The Crucible of Modern Thought

PREFACE

This book is an outgrowth of a series of articles originally published in The Progress Magazine under a pseudonym, in which I sought to account for the prevailing mental unrest regarding subjects of religious and philosophical import. These articles attracted much attention from careful students of the times, and there have been many requests for the republication thereof in book form under my own name. Accordingly, the publishers of the articles requested me to revise the several papers, and to add thereto such further matter as I might think proper. I have gone over the original articles, taking away a little here and adding much there. Several entirely new subjects have been considered and inserted in their proper places in the text. At least one-third of the present book is entirely new, having been added to the revised form of the original articles. I have purposely quoted freely from good authorities, that the reader may have the benefit of the thought of a number of competent persons upon the various phases of the subject, in addition to what I have personally thought and written. I have sought merely to tell my story in a plain, simple manner, without any attempt at fine writing, literary excellence, or display of technical philosophical knowledge. My desire has been to place in the hands of the everyday busy man and woman a book from the pages of which they may gain a general knowledge of the causes of the modern mental unrest—an idea of what is going into this great melting pot of thought; what is happening there; and what is likely to be poured forth from it. To many, the numerous new “isms,” “ologies” and cults, are entirely new— something sprung full-grown from the brains of their founders.

The absence of an elementary acquaintance with the history of philosophy, on the part of the average man and woman, has given to many new prophets and founders of cults an unmerited and unwarranted importance and authority. I trust that this book will enable some of those who have been perplexed and worried over these new (?) “isms,” and teachings, to learn the true sources of those startling conglomerations of metaphysics, philosophy and theology, and thus once more to regain their mental bearings. It is also my hope that some who have a tendency toward philosophical study may be inspired by this book to go to the proper sources of such knowledge—to the masters of this branch of thought—instead of sitting at the feet of the, too often, freakish, irresponsible, and bizarre founders and teachers of the pseudo-schools and cults, who have been revamping the old teachings, dressing them in fantastic garb, and offering them (usually at a high rate of compensation) to those who have felt the hunger for wisdom and the thirst for information, but who lacked the knowledge of the places where these things could be had at first hand, pure and free from the adulterations of these self-constituted middle-men in the great market of Philosophy.

William Walker Atkinson.

Chicago, Ill., Oct. 18, 1910.

I. THE TWENTIETH CENTURY MELTING POT.

Everyone who has kept in touch with the current of the modern trend of thought must be aware of the operation of the mighty processes of tearing down, building up, rearrangement and reconstruction now under way in the realm of thought—in every region of that realm, in fact. It may be well said that modern thought is in the melting pot, and that even the most careful observers are in ignorance of what will finally come from that pot. Advanced thinkers along all lines of human knowledge have tossed their conceptions into the great crucible of Twentieth Century Thought, there to mingle with the conceptions of others and to be fused into some wonderful new combination, the exact nature of which is beyond the knowing of even the most prescient thinker among us. Of course, each contributor, or class of contributors, to the mass of material which is placed into the great melting pot, feels assured that his or her particular material must necessarily be the predominant element in the new composition—that their particular theory will be in strong evidence in the new synthesis.

But the thinker who stands aloof, who assumes the judicial frame of mind, who regards the process from the viewpoint affording the proper perspective, does not feel at all sure of the final outcome. He sees the general trend of the thought currents, but he also recognizes the operation of reaction following action, of the play of the opposite poles of thought—and he reserves his final judgment of the outcome—and waits, and waits. The answer lies in the future—the present is merely the scene of the struggle and bubble. The materials of the new composition are being tossed into the great pot, one by one, each day adding new materials which will operate in determining the nature of the composite substance which will be poured forth in the end, and which will then go through the slow process of cooling and crystallization. But he is either a thoughtless man, a bold man, or an inspired prophet, who dares venture to predict the exact nature of that which will come out of the crucible when all this heterogeneous mass of crude material shall have been melted, fused and amalgamated.

