按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
might as a matter of fact be found resulting anywhere from
previous conditions。 To avoid such pessimistic consequences and
save its beneficent designer； the design argument accordingly
invokes two other principles； restrictive in their operation。
The first is physical： Nature's forces tend of their own accord
only to disorder and destruction； to heaps of ruins； not to
architecture。
This principle； though plausible at first sight； seems； in the
light of recent biology； to be more and more improbable。 The
second principle is one of anthropomorphic interpretation。 No
arrangement that for us is 〃disorderly〃 can possibly have been an
object of design at all。 This principle is of course a mere
assumption in the interests of anthropomorphic Theism。
When one views the world with no definite theological bias one
way or the other； one sees that order and disorder； as we now
recognize them； are purely human inventions。 We are interested
in certain types of arrangement； useful； aesthetic； or moralso
interested that whenever we find them realized； the fact
emphatically rivets our attention。 The result is that we work
over the contents of the world selectively。 It is overflowing
with disorderly arrangements from our point of view； but order is
the only thing we care for and look at； and by choosing； one can
always find some sort of orderly arrangement in the midst of any
chaos。 If I should throw down a thousand beans at random upon a
table； I could doubtless； by eliminating a sufficient number of
them； leave the rest in almost any geometrical pattern you might
propose to me； and you might then say that that pattern was the
thing prefigured beforehand； and that the other beans were mere
irrelevance and packing material。 Our dealings with Nature are
just like this。 She is a vast plenum in which our attention
draws capricious lines in innumerable directions。 We count and
name whatever lies upon the special lines we trace； whilst the
other things and the untraced lines are neither named nor
counted。 There are in reality infinitely more things 〃unadapted〃
to each other in this world than there are things 〃adapted〃；
infinitely more things with irregular relations than with regular
relations between them。 But we look for the regular kind of
thing exclusively； and ingeniously discover and preserve it in
our memory。 It accumulates with other regular kinds； until the
collection of them fills our encyclopaedias。 Yet all the while
between and around them lies an infinite anonymous chaos of
objects that no one ever thought of together； of relations that
never yet attracted our attention。
The facts of order from which the physico…theological argument
starts are thus easily susceptible of interpretation as arbitrary
human products。 So long as this is the case； although of course
no argument against God follows； it follows that the argument for
him will fail to constitute a knockdown proof of his existence。
It will be convincing only to those who on other grounds believe
in him already。
If philosophy can do so little to establish God's existence； how
stands it with her efforts to define his attributes？ It is worth
while to look at the attempts of systematic theology in this
direction。
Since God is First Cause； this science of sciences says； he
differs from all his creatures in possessing existence a se。
From this 〃a…se…ity〃 on God's part； theology deduces by mere
logic most of his other perfections。 For instance； he must be
both NECESSARY and ABSOLUTE； cannot not be； and cannot in any way
be determined by anything else。 This makes Him absolutely
unlimited from without； and unlimited also from within； for
limitation is non…being； and God is being itself。 This
unlimitedness makes God infinitely perfect。 Moreover； God is
ONE； and ONLY； for the infinitely perfect can admit no peer。 He
is SPIRITUAL； for were He composed of physical parts； some other
power would have to combine them into the total； and his aseity
would thus be contradicted。 He is therefore both simple and
non…physical in nature。 He is SIMPLE METAPHYSICALLY also； that
is to say； his nature and his existence cannot be distinct； as
they are in finite substances which share their formal natures
with one another； and are individual only in their material
aspect。 Since God is one and only； his essentia and his esse
must be given at one stroke。 This excludes from his being all
those distinctions； so familiar in the world of finite things；
between potentiality and actuality； substance and accidents；
being and activity； existence and attributes。 We can talk； it is
true； of God's powers； acts； and attributes； but these
discriminations are only 〃virtual；〃 and made from the human point
of view。 In God all these points of view fall into an absolute
identity of being。
This absence of all potentiality in God obliges Him to be
IMMUTABLE。 He is actuality； through and through。 Were there
anything potential about Him； He would either lose or gain by its
actualization； and either loss or gain would contradict his
perfection。 He cannot； therefore； change。 Furthermore； He is
IMMENSE； BOUNDLESS； for could He be outlined in space； He would
be composite； and this would contradict his indivisibility。 He is
therefore OMNIPRESENT； indivisibly there； at every point of
space。 He is similarly wholly present at every point of timein
other words ETERNAL。 For if He began in time； He would need a
prior cause； and that would contradict his aseity。 If He ended
it would contradict his necessity。 If He went through any
succession； it would contradict his immutability。
He has INTELLIGENCE and WILL and every other creature…
perfection； for we have them； and effectus nequit superare
causam。 In Him； however； they are absolutely and eternally in
act； and their OBJECT； since God can be bounded by naught that is
external； can primarily be nothing else than God himself。 He
knows himself； then； in one eternal indivisible act； and wills
himself with an infinite self…pleasure。＇295＇ Since He must of
logical necessity thus love and will himself； He cannot be called
〃free〃 ad intra； with the freedom of contrarieties that
characterizes finite creatures。 Ad extra； however； or with
respect to his creation； God is free。 He cannot NEED to create；
being perfect in being and in happiness already。 He WILLS to
create； then； by an absolute freedom。
＇295＇ For the scholastics the facultas appetendi embraces
feeling； desire； and will。
Being thus a substance endowed with intellect and will and
freedom； God is a PERSON； and a LIVING person also； for He is
both object and subject of his own activity； and to be this
distinguishes the living from the lifeless。 He is thus
absolutely SELF…SUFFICIENT： his SELF…KNOWLEDGE and SELF…LOVE are
both of them infinite and adequate； and need no extraneous
conditions to perfect them。
He is OMNISCIENT； for in knowing himself as Cause He knows all
creature things and events by implication。 His knowledge is
previsive； for He is present to all time。 Even our free acts are
known beforehand to Him； for otherwise his wisdom would admit of
successive moments of enrichment； and this would contradict his
immutability。 He is OMNIPOTENT for everything that does not
involve logical contradiction。 He can make BEING in other
words his power includes CREATION。 If what He creates were made
of his own substance； it would have to be infinite in essence； as
that substance is； but it is finite； so it must be non…divine in
substance。 If it were made of a substance； an eternally existing
matter； for example； which God found there to his hand； and to
which He simply gave its form； that would contradict God's
definition as First Cause； and make Him a mere mover of something
caused already。 The things he creates； then； He creates ex
nihilo； and gives them absolute being as so many finite
substances additional to himself。 The forms which he imprints
upon them have their prototypes in his ideas。 But as in God
there is no such thing as multiplicity； and as these ideas for us
are manifold； we must distinguish the ideas as they are in God
and the way in which our minds externally imitate them。 We must
attribute them to Him only in a TERMINATIVE sense； as differing