an enquiry concerning human understanding-第33章

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！


be　entirely　imaginary；　and　of　which　there　are　to　be　found　no
traces　in　the　course　of　nature？

　　　　　The　religious　hypothesis；　therefore；　must　be　considered
only　as　a　particular　method　of　accounting　for　the　visible
phenomena　of　the　universe：　But　no　just　reasoner　will　ever
presume　to　infer　from　it　any　single　fact；　and　alter　or　add
to　the　phenomena；　in　any　single　particular。　If　you　think；
that　the　appearances　of　things　prove　such　causes；　it　is
allowable　for　you　to　draw　an　inference　concerning　the
existence　of　these　causes。　In　such　complicated　and　sublime
subjects；　every　one　should　be　indulged　in　the　liberty　of
conjecture　and　argument。　But　here　you　ought　to　rest。　If　you
come　backward；　and　arguing　from　your　inferred　causes；
conclude；　that　any　other　fact　has　existed；　or　will　exist；　in
the　course　of　nature；　which　may　serve　as　a　fuller　display　of
particular　attributes；　I　must　admonish　you；　that　you　have
departed　from　the　method　of　reasoning；　attached　to　the
present　subject；　and　have　certainly　added　something　to　the
attributes　of　the　cause；　beyond　what　appears　in　the　effect；
otherwise　you　could　never；　with　tolerable　sense　or
propriety；　add　any　thing　to　the　effect；　in　order　to　render
it　more　worthy　of　the　cause。

　　　　　Where；　then；　is　the　odiousness　of　that　doctrine；　which
I　teach　in　my　school；　or　rather；　which　I　examine　in　my
gardens？　Or　what　do　you　find　in　this　whole　question；　wherein
the　security　of　good　morals；　or　the　peace　and　order　of
society；　is　in　the　least　concerned？

　　　　　I　deny　a　providence；　you　say；　and　supreme　governor　of
the　world；　who　guides　the　course　of　events；　and　punishes　the
vicious　with　infamy　and　disappointment；　and　rewards　the
virtuous　with　honour　and　success；　in　all　their　undertakings。
But　surely；　I　deny　not　the　course　itself　of　events；　which
lies　open　to　every　one's　inquiry　and　examination。　I
acknowledge；　that；　in　the　present　order　of　things；　virtue　is
attended　with　more　peace　of　mind　than　vice；　and　meets　with　a
more　favourable　reception　from　the　world。　I　am　sensible；
that；　according　to　the　past　experience　of　mankind；
friendship　is　the　chief　joy　of　human　life；　and　moderation
the　only　source　of　tranquillity　and　happiness。　I　never
balance　between　the　virtuous　and　the　vicious　course　of　life；
but　am　sensible；　that；　to　a　well…disposed　mind；　every
advantage　is　on　the　side　of　the　former。　And　what　can　you　say
more；　allowing　all　your　suppositions　and　reasonings？　You
tell　me；　indeed；　that　this　disposition　of　things　proceeds
from　intelligence　and　design。　But　whatever　it　proceeds　from；
the　disposition　itself；　on　which　depends　our　happiness　or
misery；　and　consequently　our　conduct　and　deportment　in　life
is　still　the　same。　It　is　still　open　for　me；　as　well　as　you；
to　regulate　my　behaviour；　by　my　experience　of　past　events。
And　if　you　affirm；　that；　while　a　divine　providence　is
allowed　and　a　supreme　distributive　justice　in　the　universe；
I　ought　to　expect　some　more　particular　reward　of　the　good；
and　punishment　of　the　bad；　beyond　the　ordinary　course　of
events；　I　here　find　the　same　fallacy；　which　I　have　before
endeavoured　to　detect。　You　persist　in　imagining；　that；　if　we
grant　that　divine　existence；　for　which　you　so　earnestly
contend；　you　may　safely　infer　consequences　from　it；　and　add
something　to　the　experienced　order　of　nature；　by　arguing
from　the　attributes　which　you　ascribe　to　your　gods。　You　seem
not　to　remember；　that　all　your　reasonings　on　this　subject
can　only　be　drawn　from　effects　to　causes；　and　that　every
argument；　deducted　from　causes　to　effects；　must　of　necessity
be　a　gross　sophism；　since　it　is　impossible　for　you　to　know
any　thing　of　the　cause；　but　what　you　have　antecedently；　not
inferred；　but　discovered　to　the　full；　in　the　effect。

