Page:Genesis I-II- (IA genesisiii00grot).pdf/91

conceived it. From one side the human mind has arrived at monotheist through a perpetual correction of its conceptions of Nature and the way in which Nature works. On the other side, the monotheistic conception has arisen from an advance in the study of humanity and moral self-education. The Semitic races have reached monotheism primarily by the latter, the Aryan by the former route. Polytheism is gradually extirpated from the region lying in Nature outside of mankind and from the domain of conduct and the play of the sensual faculties. But the workings of the moral and intellectual forces are not kept distinct in any one resultant belief. All that we can say is, that from the temper and tone of the religion, we may decide upon the prevailing direction which has called it forth. But equally behind both lies the theistic and anthropomorphic conception. And this conception has been useful to mankind in acquiring knowledge, both moral and intellectual. It cannot be expected that it should be thrown aside, so long as we obtain individual and collective benefit from its use. Certainly in the future it may be laid away as useless speculation, but this can only be when we can clearly obtain no further benefit from it, and this time is far away.

On the other hand animism and materialism, the two opposing philosophies, stand on a somewhat different footing. They are not absolutely coincident with Theism and Atheism. Subjective Theism may be entertained while the unity of Nature and the finality of form and structure under each change be completely accepted. There can be no reasonable doubt that modern spiritualism is a reversion to a low type of animism. The difference between orthodox animism and spiritualism is one of degree, and lies in the greater credulity underlying the latter belief. Logically speaking, the evidence in favor of materialism is by far the strongest, and with this philosophy in full sway, and an abandonment of the whole question between