【英文读物】The Limits Of Atheism

1、【英文读物】The Limits Of AtheismPREFACE. The object of these pages* is not to defend the intellectual accuracy of Atheism (which could not be attempted in this brief space), the object is to explain its case, to vindicate its moral rectitude, and the right of those who hold these views, to legal equality. There are two Atheisms in literaturethe ancient one of mere negation; and the affirmative form, whose relevant name is Cosmism, and of which Humboldt, in his Cosmos, is a great illustrator, and Comt

2、e, in his Positive Philosophy, an expounder. The term Cosmism ought to supersede the misleading term Atheism; just as Secularism has superseded the libellous term Infidelity. Cosmism, as well as Secularism, expresses a new form of Freethought, and I use the term Atheism, as the subject of a Lecture, for the first time here. It is a worn-out word, used by Theists in hateful senses. I employ it, as a title, to-day for political reasons, in order to show those who make it a ground of civil exclusio

3、n, that it is a thing of law and limits: that the reputed Atheism of English working men, so far as it prevails, is no longer the old Atheism of mere negation, but the Cosmism of modern science; neither dissolute, anarchical, nor impiousrecognises that the universe is, without theorising why it is. Negative Atheism says there is nothing beyond the universe. Cosmism says it cannot explain anything beyond, and pauses where its knowledge ends. *A report of a Lecture delivered in Bendalls Assembly R

4、ooms, City Road, London, March 8rd, 1861.Atheism questionsCosmism affirms. The language of Cosmism is that of the poet in the Purgatory of Suicides: I do not saythere is no God, But this I sayI know not.I prefer Secularism, which concerns itself with the moral life of man, and maintains a well-advised neutrality upon these speculative questions. My sympathies are with Adam Bede, that striking and greatest creation of modern genius, in which the National Review recognised The strong-headed, manly

5、, sharp-tempered, secular carpenter, with his energetic satisfaction in his work, and impatience of dreamers. But as I stated in the York Debate, in 1858, at which the Reverend Canons Hey and Robinson presided, it is an act of self-defence in England to question the assumed infallibility of Theismto prove that Atheists are entitled to civil recognition, as persons having legitimate, actual, and conscientious views, and who, therefore, ought not to be outlawed as they are now. So long as sceptics

6、 of Theism are refused the right of affirmation in courts of law, and their lives and property consequently placed at the mercy of every ruffian and knave, so long will a Sceptical propaganda be a parliamentary necessity, to justify these opinions, and to spread them, that those who hold them may, like the Quakers, win by pertinacity what is denied to reason. And while this state of things lasts, I confess that I listen to arguments of opponents with distrust, for I see in them, not so much the

7、confutation of my opinions, as the limitation of my freedom, and the justification of my political exclusion. In the present state of theological liberty in England, for the alleged Atheist to be silent, is to be a slave consenting to his own degradation.G. J. H.147, Fleet Street, London, E.C., April 13th, 1861. THE LIMITS OF ATHEISM Twenty years ago I stepped forward to defend the right of expressing Atheism on the part of those who conscientiously held it. On Mr. Southwells imprisonment in Bri

8、stol, I took his place as Editor of the Oracle of Reason, and shared his fate at Gloucester. Under the same circumstances I would do it again to-morrow. In the expression of speculative opinions there may be error and there may be outrage; but the error is best corrected by discussion, and the outrage by cultivation; but to prohibit the free publication of opinion is to strike at the root of all intrepidity of thought and individuality of character; and against a uniformity of profession, whethe

9、r brought about by the tyranny of the majority, by the policeman, or by the magistrate, I ever have, and ever will, protest as unwise, dishonest, and degrading.Because Atheistical opinions were attacked by the law I defended them: I defended the right to hold them without sharing them. And in all the publications I have edited, I have accepted the responsibility of the views of coadjutors and correspondents without conditions, and my name is associated in consequence much more with other persons opinions than with my own. When the rights of conscience in Free-thought are attacked, to discriminate is to condemn; and while persecution is attempted, I make it a point of honour never to pass in appearance on to the side of the persecutors. As soon as legal opposition to the publication of heretical opinion ceased, I was the first to insist that the day of good taste must commence. The moment fair play is permitted, all

《【英文读物】The Limits Of Atheism》由会员破***分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《【英文读物】The Limits Of Atheism》请在金锄头文库上搜索。