"The Conception of God" by Josiah Royce. Published by Good Press. Good Press publishes a wide range of titles that encompasses every genre. From well-known classics & literary fiction and non-fiction to forgotten−or yet undiscovered gems−of world literature, we issue the books that need to be read. Each Good Press edition has been meticulously edited and formatted to boost readability for all e-readers and devices. Our goal is to produce eBooks that are user-friendly and accessible to everyone in a high-quality digital format.
Оглавление
Josiah Royce. The Conception of God
The Conception of God
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION BY THE EDITOR
Footnotes
I. The Conception of God: Address by Professor Royce
THE CONCEPTION OF GOD
I
III
IV
Footnotes
II. Worth and Goodness as Marks of the Absolute: Criticism by Professor Mezes
WORTH AND GOODNESS AS MARKS OF THE ABSOLUTE
I
II
III. God, and Connected Problems, in the Light of Evolution: Remarks by Professor Le Conte
GOD, AND CONNECTED PROBLEMS, IN THE LIGHT OF EVOLUTION
Footnotes
IV. The City of God, and the True God as its Head: Comments by Professor Howison
THE CITY OF GOD, AND THE TRUE GOD AS ITS HEAD
I
III
IV
V
Footnote
Footnotes
V. The Absolute and the Individual: Supplementary Essay by Professor Royce
THE ABSOLUTE AND THE INDIVIDUAL
Footnotes
Отрывок из книги
Josiah Royce
Philosophical Discussion concerning the Nature of the Divine Idea as a Demonstrable Reality
.....
Confronted as our human intelligence always is with the fact of our ignorance, and bred as the religious thinking of that day had been in apologetics based on an agnostic philosophy such as Hamilton’s; impressed, too, as the general public was, religious and non-religious alike, with the steadfast march of natural science towards bringing all facts under the reign of physical law—above all, under the law of evolution—we need not wonder that this public was widely and deeply influenced by this philosophy. It is accessible to the general intelligence, and its evidences are impressive to minds unacquainted with the subtleties inseparable from the most searching thought, while its refutation unavoidably carries the thinker into the intricacies of dialectic that to the general mind are least inviting, or are even repellent.
Since the diffusion of the doctrines of Darwin and Spencer, the more alert portion of the religious world has exhibited a busy haste to readjust its theological conceptions to the new views. In fact, these efforts have been noticeable for their speed and adroitness rather than for their large or considerate judgment; in their anxiety for harmony with the new, they have not seldom lost sight of the cardinal truths in the old. Memorable, unrivalled among them, was the proposal of Matthew Arnold, in the rôle of a devoted English Churchman, to replace the Personal God of “the religion in which we have been brought up,” and in the name of saving this religion, by his now famous “Power, not ourselves, that makes for Righteousness”: a proposal which while sacrificing the very heart of the warrant for calling the religion Christian—the belief in the divine Personality—was put forward in the most evident good faith that it was Christian still, and in a form so eminent for literary excellence that it beyond doubt increased the spread of its agnostic views in the very act of satirising the “Unknowable,” and preserved for the New Negation, in a lasting monument of English letters, the aesthetic charm which it added to the cause.