　　　　　But　what　must　a　philosopher　think　of　those　vain
reasoners；　who　instead　of　regarding　the　present　scene　of
things　as　the　sole　object　of　their　contemplation；　so　far
reverse　the　whole　course　of　nature；　as　to　render　this　life
merely　a　passage　to　something　farther；　a　porch；　which　leads
to　a　greater；　and　vastly　different　building；　a　prologue；
which　serves　only　to　introduce　the　piece；　and　give　it　more
grace　and　propriety？　Whence；　do　you　think；　can　such
philosophers　derive　their　idea　of　the　gods？　From　their　own
conceit　and　imagination　surely。　For　if　they　derived　it　from
the　present　phenomena；　it　would　never　point　to　any　thing
farther；　but　must　be　exactly　adjusted　to　them。　That　the
divinity　may　　be　endowed　with　attributes；　which　we
have　never　seen　exerted；　may　be　governed　by　principles　of
action；　which　we　cannot　discover　to　be　satisfied：　All　this
will　freely　be　allowed。　But　still　this　is　mere　
and　hypothesis。　We　never　can　have　reason　to　infer　any
attributes；　or　any　principles　of　action　in　him；　but　so　far
as　we　know　them　to　have　been　exerted　and　satisfied。

　　　　　　If　you　answer　in　the　affirmative；　I　conclude；　that；
since　justice　here　exerts　itself；　it　is　satisfied。　If　you
reply　in　the　negative；　I　conclude；　that　you　have　then　no
reason　to　ascribe　justice；　in　our　sense　of　it；　to　the　gods。
If　you　hold　a　medium　between　affirmation　and　negation；　by
saying；　that　the　justice　of　the　gods；　at　present；　exerts
itself　in　part；　but　not　in　its　full　extent；　I　answer；　that
you　have　no　reason　to　give　it　any　particular　extent；　but
only　so　far　as　you　see　it；　；　exert　itself。

　　　　　Thus　I　bring　the　dispute；　O　A/THENIANS；　to　a　short
issue　with　my　antagonists。　The　course　of　nature　lies　open　to
my　contemplation　as　well　as　to　theirs。　The　experienced　train
of　events　is　the　great　standard；　by　which　we　all　regulate
our　conduct。　Nothing　else　can　be　appealed　to　in　the　field；
or　in　the　senate。　Nothing　else　ought　ever　to　be　heard　of　in
the　school；　or　in　the　closet。　In　vain　would　our　limited
understanding　break　through　those　boundaries；　which　are　too
narrow　for　our　fond　imagination。　While　we　argue　from　the
course　of　nature；　and　infer　a　particular　intelligent　cause；
which　first　bestowed；　and　still　preserves　order　in　the
universe；　we　embrace　a　principle；　which　is　both　uncertain
and　useless。　It　is　uncertain；　because　the　subject　lies

entirely　beyond　the　reach　of　human　experience。　It　is
useless；　because　our　knowledge　of　this　cause　being　derived
entirely　from　the　course　of　nature；　we　can　never；　according
to　the　rules　of　just　reasoning；　return　back　from　the　cause
with　any　new　inference；　or　making　additions　to　the　common
and　experienced　course　of　nature；　establish　any　new
principles　of　conduct　and　behaviour。

　　　　　I　observe　（said　I；　finding　he　had　finished　his
harangue）　that　you　neglect　not　the　artifice　of　the
demagogues　of　old；　and　as　you　were　pleased　to　make　me　stand
for　the　people；　you　insinuate　yourself　into　my　favour　by
embracing　those　principles；　to　which；　you　know；　I　have
always　expressed　a　particular　attachment。　But　allowing　you
to　make　experience　（as　indeed　I　think　you　ought）　the　only
standard　of　our　judgement　concerning　this；　and　all　other
questions　of　fact；　I　doubt　not　but；　from　the　very　same
experience；　to　which　you　appeal；　it　may　be　possible　to
refute　this　reasoning；　which　you　have　put　into　the　mouth　of
E/PICURUS。　If　you　saw；　for　instance；　a　half…　finished
building；　surrounded　with　heaps　of　brick　and　stone　and
mortar；　and　all　the　instruments　of　masonry；　could　you　not
　from　the　effect；　that　it　was　a　work　of　design　and
contrivance？　And　could　you　not　return　again；　from　this
inferred　cause；　to　infer　new　additions　to　the　effect；　and
conclude；　that　the　building　would　soon　be　finished；　and
receive　all　the　further　improvements；　which　art　could　bestow
upon　it？　If　you　saw　upon　the　sea…shore　the　print　of　one
human　foot；　you　would　conclude；　that　a　man　had　passed　that
way；　and　that　he　had　also　left　the　traces　of　the　other　foot；
though　effaced　by　the　rolling　of　the　sands　or　inundation　of
the　waters。　Why　then　do　you　refuse　to　admit　the　same　method
of　reasoning　with　regard　to　the　order　of　nature？　Consider
the　world　and　the　present　life　only　as　an　imperfect
building；　from　which　you　can　infer　a　superior　intelligence；
and　arguing　from　that　superior　intelligence；　which　can　leave
nothing　imperfect；　why　may　you