6. The Land of Positive Knowledge

Religion and positive science. – Light-fearingness of unbelief. – Confession of faith from scholars. – Newly-minted theories. – “Religion of the future.”

Both the fact of religion’s very existence and its relationship to positive science can best be observed where both manifest themselves freely, without any artificial support, and solely from internal motives conditioned by internal necessity. Here it will be impossible to get away with such arguments of unbelief as that religion exists only because it is supported by the state, and that positive science does not take the place of religion only because it is oppressed by the state. In America both religion and positive science are completely free, develop according to their own laws, and establish their mutual relationships completely freely, without any external mediation. And what do we see? In the previous essay I noted several passing facts of the energy of religious feeling in America; now I will note several such facts characterizing the relationship of positive knowledge to religion.

America is truly the promised land of positive knowledge. No people can rival Americans in the wealth and spread of this knowledge. All sorts of technical and natural science schools play the most important role in popular education here, and almost the entire population passes through them. Every farmer here is at the same time a technician, he works with machines. Highest positive knowledge—mathematics, astronomy, medicine, etc.—has its most famous representatives here. In a word, positive science has found the most fertile soil in America and luxuriantly spreads through and over it. From the point of view that positive science should take the place of religion for “grown” humanity, one would suppose that America long ago would have relegated religion with all its churches and hierarchies to the archive of eternity, and thanks to its development it long ago should have been worshiping only the idols of the “new faith,” as Strauss called it, and the “old faith” somewhere in dark corners is living out its last days. In reality, all is quite the opposite. If religion nowhere has such energy and such variety of manifestations as in America, then, on the contrary, unbelief hardly anywhere on the entire earth is distinguished by greater modesty and lack of pretension than precisely in this country of positive knowledge. Unbelief here as if fears the light and hides from curious eyes. Its manifestation is hard to find. One of the best indicators of it is, of course, the book market. In Germany, that classical land of unbelief, at the present time in bookstores behind mirror glass so dazzle various treatises on “religions of the future,” on “the self-dissolution of Christianity,” on the “new symbol of faith,” etc. Clearly, the demand for them is great, and the supply from generous suppliers corresponds. Quite the opposite here. On display here are classical works of favorite writers, Bibles, treatises on theological, historical, and positive knowledge, and the newest works of fiction. I was so interested in this fact that I made it a point to examine a good dozen of the best stores to find some of the outstanding works of unbelief. The effort was in vain. Only in one store of imported books did I find behind the glass window the last work of Renan, where it stood proudly beside the latest novel by Emile Zola. But even in this last refuge the brisk novelist completely overshadowed the unbelieving academic: the novel was displayed in a whole dozen copies and in two languages, while Renan’s offspring appeared only in one copy and only in its native language. The fact is not grand, but very eloquent.

If one turns to the living representatives of positive knowledge, they will speak in an even more eloquent language. The first-rate astronomer Dr. Proctor not only does not mock the various astronomical data of the Bible, as the old-fashioned “positivists” do, but constantly publishes articles aimed at scientific explanation of them, with a clear apologetic intent. In one of the holiday issues of the “Herald” he printed a lengthy article on the “star in the east” that guided the eastern wise men, and argued for the real appearance of this star. One of the best naturalists, namely Professor Gray, at the onset of the Lenten season gave a series of lectures on “religion and science” in a reconciliatory and apologetic spirit. The best geologist Dawson published a book titled “The Bible and Nature,” in which he argued for the truth of the first chapter of the Bible. Finally, one of the first-rate mathematicians, Dr. Pierce, also gave lectures on the relation of science to religion, and in mathematics found proofs of the existence of God. But that is not all. Here religiousness is even boasted of by doctors, these, so to speak, professional materialists. Walking once along the main New York street Broadway, I received among a mass of various announcements a fairly bulky pamphlet from a doctor, in which he defined his specialty, described the diseases within its scope, and displayed his own, newly invented means of fighting them. The pamphlet concluded with an eloquent article on the happiness of a healthy person and the bitter fate of the sick person with a final appeal that whoever wants to be happy should go to this doctor, the bestower of health and happiness. This article contained many references to various authorities with extracts from them. Upon reviewing them, I was astonished to find that some of these extracts were taken from the best New York preachers, with their names indicated. A doctor in his advertisement referring to preachers – well, what you will, a unique phenomenon! After all this, it is quite understandable that the fact that ten years ago when Büchner came here, who had made such a stir in Europe in his time with his “Force and Matter” and gave a series of brilliant materialistic lectures, he met a completely cold reception from the American public.

The facts presented above may seem like a new discovery to many Russian readers, because American science, even in its best representatives, is little known in Russia. Some, however, will read these lines with perplexity and ask: “But what about Draper?” Yes, only on this stronghold can one rely. By some strange chance, this American professor was especially fortunate here. His thin works among us were constantly welcomed and translated with greater enthusiasm than in other countries. If it were not offensive to the Russian mind, one could explain this reason by the absence in it of taste for anything more serious. Draper, as a learned medical specialist, is celebrated here and considered one of the best professors! But it is not his learned works that are translated and distributed among us; rather those works of his leisure, which have no relation to his specialty and in whose subject he is therefore just as competent as, according to Krylov’s fable, a cobbler is in baking pies. His last work: “The Conflict between Religion and Science,” translated into Russian as “The Conflict between Catholicism and Science,” had considerable success in America. In five years it went through eight editions. But this is solely explained by the fact that this work by its nature is a political pamphlet directed against Roman Catholicism, which spreads more widely with each passing year in America and inspires concern among politicians about the future fate of the republic. Any resistance to the invasion of Papacy is therefore desired and welcomed with enthusiasm here; all the more so if it comes from science. Thus for Americans the subject of this book is quite practical, vital, and political, and its success is conditioned by political causes. In Russia, in the absence of these causes, its appearance can be explained only by what has been said above. Nevertheless, despite the predominance of the political element over the religious in this book, its success can be called significant only from a Russian perspective. In American terms, it is actually a weak success, and far cannot compare with the success of, for example, Farrar’s recent book on the apostle Paul. Draper’s book in five years had eight editions, while Farrar’s book in five months went through four editions on American soil. The proportion is far from in Draper’s favor.

