The Dominion. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1912. WONDER AND MYSTERY.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1629, 21 December 1912, Page 6

The Dominion. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1912. WONDER AND MYSTERY.

We live in a world of wonder, and are surrounded by mysteries which become the more mysterious the more they are thought about. In this matter religion can claim no monopoly, for Professor Huxley did not hesitate to declare that the mysteries of science were even greater than those of theology, and the progress of scientific investigation since the days j of 'Huxley has steadily emphasised ' the fact that the human intellect is unable to solve the . fundamental problems of the universe. Religion, therefore, need not be ashamed to 'admit'that it is rooted in wonder and mystery, and it is not surprising that the Christian Church should describe the central fact of the Christmas festival as the "mystery" of the Incarnation, which finds its classic statement in the well-known words of the Christmas Gospel "the Word"—that is the Divine Reason or Wisdom—"was made flesh and dwelt among us" in the Person of Christ. This is not the place to discuss the foundations in reason,' and history on which this doctrine rests. It is sufficient for the purposes of this article to state that a belief, religious or scientific, need not be any the less true merely- because the intellect cannot fully comprehend it. There are, however, some people who cannot see any difference between mystery and superstition, for one of the most persistent superstitions of modorn times consists in the foolish belief that science has found a complete explanation for everything. Of course scientists know how untrue this, idea is, but it is kept alive by a section of camp followers who too often mistake theory for fact, and speak with the loud assurance of ignorance about the very matters concerning which the greatest authorities are most rcticent and uncertain. Only a few months ago some people were confidently proclaiming that Professor Schaefer had laid bare the inner secrot of life, but those who could spoak with first-hand knowledge entertained no such delusion. It is true that some men of science, by a brilliant exercise of the imagination, are able to foresee great possibilities in this direction, but one of the most distinguished of them, in the course of a recent and memorable debate, concluded a masterly analysis of tho position with theso significant words: , Of course, all this is assuming tho occurrences of. processes of which wo know 'nothing whatever, Our attitude must be ono of expectancy nml of hop® for more light, nnd wo must content ourselves by expressing nothing of greater vahio than a pious belief. (Profossor Minchin.) Another eminent authority (ProFEBROit Haktoo) iidmittod that in tho jarly. 'seventies at Cambridge tixoy

thought they were going to inako protoid matter in a score of yearn, and protoplasm by the end of tho century; but they hud not done it. Indeed, further study of the cell nindo them feel that they were further away from it than ever. If tho secret of the cell defies tho human intellect, how can it hope to fully explain tho starry heavens above and the moral law within—tho two great facts which impressed the mind of Immanuel Kant, the great German philosopher, more deeply than anything else. But tho man-in-thc-street, generally speaking, does not believe in mystery, a,nd he is apt to regard wonder as a sign of ignorance. Yet the one thing above all others that ho thinks ho is certain about—the material world around him —is one of the deepest mysteries of all. What is matter? No one can tell. It defies explanation. As a modern writer puts it, "paradoxical as it may sound, matter is something which nobody has ever seen, touched, or handled. Thoughts and feelings are the only things wo really know; all else is doubtful inference." Me. Balfour, taking colour as an example, illustrates this point as follows.:—

Colour is not a property of tho thing Eeen: it is a sensation produced in us by that thing. The thing itself consists of uncoloured particles, which become visiblo solely in consequence of their power of producing or reflecting ethereal undulations. Tho degrees of brightness and the qualities of colour perceived in the thing, and in virtue of which alone any visual, perception of the- thing is possible, are, therefore, according to optics, no part of its reality, but are mero feelings produced in the mind of the percipient. . . . What science tells us of the colour element in our visual perceptions, namely,' that it is merely a feeling or sensation, is true of every element in every perception. We are directly cognisant of nothing but mental states: all else is a matter of inference; a hypothetical machinery devised for no other purpose than to account for tho existence of tho only realities of which we have first-hand knowledge—namely, the mental states themselves.

The. nature of the external "thing in itself," which gives rise to these mental sensations is an impenetrable mystery. Niagara makes no sound unless there is a sentient mind to hear it, and apart from _mi'nd there is no colour "out there" in the rainbow, no green in the grass, and no red in the poppy, linder the analysis of scientific thought, matter, as the average man thinks he knows it, seems to dissolve "like the baseless fabric of a vision and leave not a wrack behind."' A leading authority states .that the process reminds him of the Cheshire cat of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. The cat "vanished quite slowly beginning with the end of the tail and ending with the grin, which remained some time after the rest of it had gone." Alice, could imagine a cat without a grin, but a grin without a cat was the most curious thing she ever saw. So matter, after seiencc and philosophy have dealt with it, fades away into "a grin without a cat." In the light of these facts the cOcksureness of crudo common-sense materialism oollapses - like a pricked bubble. In addition to the insoluble problems concerning the nature of matter, almost every department of science ' is permeated _by mystery. All that is involved in the simple act of lifting one's hand to one's head is more than anyone can fully understand. AYe are'-.told that the order of nature is a network of mechanism. Perhaps but this lictwork itself wants a lot of explaining, and as Sir Ray Lankester says, "no sane man has ever pretended since science became a definite body of doctrine that we know, or can ever hope to know, or conceive of the possibility of knowing, whence this mechanism has tome, why it is here, whither it is going." If the external world is cramped with mystery, when we look within ourselves the wonder increases. _ Personality prpvides a problem which baffles explanation, and the new science of psychology is probably raising more problems than it is solving. It has revealed deep beneath deep; and the supreme Personality of the Pounder of Christianity, which has stood out as a challenge to all ages, carries us to the very heart of religion. "What manner of Man is this.' 7 the world still asks. Tho problem has fascinated yet baffled .the keenest intellects of ancient and modern times, and no one pretends that a final solution is in sight. Thus we find that religion,liko science, ends up in mystery, and in a world that could be fully comprehended by the human mind it is probable that religion could not live. It could not sail, writes Professor Otto, of Gottingen, on such shallow waters or breathe such thin air, for one of its chief characteristics is a "sense of awe before the marvellous and mysterious, before the depth and the hidden nature of all things and all being, before unspeakable mysteries over which. we hover and abysmal depths over which we are borne." Keligion, then, need not be ashamed of its mysteries, and true science, humbled by its own 'involved problems, is laying aside the haughty confidence which in former days it was wont to assume. So religion and science might well combine in a great art of faith resting on the conviction that underneath the riddle of existence their lies meaning and purpose. Tho known may be infinitesimal compared with the unknown, but we know enough, when we allow the intuitions of the heart to supplement the conclusions of the intellect, to warrant a belief in a reasonable universe. Notwithstanding our failure to pierce the clouds of mystery which surround us, tho mind refuses to let go tho belief that we live in a cosmos, not a chaos, and that (to quote Professor Pringle-Pattison) the _ power at work in the universe will not_ put us to perpetual confusion. This is an ultimate trust which iB not capable of demonstration, though progressively verified and by every step we take in the intellectual oonquest of the world,"