
|||
|
necessarily and unavoidably implies that he could make right that
|
|||
|
which before was wrong. Nor is this all that is implied by
|
|||
|
dualistic theological morals.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If by the will or command of the Supreme Being certain acts
|
|||
|
were made either absolutely right or absolutely wrong, the fact of
|
|||
|
relativity, which applies in every other branch of thought, must be
|
|||
|
utterly ignored in ethics. If, for example, stealing is absolutely
|
|||
|
wrong, it is as great a crime to steal a grain of millet from the
|
|||
|
wealthiest man in the world as to steal the last penny from a
|
|||
|
helpless and homeless invalid. Indeed, we might make even more
|
|||
|
striking comparisons, since we are by no means logically limited to
|
|||
|
the comparison of acts of like nature. It is, I say, as great a
|
|||
|
crime, according to the dualistic theological critics of
|
|||
|
Ingersoll's ethics, to covet your neighbor's ox as to murder the
|
|||
|
happiest and most useful member of society. These, I urge, are not
|
|||
|
exaggerations but perfectly logical deductions from the premises of
|
|||
|
the dualistic theological moralist. And precisely the same
|
|||
|
reasoning is conversely applicable to such acts of virtue as were
|
|||
|
sanctioned or commanded by Jehovah.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
It is hardly necessary to point out, that the system of
|
|||
|
ethics, or morals, the cardinal principles of which I have
|
|||
|
indicated in this brief exposition is, in the ultimate analysis,
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Bank of Wisdom
|
|||
|
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
|||
|
174
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
INGERSOLL, A BIOGRAPHICAL APPRECIATION
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
based solely and absolutely upon belief in a First Cause, or
|
|||
|
Creator, and that, so far as the Jewish and both the Catholic and
|
|||
|
the Protestant theologians are concerned, the base of the system in
|
|||
|
question is still further narrowed to belief in the Old and the New
|
|||
|
Testaments. After what has previously been written in this work, I
|
|||
|
shall not discuss the tenability of that belief, but shall proceed,
|
|||
|
at once, to contrast with the moral system ultimately resting upon
|
|||
|
it the ethical ideas of the Great Agnostic.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
In the first place, to the dogmatic assertion of the dualistic
|
|||
|
theological moralist, that all rational beings derive their
|
|||
|
knowledge of right and wrong from a superior being, Ingersoll would
|
|||
|
propose the relentlessly logical query: How, then, can the most
|
|||
|
superior being, that is, the very Supreme Being himself, be moral?
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If, as all theologians assert, the most superior ("most
|
|||
|
superior" itself implies relativity) being of whom we can conceive
|
|||
|
is absolutely good, it follows, as a necessarily unavoidable
|
|||
|
corollary, that the most inferior ("most inferior" also implies
|
|||
|
relativity) being of whom we can conceive is absolutely bad. But
|
|||
|
the most inferior being of whom we can conceive is not absolutely
|
|||
|
bad. Therefore, the first side of our proposition falls. To state
|
|||
|
the problem in a different way, we cannot conceive of absolute
|
|||
|
goodness unless we can conceive of absolute badness. We cannot
|
|||
|
conceive of absolute badness. Therefore, we cannot admit the
|
|||
|
absolute in morals -- nothing absolutely good, nothing absolutely
|
|||
|
bad; nothing absolutely moral, nothing absolutely immoral. Both are
|
|||
|
alike inconceivable. "The absolute," says Ingersoll, "is beyond the
|
|||
|
human mind."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
If, then, man did not derive from a being superior to himself,
|
|||
|
that is, from a supernatural being, his present knowledge of right
|
|||
|
and wrong, -- of morality, -- and if absolute right and absolute
|
|||
|
wrong, absolute morality and absolute immorality, are alike
|
|||
|
inconceivable, whence, according to Ingersoll, did man derive the
|
|||
|
knowledge in question? and what is man's standard of conduct? We
|
|||
|
will allow Ingersoll himself to answer this question, in a few
|
|||
|
sentences carefully collated from here and there in his works: --
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"Morality is based upon the experience of mankind." "Man is a
|
|||
|
sentient being -- he suffers and enjoys." "Happiness is the true
|
|||
|
end and aim of life." "Happiness is the only good." "By happiness
|
|||
|
is meant not simply the joy of eating and drinking -- the
|
|||
|
gratification of the appetite -- but good, well-being, in the
|
|||
|
highest and noblest forms." "In order to be happy * * * [man] must
|
|||
|
preserve the conditions of well-being -- must live in accordance
|
|||
|
