VIII
My dear ——,
I am afraid your notions about "proof" are still rather hazy; for you quote against me a stern and self-denying dictum which passes current among some of your young friends, that "it is immoral to believe what cannot be proved."
Have you seriously asked yourself what you mean by "proved" in enunciating this proposition? Do you mean "made sufficiently probable to induce a man to act upon the probability"? Or do you mean "absolutely demonstrated"?
If you mean the former, not so many as you suppose are guilty of this "immorality." Give me an instance, if if you can, of a man who "believes what cannot be made sufficiently probable to induce him to act upon the probability." Of course some men say they believe what they, in reality, do not believe; but you speak, not about "saying" but about "believing;" and I do not see how any man can "believe" what he does not regard as probable. I am inclined to think therefore that, in this sense of the word "prove," your proposition is meaningless.
But perhaps by "prove," you mean "absolutely demonstrate;" and your thesis is that "it is immoral to believe what cannot be absolutely demonstrated;" in that case I am obliged to ask you how you can repeat such cant, such a mere parrot cry, with a grave face.
Do you not see that, as soon as you conceded (as I
