|
|
If
we once start thinking no one can guarantee where we shall come
out, except that many objects, ends and institutions are doomed.
Every thinker puts some portion of an apparently stable world in
peril and no one can wholly predict what will emerge in its place.
It
is a commonplace that since the seventeenth century science has
revolutionized our beliefs about outer nature, and it is also beginning
to revolutionize those about man.
When
our minds dwell on this extraordinary change, they are likely to
think of the transformation that has taken place in the subject
matter of astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, psychology, anthropology,
and so on. But great as is this change, it shrinks in comparison
with the change that has occurred in method. The latter is the author
of the revolution in the content of beliefs. The new methods have,
moreover, brought with them a radical change in our intellectual
attitude and its attendant morale. The method we term scientific
forms for the modern man the sole dependable means of disclosing
the realities of existence. It is the sole authentic mode of revelation.
This possession of a new method, to the use of which no limits can
be put, signifies a new idea of the nature and possibilities of
experience. It imports a new morale of confidence, control, and
security
In
science and in industry the fact of constant change is generally
accepted. Moral, religious, and articulate philosophic creeds are
based upon the idea of fixity. In the history of the race, change
has been feared. It has been looked upon as the source of decay
and degeneration. It has been opposed as the cause of disorder,
chaos, and anarchy. One chief reason for the appeal to something
beyond experience was the fact that experience is always in such
flux that men had to seek stability and peace outside of it. Until
the seventeenth century, the natural sciences shared in the belief
in the superiority of the immutable to the moving, and took for
their ideal the discovery of the permanent and changeless
In
this attachment to the fixed and immutable, both science and philosophy
reflected the universal and pervasive conviction [that]
impermanence
meant insecurity; the permanent was the sole ground of assurance
and support amid the vicissitudes of existence
The good life
was one lived in fixed adherence to fixed principles.
In
contrast with all such beliefs, the outstanding fact in all branches
of natural science is that to exist is to be in process, in change.
Nevertheless, although the idea of movement and change has made
itself at home in the physical sciences, it has had comparatively
little influence on the popular mind as the latter looks at religion,
morals, economics, and politics. In these fields it is still supposed
that our choice is between confusion, anarchy, and something fixed
and immutable.
Ideals
of fixity persist in a moving world. A philosophy of experience
will accept at its full value the fact that social and moral existences
are, like physical existences, in a state of continuous if obscure
change. It will not try to cover up the fact of inevitable modification,
and will make no attempt to set fixed limits to the extent of changes
that are to occur. For the futile effort to achieve security and
anchorage in something fixed, it will substitute the effort to determine
the character of changes that are going on and to give them in the
affairs that concern us most some measure of intelligent direction
Wherever
the thought of fixity rules, that of all-inclusive unity rules also
Consider the place occupied in popular thought by search for the
meaning of life and the purpose of the universe. Men who look for
a single purport and a single end either frame an idea of them according
to their private desires and tradition, or else, not finding any
such single unity, give up in despair and conclude that there is
no genuine meaning and value in any of lifes episodes.
The
alternatives are not exhaustive, however. There is no need of deciding
between no meaning at all and one single, all-embracing meaning.
There are many meanings and many purposes in the situations with
which we are confronted one, so to say, for each situation.
Each offers its own challenge to thought and endeavor, and presents
its own potential value.
It
is impossible, I think, even to begin to imagine the changes that
would come into lifepersonal and collective if the idea
of a plurality of interconnected meanings and purposes replaced
that of the meaning and purpose. Search for a single, inclusive
good is doomed to failure. Such happiness as life is capable of
comes from the full participation of all our powers in the endeavor
to wrest from each changing situation of experience its own full
and unique meaning. Faith in the varied possibilities of diversified
experience is attended with the joy of constant discovery and of
constant growing. Such a joy is possible even in the midst of trouble
and defeat...
|
|
|
|