next up previous contents
Next: VIII Up: HISTORICAL INEVITABILITY Previous: VI   Contents

VII

Two powerful doctrines are at large in contemporary thought, relativism and determinism. The first of these, for all that it is represented as being an antidote to overweening self-confidence, or arrogant dogmatism, or moral self-satisfaction, is nevertheless founded on a fallacious interpretation of experience; the second, for all that its chains are decked with flowers, and despite its parade of noble stoicism and the splendour and vastness of its cosmic design, nevertheless represents the universe as a prison. Relativism opposes to individual protest and belief in moral principles the resignation or the irony of those, who have seen many worlds crumble, many ideals turned tawdry or ridiculous by time. Determinism claims to bring us to our senses by showing where the true, the impersonal and unalterable machinery of life and thought is to be found. The first, when it ceases to be a, maxim, or merely a salutary reminder to us of our limitations or of the complexity of the issue, and claims our attention as a serious Weitanschauung, rests on the misuse of words, a confusion of ideas, and reliance upon a logical fallacy: The second, when it goes beyond indicating specific obstacles to free choice where examinable evidence for this can be adduced, turns out to rest either on a mythology or a metaphysical dogma. Both have, at times, succeeded in reasoning or frightening men out of their most human moral or political convictions in the name of a deeper and more devastating insight into the nature of things. Yet, perhaps, this is no more than a sign of neurosis and confusion: for neither view seems to be supported by human experience. Why then should either doctrine (but especially determinism) have bound its spell so powerfully on so many otherwise clear and honest minds?


next up previous contents
Next: VIII Up: HISTORICAL INEVITABILITY Previous: VI   Contents
Administrator 2001-02-25