Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

allowed any scientific knowledge' of the actual oth than rests on 'probable' belief.

The whole corpus of so-called knowledge, relatively which a given proposition is probable, has but probal grounds. Probability thus becomes a logical relation the probable, and we touch no bottom. And further, we grant that the probability of a particular inducti be an objective and logical, if undefinable, relation certain fundamental postulates, it seems plain that wh these postulates are in turn called probable, that wo must bear quite a different meaning from that which bears when the particular induction is said to be probab relatively to them. Logicians have not told us anythi as yet concerning this probability attributed to the bas induction-postulates, except that it is not numerical measurable. But much more will have to be said it than that. And when it is said, it will be interesti to see whether appeal to the downright alogical, tl psychologically inevitable, the vaguely-called instinctiv the expectation based on habit, the hope that spring perennial, and so forth, can be avoided: whether th basis of our corpus of so-called or presumptive knowledg is not essentially non-cognitive.

One does not glory in this threatened conclusion th reasonableness is at bottom non-rational, if it sha be thrust upon us. It is somewhat humbling to prop human pride and aspiration. The theologian, as we as the devotee of science, would prefer things to b otherwise.

For one will not derive very profound comfort fro the doctrine that probability is the measure of beli that it is reasonable, or one's moral duty, to entertain, to be moral in this connexion consists ultimately being alogical in one way rather than in another.

However, whether one likes it or not, it looks as human reasonableness is at bottom anthropic interpret tiveness: as if faith and hope are more fundament than the knowledge which is to vanish away, and whic indeed in one sense has already vanished away. seems that, whether as scientific knowers or as religiou believers, we must be content to 'feel that we are greate than we know': to recognise that it is trust of som such feeling as that, that in all our knowledge (such a

it is) and all our reason (whatever that be) has prompted and guided our intellectual search: that the superficial success of the reason that is everywhere thwarted and baffled in its quest for certain knowledge about the world, is the substantiation of things hoped for: and that if it be also the evidencing of things unseen, that evidencing is in the last resort a matter of psychological certitude, not of logical certainty.

If theology be right in her interpretation of the world, which does include man and his valuations in the Nature which it would interpret, she will have to be in earnest with her belief that in man there is something more God-like than the cold dry light of reason, and to justify her fundamental belief in a Personal God by pleading that the development of this faculty requires a revelation that is obscure, a world that mirrors, a reason that analogises and interprets and sees but in a riddle. For, so far as we can as yet discern, the reasonable is what stands in the relation of probability to presumptive knowledge: this knowledge rests on belief: the belief is grounded on hope. At bottom, there is no difference between the reasonableness of theology and science. Superficially, it is a difference in degree of probability relatively to what we politely allow to pass as knowledge.

[graphic]

F. R. TENNANT.

Vol. 241.-No. 478.

K

[graphic]

Art. 10.-MATTHEW ARNOLD.

THERE are three impressions of Matthew Arnold now circulation. The first, and most common, is that 'Isaiah in white kid gloves,' an elderly bird pecking grapes on a trellis.' The second is a degree higher, is held by the majority of cultivated persons, as that a coiner of phrases-Barbarians, Philistines, and Po lace,' 'Knowledge of ourselves and the world,' the 'I ourselves which makes for righteousness'-with all traditions which go with an apostle of culture. A th impression, and one not yet sufficiently understood, that of a true progressive, a thinker who, besides bei the foremost English critic of letters and no mean po was ahead of his time in matters regarding educati religion, State control of popular affairs, and inter tional relationships.

[ocr errors]

Great writers inevitably pass through the 'anecdo stage before their status is finally settled, and Matth Arnold is passing through his anecdote' stage no His personality is epigrammatically perverted by the who insist upon regarding him as belonging to either the first two categories mentioned above, and omit co sideration of the third. Expressly opposed to a b graphy of himself, happily saved from unsavoury goss by the white light of his own clean living, he is cited a 'conceited wearer of ill fitting clothes,' or a phra maker whose 'sweetness and light' travelled the roun of London dinner-tables. But, mostly, he is quarried wit out acknowledgment and without continuity in articl which would advance the knowledge of God, the wor and ourselves.' These are wind-straws of a personali not yet understood; they result naturally from Arnol purposely assumed 'amateurism,' from his airy attac upon subjects which he approached too often witho sufficient depth of knowledge, and from an assumptithat his contemporaries were excellent in their intentio but faulty in their execution. His thoughts are t common property of reviewers and 'belletrists.' It is m necessary to study his sources, for competent studer have investigated his indebtedness to Goethe and Saint Beuve as well as to the Classics; it is superfluous to ta about his poetry, for his weaker work has been discard

