The Philosophical Review/Volume 1/Review: Hovey - Studies in Ethics and Religion
This book is composed of a number of short papers, most of which are theological in character, as indicated by the titles. The division of the book dealing with theism is, however, interesting from a philosophical standpoint, indicating as it does, the author's theory regarding the relation of God to nature and to man. He refuses to accept such a definition as that of Dean Mansel, which defines the Infinite as "containing within itself the sum not only of all actual, but of all possible, being." Such a view, he maintains, is pantheism, and this he wishes to avoid. The Infinite Being does not contain everything within itself, but is "so great that no addition can be made to its nature without destroying its self-consistency." We have, he argues, a perfectly trustworthy, though only partial, knowledge of the Infinite. We can perceive that an object is infinite, or why it must be so, though we cannot comprehend the object itself. The Infinite must, further, be an intelligent mind or spirit; for only such a Being can explain the material world, and the moral and religious nature of man.
When he comes to discuss the relation of God to the universe, he maintains the older view of a creation in time, and devotes the greater part of his second chapter to a criticism of theories which regard God as the ground of the world. The books which President Hovey criticises as representative of this latter view are Lotze's Microcosmus and Professor Schurman's Belief in God. The Welt-anschauung of both these thinkers is idealistic, and from President Hovey's arguments it seems evident that this is a position which he fails to understand. "The idealistic theory" he writes, "represents God as producing illusions in the mind of men. . . . The world which they are made by Him to see and feel is all in their mind's eye; it is a dream-world having no existence outside of their thought" (p. 34). It seems scarcely necessary to add that such a statement indicates a thorough-going misapprehension of idealism. As for the author's argument that an idealistic position impeaches the veracity of God, it could only have force if we presuppose that it is the business of our thought to copy a reality which already exists independently of it. Berkeley's famous question is here in order as to what meaning can be given to the absolute existence of unthinking things. And, further, must not one's philosophy be either an idealism or materialism with its correlate, physical necessity? The same lack of metaphysical insight is shown by President Hovey's criticism of the "immanent" view of cause, which is maintained by both the philosophers above mentioned. He characterizes furthermore Professor Schurman's proposition that "it is the essence of Spirit to manifest itself" as "an unqualified assertion." His own view seems to be that existence has a meaning apart from activity. These and other fundamental misconceptions furnish occasion for pointing out that these questions regarding the relation of God to the universe do not lie within the province of theology, but belong to and can only be settled by a metaphysic. The other portions of the book seem to me much more valuable than these early chapters. The lectures on Christian Ethics apply the principles of Christ's teaching to the relations of ordinary life. They are both vigorous and inspiring. Perhaps the most interesting are the chapters entitled "The Golden Rule" and "The State and Religion."
This work is in the public domain in the United States because it was published in 1892, before the cutoff of January 1, 1929.
The longest-living author of this work died in 1924, so this work is in the public domain in countries and areas where the copyright term is the author's life plus 99 years or less. This work may be in the public domain in countries and areas with longer native copyright terms that apply the rule of the shorter term to foreign works.
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse