heretics-第4部分
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
in the task； so obviously ultimately hopeless； of using science
to promote morality。
I do not wish the reader to confuse me for a moment with those vague
persons who imagine that Ibsen is what they call a pessimist。
There are plenty of wholesome people in Ibsen； plenty of
good people； plenty of happy people； plenty of examples of men
acting wisely and things ending well。 That is not my meaning。
My meaning is that Ibsen has throughout； and does not disguise；
a certain vagueness and a changing attitude as well as a doubting
attitude towards what is really wisdom and virtue in this life
a vagueness which contrasts very remarkably with the decisiveness
with which he pounces on something which he perceives to be a root
of evil； some convention； some deception； some ignorance。
We know that the hero of GHOSTS is mad； and we know why he is mad。
We do also know that Dr。 Stockman is sane； but we do not know
why he is sane。 Ibsen does not profess to know how virtue
and happiness are brought about； in the sense that he professes
to know how our modern sexual tragedies are brought about。
Falsehood works ruin in THE PILLARS OF SOCIETY； but truth works equal
ruin in THE WILD DUCK。 There are no cardinal virtues of Ibsenism。
There is no ideal man of Ibsen。 All this is not only admitted；
but vaunted in the most valuable and thoughtful of all the eulogies
upon Ibsen； Mr。 Bernard Shaw's QUINTESSENCE OF IBSENISM。
Mr。 Shaw sums up Ibsen's teaching in the phrase； 〃The golden
rule is that there is no golden rule。〃 In his eyes this
absence of an enduring and positive ideal； this absence
of a permanent key to virtue； is the one great Ibsen merit。
I am not discussing now with any fullness whether this is so or not。
All I venture to point out； with an increased firmness；
is that this omission； good or bad； does leave us face to face
with the problem of a human consciousness filled with very
definite images of evil； and with no definite image of good。
To us light must be henceforward the dark thingthe thing of which
we cannot speak。 To us； as to Milton's devils in Pandemonium；
it is darkness that is visible。 The human race； according to religion；
fell once； and in falling gained knowledge of good and of evil。
Now we have fallen a second time； and only the knowledge of evil
remains to us。
A great silent collapse； an enormous unspoken disappointment；
has in our time fallen on our Northern civilization。 All previous
ages have sweated and been crucified in an attempt to realize
what is really the right life； what was really the good man。
A definite part of the modern world has come beyond question
to the conclusion that there is no answer to these questions；
that the most that we can do is to set up a few notice…boards
at places of obvious danger； to warn men； for instance；
against drinking themselves to death； or ignoring the mere
existence of their neighbours。 Ibsen is the first to return
from the baffled hunt to bring us the tidings of great failure。
Every one of the popular modern phrases and ideals is
a dodge in order to shirk the problem of what is good。
We are fond of talking about 〃liberty〃； that； as we talk of it；
is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good。 We are fond of talking
about 〃progress〃； that is a dodge to avoid discussing what is good。
We are fond of talking about 〃education〃； that is a dodge
to avoid discussing what is good。 The modern man says； 〃Let us
leave all these arbitrary standards and embrace liberty。〃
This is； logically rendered； 〃Let us not decide what is good；
but let it be considered good not to decide it。〃 He says；
〃Away with your old moral formulae； I am for progress。〃
This； logically stated； means； 〃Let us not settle what is good；
but let us settle whether we are getting more of it。〃
He says； 〃Neither in religion nor morality； my friend； lie the hopes
of the race； but in education。〃 This； clearly expressed；
means； 〃We cannot decide what is good； but let us give it
to our children。〃
Mr。 H。G。 Wells； that exceedingly clear…sighted man； has pointed out in a
recent work that this has happened in connection with economic questions。
The old economists； he says； made generalizations； and they were
（in Mr。 Wells's view） mostly wrong。 But the new economists； he says；
seem to have lost the power of making any generalizations at all。
And they cover this incapacity with a general claim to be； in specific cases；
regarded as 〃experts〃； a claim 〃proper enough in a hairdresser or a
fashionable physician； but indecent in a philosopher or a man of science。〃