2

A

-t

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

and we are the happy possessors of Thyrsis,' 'Dover Beach,' Tristram,' Heine's Grave,' and a dozen other poems which have taken the first rank. But it is necessary to disprove the too popular view that he was merely a cultivated voice, a kind of walking Athenæum Club, a Lord Advocate of Homer, Dante, and Shakespeare, and to find the elements in him which directly relate to the life and letters of to-day. In other words, we should consider whether his prose is a rudimentary survival from Victorian England, or whether it floats squarely down the current of the Time-Spirit which he so often invokes. It is in order, we repeat, that this Isaiah be interpreted in terms of the 20th century.

A cursory glance at the careers of Thomas and Matthew Arnold will make clear to us the fact that throughout their lives they were engaged in a sort of polite debate with the universe. They irritated people by always taking superior ground. They fought their own organisations, so to speak, from within. Each of them paid the penalty of such an attitude by being popularly classed, the one as the ideal dominie, the other as the ideal coiner of catch-words. Mr Strachey has immortalised the gown and bands and 'slightly puzzled look' of the doctor; while George Meredith, with all his admiration for that Arnold blood which transmits onward brains and taste,' has imprisoned the doctor's son in an epigram-'born from the pulpit, he occupied it, and might have sermonised for all time, but that he conceived the head of the clerk below to be the sconce of the British public, and that he must drum on it with an iterated phrase perpetually to awaken understanding.'

[ocr errors]

At the time of Matthew's birth his father was coaching pupils for the Universities, studying Thucydides and Roman history, and meditating the ideals which six years later he was to put into practice at Rugby. Thomas was a pioneer in many ways: he was the father of school curricula in modern history; he exhibits one of the early cases of academic freedom, in refusing to acknowledge that his authorship of an Edinburgh Review' article defending Dr Hampden had any bearing upon his position before Earl Howe and other trustees of Rugby School; he had visions of Church federation, the admission of Dissenters to the Church of England

[ocr errors]
[graphic][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

without religious tests; and he ventured out of his ov purse a short-lived periodical called the Englishman Register.' He might be called the Roosevelt of t Anglican Church of the 'thirties. To poke fun at h 'puzzled earnestness' is easy; and it is true enough th modern phases of art and aesthetics were rather a clos book to him, as they were in great measure to his so We cannot avoid a smile when the father writes fro abroad, How miserably inferior to Oxford is France and the churches and religion of Italy are inferior ours.' But he left to Matthew his unruffled courage, h love of nature and travel, his moderate liberalism, h intense yearning to convey a message to England, and modicum of self-satisfaction, which his son's friend occasionally defined as conceit. His legacy of recoil fro religious technique is as strong as any element in h son's later belief; while his desire to draw scholarshi and literature more closely together doubtless playe searchingly and sympathetically into the mind Matthew. Both men were were mugwumps' throughou their lives-neither a follower of any one party, an each filled with an intense moral earnestness backed b culture and force. And if people smile now at wha in 1830 and 1850 was called radical, they must think o self-satisfied Warwickshire squires in velvet collars an ponderous carriages; they must call to mind a Vi torianism that was sloughing off the aristocrati rowdyism of the Georges. In the days of Thoma Arnold the Congress of Vienna had scarcely broken up the Tractarian movement had not yet horrified th Kingsleys, and the prison-house was only ceasing t shadow the mills of Lancashire and the mines of York shire. In his time any democracy at all was associate with cheating yard-wands.'

most.

[ocr errors]

The father was a teacher, the son an interprete But in both men the moral sense, the underlying belie in a power that makes for righteousness, was upper And what is more, this moral sense, for all th probing of biographers and controversialists, neve failed. It was both sweet and sound; it flowed from depths that were not affected by storm or calm, b drought or plenty.

Walter Bagehot has remarked in his essay on Glad

« VorigeDoorgaan »