William Atkinson - The Essential Works of William Walker Atkinson - 50+ Books in One Edition

Dr. Paul Carus, editor of The Monist , says: “The best evidence that the scientific spirit pervades the atmosphere of the present age can be seen in the influence which science exercises on religion. There it appears as Biblical Research (sometimes called Higher Criticism); in the study of the history of Christianity and of other faiths; and in a philosophical purification and deepening of the God-idea.”

The same writer characterizes the Monistic position by the following motto:

“No agnosticism but positive Science,

Not mysticism but clear thought,

Neither supernaturalism nor materialism.

But a unitary conception of the world;

Not dogma but Religion,

Not creed but faith.”

Passing from the field of theology and religion to that of metaphysics, we find changes equally revolutionary. From being considered the foggiest, most impractical, dreamiest form of speculative thought, we find metaphysics invading the field of the practical and workable. The new metaphysics, arising in response to the spirit of the age, is meeting the requirements of Pragmatism—the test question of which is: “What is it good for? How will it work? What can be done with it? Will it work out in everyday life?” Strange as it may appear to those familiar only with the old conception of metaphysics, the modern demand is for a new metaphysics—a system of metaphysics that may be used in everyday life, and that will be of “some good” to those who may master its principles. This tendency is deplored by those of the old school who hold that the subject of metaphysics must necessarily be entirely removed from that of the phenomenal world and the activities of life, but, be that as it may, it is unquestionably the fact that the trend of the latest metaphysical thought is in the direction of a practical metaphysics and away from the foggy speculations of the past. The material of the past, however, is being used in constructing the new metaphysics. No longer concerned with the abstractions regarding the probable nature of an Absolute which by reason of its very being must be without qualities, attributes or properties, the latter-day metaphysician is inquiring how the underlying something manifests through the individual, and how the individual may avail himself of the cosmic forces behind and in him. The many are asking how the One may be manifested through them. As crude and naive as may be some of these efforts, nevertheless, this is the metaphysical problem of to-day—this is the quality demanded of the new metaphysics.

Passing from the realm of metaphysics into that of philosophy, we find startling changes. The philosophy of to-day, instead of being merely an extension of metaphysical inquiry, has taken on quite a scientific spirit. The inductive method of reasoning has supplanted the deductive in philosophy—the “scientific method” is now the rule. No longer content with the attempt to explain the universe by an assumed principle, philosophy now begins with the universe and strives to work backward to its underlying principles. The “guesses” of the majority of the old philosophers are now regarded merely as the curiosities of philosophical thought. While many of the old thoughts appear in the new systems, they are used in connection with new methods of inquiry. Biology and psychology are blended into the philosophies of to-day—and philosophical theories must square with these branches of science in order to be accepted by thinkers. The old school philosopher evolved a theory of the universe from his own “inner consciousness” and then attempted to explain the universe by means of his theory. If the facts did not agree with or fit in with his theory, well, then “so much the worse for the facts.” The new school of philosophers, on the contrary, have made of philosophy a science; indeed, as Dr. Carus has claimed, philosophy is “the science of sciences.” This writer speaks as follows regarding the method of scientific inquiry demanded, and observed, in the work of the modern philosopher:

“Science is based upon observation and experience. It starts with describing the facts of our experience, and complements experience with experiment. It singles out the essential features of facts, and generalizes the result in formulas for application to future experience; partly in order to predict coming events; partly, to bring about desirable results. Generalized statements of facts are called truths, and our stock of truths, knowledge. There are always two factors needed for establishing scientific truth, indeed, for establishing any kind of knowledge; they are, first, sense experience, and, second, method. By method we mean the function of handling the material furnished by sense activity, viz., identifying samenesses and differences, comparing various phenomena, i. e., classifying and contrasting them; measuring and counting them; tracing the succession of cause and effect, and arranging the truths thus established into an harmonious whole.…The old philosophies are constructions of purely subjective significance, while agnosticism, tired of these vain efforts and lacking strength to furnish a better solution of the problem, claims that the main tasks of philosophy cannot be accomplished; but, if science exists, there ought to be also a philosophy of science, for there must be a reason for the reliability of knowledge.…We may confidently hope that the future which the present generation is preparing will be the age of science.…Here we have the test of progress. Progress is not, as Spencer says, ‘a passage from the homogeneous to a heterogeneous state,’ it is the realization of truth. Progress means the growth of soul, and growth of soul means growth of truth. The more clearly, correctly and completely truth is mirrored in a man, the higher he ranges in the scale of evolution.”

While modern philosophical thought covers a wide range of speculation and inquiry, and embraces within itself a great variety of conceptions and interpretations, nevertheless it may be safely asserted that it is in its essence Monistic. On all sides we see the disposition to attribute a “Oneness” to the things of the universe—a tendency toward resolving everything back to a one fundamental something. Monism is undoubtedly the prevailing conception of modern philosophical thought. The disputes still rage fiercely over the question of what that one something is, but it is the exception for any leading thinker to question the inherent oneness of things. We have boldly seized the underlying conceptions of the Vedanta, of the Greek philosophers, of Spinoza, and others, and now positively assert in the words of the Hindu thinkers of several thousand years back: “That which is , is One—men call it by many names.” All, from the most radical Idealist to the most crass Materialist, join in the refrain: “All is One, at the last.”

Professor Pringle-Pattison says of Monism:

“Monism is, in strictness, a name applicable to any system of thought which sees in the universe the manifestation or working of a single principle. Such a unity may be said to be at once the tacit pre-supposition and the goal of all philosophic effort, and in so far as a philosophy fails to harmonize the apparently independent and even conflicting facts of experience, as aspects or elements within a larger whole, it must be held to fall short of the necessary ideal of thought. Dualism, in an ultimate metaphysical reference, is a confession of the failure of philosophy to achieve its proper task; and this is the justification of those who consistently use the word as a term of reproach.”

The Monism of to-day includes such widely separated schools of thought as those who claim that all is a manifestation of the one principle of Spirit; those who advocate a Higher Pantheism in which all is held to be a manifestation of, and in, God; those who assert that there is but One, and that One is Matter; and those who, like Haeckel, may be considered as scientific Monists, and who hold that the One is substance, possessing the attributes of extension (matter), motion (energy), and conscious (mind). Thus to-day we witness the strange spectacle of the newest new, standing armed with the facts of modern science, biology, psychology, and physics—discarding the subjective philosophies of the intervening period, and looking directly into the eyes of the oldest old which found the conception of the One somewhere in that part of its mind which assures it of the existence of time, space, and causation. The new is ready to “start all over again” just where the old began, but this time basing its advance on scientific research and reasoning, instead of upon mere subjective speculation and theorizing, or “innate truths.”