One seeking for the causes of this modern unrest in the world of thought must go far back in the pages of philosophy in his search. For much of the modern activity arises from causes latent in the thought of hundreds, yes, thousands, of years ago. There has been a constant evolution of thought, with its action and reaction, its manifestation of the opposing poles of activity, its tides and currents, its slipping back and its recovery of lost ground. In this evolution there has been noticed the constant swing of the pendulum of thought from one extreme to another, and then back again—the curious manifestation of fashion in thought which causes a favorite set of ideas to flourish for a while and then to sink into obscurity, there to remain for centuries, only to spring up again with renewed vigor after the passage of years. Strange as it may appear to many, nearly all of the great modern philosophical truths have been known in the past and have gone through this period of obscurement and hiding, only to now emerge on the scene of modern thought in full vigor, claiming their rightful place in the evolution of thought.

It must be admitted, however, that the modern scientific spirit—that spirit which seeks truth for truth’s sake—which follows reason wherever it may lead, irrespective of the personal beliefs, theories and opinions of the investigators— seems to be unique and peculiar to this age. Never before in the history of human thought has there been manifested such an honest desire for the real truth as at present. We see thinkers and investigators sorrowfully, but willingly, discarding many of their old and hallowed ideas and beliefs, because investigation has shown the unreasonableness of such beliefs. The spirit of the materialists, who, in their search for evidence that matter was the final and ultimate reality, found instead that matter, in the old sense, melted into mystery and became non-existent, and who then gladly accepted the new knowledge, is but one evidence of the modern scientific spirit which is animating the world’s best thinkers. The courage and honesty of many of the thinkers along theological lines, who find it necessary to throw overboard their old dogmas, as the price of the discovery of higher conceptions of truth, is akin to the instance just cited, and requires even greater courage and honesty of purpose.

While this unrest in the world of thought seems to be scattered over a large and varied field, yet if we will but closely examine into the underlying causes, we will see that all these varied manifestations and phases of the unrest really arise from the changing foundations of popular philosophy. And, indeed, the basic thought upon which philosophy rests is involved in the shifting and readjustment. That basic thought is that which men call the idea of fundamental principles, and which underlies all philosophic thought, as the foundation-stones underlie every edifice. A shifting of that foundation brings down the house, or at least disturbs its equilibrium, cracks its walls, and necessitates radical and important repairs. And this is what has happened in the world of thought today. The ideas regarding fundamental principles are changing, and the structure of thought erected thereupon is endangered—its walls are cracking, its beams slipping, its floors sagging, its roof is awry. Just how great the damage—just the extent of the repairs needed—these can be determined only by time, for the shifting and slipping of the foundation is still under way. Some think it will be necessary to tear down the walls and erect an entirely new edifice upon the readjusted foundation—who knows?

This claim that the conception of the fundamental principles is being disturbed, and is thus causing the trouble in the edifice of modern thought, may seem strange to those who have thought that the discoveries in physical science and the unrest in sociological thought were the disturbing elements. But the careful thinker will see that the real disturbance lies far deeper than these. For these conceptions depend materially, at least in their application and working-out, upon the world’s conception of the fundamental principles supporting the phenomenal universe. All edifices of thought must be built upon some foundation, and the only true foundation for thought is the conception of the fundamental principles, upon which depend the particular conception of philosophy, nature and life built thereupon. At the last, all physical conceptions must rest upon the basis of some metaphysical conception.

This may not be apparent at first thought, but a retracing of the steps of reasoning will show that the statement is correct.

The parable of the house that is built upon shifting sand, and that built upon the solid rock, is in accordance with the facts of thought and philosophy. It sometimes happens, however, that what has been thought to be a foundation of solid rock is finally discovered to be but soft crumbling sandstone, which is rapidly disintegrating into shifting sand. And this is what appears to be the trouble today. The foundation is apparently crumbling, or at least settling in a new adjustment of itself. And the settling or crumbling process is disturbing thought and life in all of its many phases.

Let us now examine the case of this shifting or crumbling foundation. Let us see, if possible, the nature and extent of the damage. In order to proceed intelligently we must, for the time being, discard our prejudices and maintain the open mind. Let us examine what men are saying and thinking about the matter, and then proceed to make up our minds regarding the true state of affairs. This is the purpose of this book, and this only. I shall not try to convert anyone to my own particular views on the subject. In fact, I shall endeavor to keep my own views in the background. Instead of appearing as the counsel for the prosecution or the defense, I shall try to occupy the seat of the judge—instead of making the argument of counsel on either side, I shall try to follow the course of the judge in summing up and reviewing the evidence and submitting the same to the jury of the readers of this book. This is the only fair way, and I trust that you, the jury, will give me the credit for fairness and just intentions as we proceed.

The idea of fundamental principles depends upon the conception of an underlying something, in which philosophy holds that everything that is must “live and move and have its being.” The human mind has ever tended toward the conception of a Something underlying all individual manifestations of being—the ocean of being, in which all particular beings are but as drops or particles. This universal principle of being has been variously conceived of as being by nature anything or everything from pure spirit to pure matter.

Theologians have conceived of it as a mysterious something called spirit, connected in some way with Deity. Philosophers have endeavored to attribute to it various and different natures. Modern science has considered it either as the principle of matter, on the one hand, or as “that infinite and eternal energy from which all things proceed,” as Spencer put it, on the other hand. Ancient Oriental metaphysicians, as well as modern idealism, have considered it as pure mind. Ancient pantheism and modern transcendentalism have regarded Being as identical with Deity. Between these various conceptions the metaphysical and philosophical conflict has raged.

While, at first, it may seem that the conflict is one which concerns only theologians, philosophers and metaphysicians, a closer examination will reveal the fact that its influence and scope extends much farther, inasmuch as our conceptions of life, action, duty, morals and general conduct must, and do, depend materially upon the conception of Being held by the popular mind. The individual may be uncertain or indifferent, but, nevertheless, he is affected and, to a certain extent, bound by the ideas arising from such popular conception. The affairs of men’s lives depend upon certain standards, and these standards depend upon the popular conception regarding the source of standards, and the belief in and acceptance of the authority of the standard-makers. These standards may be said to have the effect of laws, and the efficacy of all laws must rest upon the acceptance by the people of the authority, reality and power of the lawmaker to enforce. Therefore, any disturbance regarding the validity of the standards and values of life must arise from a shifting conception regarding the fundamental source of these standards, values and laws, in the public mind. And this is what we mean when we say that the foundation of the structure of thought and action gives signs of a shifting, settling, or sinking.

This foundation is, of course, in the public mind, and we must look to the public mind for the evidences of the changes that are going on.

Remember, first and last, that I am not attempting to pass upon the truth or untruth of any particular conceptions of the fundamental truths—neither am I undertaking to theorize or speculate upon the real nature of truth. We are merely conducting an investigation into the state of the public mind on the subject—merely feeling the pulse of modern thought. Upon the fundamental conceptions in the public mind depend the actions and life of the individuals composing that public. Not only is it true that a tree is known by its fruits, but it is also true that the fruits may be known by its tree. We may infer the popular standards by observing the actions of the populace; we may predicate the actions of the populace by knowing the public standards. And the standards must, in the end, depend upon the accepted idea or conception of the fundamental principles. Investigate the subject from any starting point, and we find ourselves approaching the center at last.

In considering the conception of the fundamental principles and its effect on the creation of standards of living and action, we need go back no further than the Middle Ages. That particular period of the history of the race shows in itself a reactionary swing of the pendulum of thought. Independent thought had reached its lowest ebb. Here and there were to be found a thinker or two who dared use his reason, but the philosophies of the past were forgotten or unknown to the masses of people, and dogmatic theology had spread its wet blanket over the embers of independent thought so thoroughly as to almost smother out of existence even its feeble spark.

There was no question regarding fundamental principles disturbing the public mind of the Middle Ages. Everything of the kind had been positively and thoroughly settled by the church. The world had been created out of nothing, in six days, some 5,000 years before that time; the animals had been made, one by one, species by species, and man was a special creation, coming after all the earth had been prepared for him. He had partaken of the forbidden fruit and had been driven from Eden, and the curse of original sin had been placed on the race.

There were no disputed questions of geology, anthropology or general science. The earth was flat, and the sun and stars moved around it—this relieved the minds of the people of all worrisome questions of astronomy—the nebular hypothesis was undreamed of. Ethics and morality were likewise beyond dispute or argument—these matters had been settled once and for all by the scriptures interpreted by the infallible authority of the church. Theologians disputed about doctrinal points— but this did not concern the general public, for the latter knew nothing of these subjects. The authority was supreme—the standards were firmly established—there was nothing to think about. Some failed to live up to the standards, but the standards were fixed, nevertheless.

