THE JUSTIFICATION OF THE GOOD.*
VLADIMIR Sotov-loa's celebrated book, The Justification of the Good, written at the end of the last century, is now translated. into English for the find time. Mrs. Duddington, who has done it, is indeed to be congratulated. The reader who did not know the facts could not suspect that he was not reading the book in the language in which it was written. More than that, he could not fail to be struck by the precision and clarity of the English version. It is somewhat difficult as a rule for a plain man to understand a treatise on moral philosophy, but he who runs may read the work before us, which hardly contains a technical phrase or an involved sentence. An average man who will pay attention can follow every argument herein set down from first to last. "The subject-matter of moral philo- sophy," declares our author, "is the idea of the good ; the purpose of this philosophioal inquiry is to make clear the content that reason, under the influence of experience, pate into this idea." Solovyof s object in writing is "to show the good as truth and righteousness." His purpose is moral and religious. He is a convinced Christian with a strong orthodox bias, but the most captious sceptic will not deny the originality of his treat- ment of his subject or his power of enthralling his reader. There exists, he has convinced himself, an ultimate basis of universal human morality, and upon it all that is of bnportance in ethics must rest. Ile describes this threefold foundation as "shame," "pity," and 'reverence." "I am ashamed, therefore I exist, as a man," he misquotes with singular aptitude. So far as a man is modest and pitiful he fulfils his moral duty to himself and his neighbour. Man is ashamed of his animal nature. "The eternal life of the genus based upon the eternal death of individual entities is shameful and unsatisfactory to man, who both wants, and feels it his duty, to possess eternal life, and not merely to be its instrument." Upon this question of shame our author perhaps refines his point too much. For instance, he derives from "shame" every virtue which we think insepar- able from human dignity—magnanimity, generosity, and even certain high forms of courage. It is not shame which makes any animal brave ; but, he argues, how many men act with courage for fear of their own contempt ? He denies hotly the idea that morality is based upon social expediency. The State, he declares, is simply pity organized. "Justice is pity equally applied." The State enables men to make pity practical, make it extend to thousands instead of to tens, and such extended pity includes of course the restraint of the lawless. It must legally and forcibly limit all external exhibitions of evil will, he maintains, not only in the interests of the innocent public, but in the interests of criminals themselves. The third found- ation of morality—reverence--he describes as a voluntary submission to the "superhuman principle." All these things, he argues, can exist apart from any particular form of religion, though he seems to doubt whether they are often found apart from any religious feeling at all, while asserting that they may be. At any rate, he regards religion in some form or other as generally essential to man's well-being. He does not con- sider the existence of God a subject for argument, any more than he regards the freedom of the will. "The reality of God is not a deduction from religious experience but its immediate content—that which is experienoed."
Solovyof is not moved by the argument that some men have no religious experience. Some men are born blind,
• The JueGlItation of Me Good an Essay on Moral Phdomphy. By Vladimir Solovyof. Translated from the Russian by Netball. A. DoddIngton, London Constable. Ms. net.]
but that will never alter the conviction of the majority that there is a sun. As to exactly what the sun is, has been in the past a matter of opinion. Though men held false theories about it, they felt it shining, and it was still the same sim. The history of religion he constantly compares with the history of astronomy, believing that in Ohriatianity we find revealed a true principle upon which we may work towards the perfection of the world. To other great religious and ethical systems be gives immense value. His chapters upon Buddhism and Platonism are extraordinarily brilliant and fascinating. But what do Buddha and Plato offer to the world, when all is said ? They have given "empty bliss for the spirit- ually awake, and empty pain for the Spiritually asleep." Does not Buddha may that only "three things are worthy of belief," all else being deception—" (1) the spiritually-awakened man ; (2) the word of awakening; (3) the brotherhood of those who are awake" ? Christianity, on the other hand, not only holds before men a perfect character, immortal because sinless, and a vision of a perfect State, but sets them a teak, the perfecting of the individual and of the State. A Christian State implies, he thinks, a Christian Church, which he describes as organized piety as distinct from organized pity. A Christian State most set itself to "preserve the foundations of social life apart from which humanity could not exist, and to improve the conditions of its existence." Its ideal for its children should be no famine, no excessive labour, no sick uneared for, reparation for the injured, correction for the injurer. Christian States have erred terribly in the past. The Christian Church has erred terribly in the past. The sin of her persecutions is hard to forgive. All the same, it is only the pure cynic who looks upon the errors of either as in any way comparable with their achievements. Here is our author's conception of the ideal relation between Church and State :—
"The State recognizes the supreme spiritual authority of the universal Church, which indicates the general direction of the goodwill of mankind and the final purpose of its historical activity. The Church leaves to the State full power to bring lawful worldly interests into conformity with this supreme will and to harmonize political relations and actions with the require. ments of this supreme purpose. The Church must have no power of compulsion, and the power of compulsion exercised by the State must have nothing to do with the domain of religion."
We have here no doubt a Utopian picture, but, unlike so many such pictures, it contains no obvious impossibility, and makes a reasoned appeal not to an esoteric circle but to an immense crowd of religious and reasonable people.
Previous page