with certain facts by which he is surrounded." "That which
|
|||
|
increases the sum of human happiness is moral; and that which
|
|||
|
diminishes the sum of human happiness is immoral." "All actions
|
|||
|
must be judged by their consequences, * * * and all consequences
|
|||
|
are learned from experience. After we have had a certain amount of
|
|||
|
experience, we then reason from analogy. We apply our logic and say
|
|||
|
that a certain course will bring destruction, another course will
|
|||
|
bring happiness." "There is in the moral world, as in the physical,
|
|||
|
the absolute and perfect relation of cause and effect." "If
|
|||
|
consequence are good, so is the action. If action had no
|
|||
|
consequences, they would be neither good or bad." "So, the
|
|||
|
foundations of the moral and the immoral are in the nature of
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Bank of Wisdom
|
|||
|
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
|||
|
175
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
INGERSOLL, A BIOGRAPHICAL APPRECIATION
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
things -- in the necessary relation between conduct and well-being,
|
|||
|
and an infinite God cannot change these foundations, and cannot
|
|||
|
increase or diminish the natural consequences of actions." "There
|
|||
|
is nothing inspired about morality -- nothing supernatural." "The
|
|||
|
highest possible standard is human."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Ingersoll's insistence, with Mill, Spencer, and other
|
|||
|
philosophers, upon the soundness of utilitarian morals, as implied
|
|||
|
by the single phrase "the greatest happiness for the greatest
|
|||
|
number" -- a phrase which made glorious the name of Jeremy Bentham
|
|||
|
-- is perhaps best shown by the following paragraph: --
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"Morality is capable of being demonstrated. You do not have to
|
|||
|
take the word of anybody; you can observe and examine for yourself.
|
|||
|
Larceny is the enemy of industry, and industry is good; therefore
|
|||
|
larceny is immoral. The family is the unit of good government;
|
|||
|
anything that tends to destroy the family is immoral. Honesty is
|
|||
|
the mother of confidence; it unites, combines and solidifies
|
|||
|
society. Dishonesty is disintegration; it destroys confidence; it
|
|||
|
brings social chaos, it is therefore immoral."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
After this brief presentation, I cannot refrain from quoting
|
|||
|
Ingersoll's comparison of the practical workings of the two ethical
|
|||
|
theories here concerned: --
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"Christianity teaches that all offenses can be forgiven. Every
|
|||
|
church unconsciously allows people to commit crimes on credit. I do
|
|||
|
not mean by this that any church consciously advocates immorality.
|
|||
|
I most cheerfully admit that thousands and thousands of ministers
|
|||
|
are endeavoring to do good -- that they are pure, self-denying men,
|
|||
|
trying to make this world better. But there is a frightful defect
|
|||
|
in their philosophy. They say to the bank cashier: You must not
|
|||
|
steal, you must not take a dollar -- larceny is wrong, it is
|
|||
|
contrary to all law, human and divine -- but if you do steal every
|
|||
|
cent in the bank, God will as gladly, quickly forgive you in Canada
|
|||
|
as he will in the United States. On the other hand, what is called
|
|||
|
infidelity says: There is no being in the universe who rewards, and
|
|||
|
there is no being who punishes -- every act has its consequences.
|
|||
|
If the act is good, the consequences are good; if the act is bad,
|
|||
|
and these consequences must be born by the actor. It says to every
|
|||
|
human being: You must reap what you sow. There is no reward, there
|
|||
|
is no punishment, but there are consequences, and these
|
|||
|
consequences are the invisible and implacable police of nature.
|
|||
|
They cannot be avoided. They cannot be bribed. No power can awe
|
|||
|
them, and there is not gold enough in the world to make them pause.
|
|||
|
Even a God cannot induce them to release for one instant their
|
|||
|
victim.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"This great truth is, in my judgement, the gospel of morality.
|
|||
|
If all men knew that they must inevitably bear the consequences of
|
|||
|
their own actions -- if they absolutely knew that they could not
|
|||
|
injure another without injuring themselves, the world, in my
|
|||
|
judgement, would be far better than it is."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Finally, the combined ultimate conclusions of all moralists,
|
|||
|
from Confucius to the present, amount to no more than this single
|
|||
|
epigram of Ingersoll: --
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
"Morality is the best thing to do under the circumstances."
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
**** ****
|
|||
|
176
|
|||
|
|