Time rolled on. Printing was discovered, and people began to read books. Then came the theological revolts which resulted in the establishment of various churches in opposition to the one church. People began to realize that it was possible and permissible to reason about things instead of having to accept them upon mere authority. The Reformation, as it is called, was the entering wedge of independent thought. People actually dared to question the authority of the church, and, wonder upon wonders, they were not struck dead on the spot! The chains were loosened and the primal causes of the present unrest were set into motion. As time passed the churches disputed one with another, and various sects and divisions arose, each of which based its schism upon some disputed conception of doctrine or practice. After a time the members of the various sects began to hold individual opinions, although still adhering to general truths and creeds. Creeds became broader, and men claimed a greater and still greater right of individual interpretation and freer thought. Although the educated classes did the most of the thinking, still, as is always the case, their opinions gradually filtered through to the lower classes and changes became general.

During the eighteenth century there was a great activity in Europe along the lines of free-thought. All sorts of heretical schools became popular—from atheism to modified deism. People also began to rebel against the constituted authorities— the doctrine of divine right began to be doubted. The French Revolution was an active factor in the shaking off of old ideals, political and theological, and although a reaction set in following the terrible excess of fanatics of the times, still the work had been done, and much of the leaven remained. The American Revolution, with its democratic teachings, and the heterodox views of men like Jefferson and Paine, added to the work done by the earlier leaders of the French Revolution, and the teachings of Voltaire and others of his school.

During the nineteenth century the advances of physical science made still further inroads into the orthodox teachings of the past. Reaching the halfway point of the century, men like Darwin, Huxley, Tyndall and Herbert Spencer began to exert a remarkable influence upon the popular mind, and orthodoxy was put squarely on the defensive in a manner never before known—a condition which has continued even unto this day, the orthodox ranks having been steadily forced to retreat, until now many of the orthodox opinions are almost as heterodox as those of the skeptics of fifty or a hundred years ago. Many of the orthodox pulpits today give utterance to views almost identical with those which shocked our great-grandfathers when uttered by Thomas Paine. The higher criticism of today goes further than the infidelism of 1850.

The theory of Evolution and the Descent of Man broke down many of the old barriers, and the works of Huxley and Spencer tore down still more. It became popular to be an evolutionist, and the adherents of the older teachings were regarded as behind the times. A strong tendency toward materialism set in, which many supposed was destined to sweep before it all the old line of defenses of orthodoxy. But, strange to say, toward the close of the century a reaction set in. Although people had been carried away with the newer teachings which had wiped away old lines of thought, the old religious instinct and the desire for spiritual things had not been destroyed. All the stronger for having been suppressed for a time, these factors in the human mind swung back the pendulum of thought away from materialism. Materialism, once so popular in scientific circles and in the universities, has now almost entirely disappeared, being superseded by a new conception of idealism. There is, of course, an old guard of materialism still left, but its popularity has departed for the time being. But the pendulum, in its backward swing, did not carry popular thought back to the old orthodox standards. These had been discarded once and for all, it seemed. There was a need for a new set of conceptions—and the demand created the supply. And here we have the key to the present conditions of affairs.

Filling the vacuum created by the evaporation of the older orthodox dogmas, we find the ideals of ancient Greek philosophy, mingling with the still older teachings of the Hindus, and through all is heard the note of mysticism which has ever pervaded human thought in every religion, every time, and every race. The discarded and long-reviled teachings of the Gnostics, that body of early Christian mystics, have arisen again and under new names have found popular favor in the minds of the public of the twentieth century. The teachings of the old Hindu Vedantism, given a new impetus by Emerson and the transcendentalists, find a prominent place in the advancing thought of today. Plato has sprung into renewed and startling popular favor, and many advanced modern thinkers find in his pages the truths for which they have sought in vain elsewhere. Heraclitus finds corroboration in the teachings of modern science, and his views of the eternal change and the “becoming” of the universe are repeated in many modern teachings. Other bits of philosophy have been borrowed from Buddhism, and even from the Sufis, the mystic sect of Mohammedism. Even the philosophy of Lao-tze, the ancient Chinese philosopher who taught of the Tao, or “Way,” is accepted as correctly representing some stages of modern thought. The new bottles of the present are being filled with the old wine of the past.