But in spite of the refreshing rationality with which Mr。 Wells has
indicated this； it must also be said that he himself has fallen
into the same enormous modern error。 In the opening pages of that
excellent book MANKIND IN THE MAKING； he dismisses the ideals of art；
religion； abstract morality； and the rest； and says that he is going
to consider men in their chief function； the function of parenthood。
He is going to discuss life as a 〃tissue of births。〃 He is not going
to ask what will produce satisfactory saints or satisfactory heroes；
but what will produce satisfactory fathers and mothers。 The whole is set
forward so sensibly that it is a few moments at least before the reader
realises that it is another example of unconscious shirking。 What is the good
of begetting a man until we have settled what is the good of being a man？
You are merely handing on to him a problem you dare not settle yourself。
It is as if a man were asked； 〃What is the use of a hammer？〃 and answered；
〃To make hammers〃； and when asked； 〃And of those hammers； what is
the use？〃 answered； 〃To make hammers again〃。 Just as such a man would
be perpetually putting off the question of the ultimate use of carpentry；
so Mr。 Wells and all the rest of us are by these phrases successfully
putting off the question of the ultimate value of the human life。
The case of the general talk of 〃progress〃 is； indeed；
an extreme one。 As enunciated today； 〃progress〃 is simply
a comparative of which we have not settled the superlative。
We meet every ideal of religion； patriotism； beauty； or brute
pleasure with the alternative ideal of progressthat is to say；
we meet every proposal of getting something that we know about；
with an alternative proposal of getting a great deal more of nobody
knows what。 Progress； properly understood； has； indeed； a most
dignified and legitimate meaning。 But as used in opposition
to precise moral ideals； it is ludicrous。 So far from it being
the truth that the ideal of progress is to be set against that
of ethical or religious finality； the reverse is the truth。
Nobody has any business to use the word 〃progress〃 unless
he has a definite creed and a cast…iron code of morals。
Nobody can be progressive without being doctrinal； I might almost
say that nobody can be progressive without being infallible
at any rate； without believing in some infallibility。
For progress by its very name indicates a direction；
and the moment we are in the least doubtful about the direction；
we become in the same degree doubtful about the progress。
Never perhaps since the beginning of the world has there been
an age that had less right to use the word 〃progress〃 than we。
In the Catholic twelfth century； in the philosophic eighteenth
century； the direction may have been a good or a bad one；
men may have differed more or less about how far they went； and in
what direction； but about the direction they did in the main agree；
and consequently they had the genuine sensation of progress。
But it is precisely about the direction that we disagree。
Whether the future excellence lies in more law or less law；
in more liberty or less liberty； whether property will be finally
concentrated or finally cut up； whether sexual passion will reach
its sanest in an almost virgin intellectualism or in a full
animal freedom； whether we should love everybody with Tolstoy；
or spare nobody with Nietzsche；these are the things about which we
are actually fighting most。 It is not merely true that the age
which has settled least what is progress is this 〃progressive〃 age。
It is； moreover； true that the people who have settled least
what is progress are the most 〃progressive〃 people in it。
The ordinary mass； the men who have never troubled about progress；
might be trusted perhaps to progress。 The particular individuals
who talk about progress would certainly fly to the four
winds of heaven when the pistol…shot started the race。
I do not； therefore； say that the word 〃progress〃 is unmeaning； I say
it is unmeaning without the previous definition of a moral doctrine；
and that it can only be applied to groups of persons who hold
that doctrine in common。 Progress is not an illegitimate word；
but it is logically evident that it is illegitimate for us。
It is a sacred word； a word which could only rightly be used
by rigid believers and in the ages of faith。
III。 On Mr。 Rudyard Kipling and Making the World Small
There is no such thing on earth as an uninteresting subject；
the only thing that can exist is an uninterested person。
Nothing is more keenly required than a defence of bores。
When Byron divided humanity into the bores and bored； he omitted
to notice that the higher qu