The newly invented scientific theories, which, as is known, are eagerly consumed by empty-minded stomachs here, do not enjoy such hospitality in America and are constantly pursued by satire. In one of the best New York circuses-museums (both at once) among all manner of entertaining rarities, I encountered an interesting group of mechanical musician monkeys, who, by the motion of a hidden mechanism, splendidly performed various musical pieces – on violins, trumpets, drums, and so forth. Above them a golden inscription read: “Darwin’s Company of Men.” In the most widespread humorous journal (The Puck) in one of the recent issues there was published a hilarious poem celebrating the theory of spontaneous generation and gradual development. The poem presents an entire choir of learned naturalists. One of them enthusiastically recites these theories, concluding each verse with the words: “So, gentlemen, it all turned out by itself.” The choir of naturalists picks up this verse and sings loudly with spirited stamping:

The choir of scholars sings loudly –

Everything happened all by itself.

The satirical attitude toward newly invented theories manifests itself not only in publications that are satirical by profession, but also in ordinary newspaper print. In one of the Sunday issues of the best American newspaper “N. Y. Times” there appeared an article interesting in this regard, titled: “The Religion of the Future.” The article belongs to the so-called “editorial” publications and thus expresses not a private view but the view of the entire publication. A certain Stephen, in one of the monthly journals, published an article in which he argues that Christianity, sooner or later, will outlive its time, cease to satisfy sensitive people; a new religion will arise in its place, based on the great truths of positive science. The examination of this opinion is the subject of the newspaper article mentioned above. Here is what was said in it, among other things:

“Although Stephen is confident that the new religion will agree with scientific truths and discover in them sources for pious reflection, he does not define this religion precisely and in detail. However, this is not at all difficult, and we will undertake the task of sketching the creed and distinctive features of this positive religion of the future. This religion, of course, will not recognize revelation, and consequently, not the truths connected with it concerning the existence of a personal God, the immortality of the soul. If there is no immortality, then naturally there is no reward or punishment after death; consequently there is no distinction between sinfulness and righteousness, and the rule of life can be only advantage. The new creed will consist of three articles: 1) no future life; 2) advantage is the only rule of life, and 3) perhaps there is, and perhaps there is not, a personal God. By its simplicity the new creed is much shorter than the old one and leaves no room for tedious theological speculations.”

“The new religion, of course, will not need either churches or priests, and the entire worship will consist only in that poets will compose odes celebrating the Great, perhaps existing and perhaps not existing, First Cause. But it will, however, contain truths to the contemplation of which people will resort both in joy and in sorrow. These truths will, of course, be positively scientific, and people will be comforted in sorrow by them and strengthened in weakness. A criminal approaching the gallows will prepare himself for death by contemplating the great and glorious truth of the binomial theorem. A priest, of course, will no longer accompany him; instead, some learned philanthropist will come and read him comforting excerpts from algebra and smooth his path to the kingdom of non-being with a skillful exposition of Pythagoras’s theorem. This will influence the criminal so beneficially that he will mount the scaffold with truly scientific calm. When a person is subjected to some dangerous temptation and cannot resist it, he need only retire to his study and engage a little in reflection on the squaring of the circle; this will so strengthen him that he can pass fearlessly through the fiery furnace of all temptations. Such reflection will be exceedingly useful also in sorrow. For example, a man’s dearly loved wife dies. He knows that he will never see her again and that instead of awaiting him in the future world, she will decompose into her chemical elements. In such circumstances, he, having returned from scientific funerals, of course, retires so as to find comfort in his religion. He reflects on the elements of the orbit of a new comet, or concentrates his heartfelt feelings on the truth that the force of attraction is inversely proportional to the square of the distance. This will soon comfort and strengthen him, and he will leave his confinement with peace in his soul. – The new morality will also differ from the Christian. The rejection of the theory that there exists some sin in the Christian sense of the word, and the adoption of the teaching that success is the only rule of life, will lead to results, at the sight of which one should not want to live in such a society where Christian prejudices still exist. The people of the future will undoubtedly discourse on morality as eloquently as the Stoic philosophers spoke of it; but if they find it advantageous to lease their wives to their neighbor, or convenient to end their own lives, then science can raise no objection to this, and much less dissuade them.”

“After all this it is clear that the new religion will be far superior to Christianity, and we should strive in every way for its speedy introduction and dissemination. Ignorant people and weak women, surely, will long still hold to Christianity, but the superiority of the new religion, with its scientific comfort and great promise of eternal death, is so evident to all thinking people, that they will undoubtedly accept the new faith with joy.”

Here is one of many examples of how the free American press relates to dreamy theories about various scientific religions. This calm but deadly sarcasm is more formidable to such theories than lengthy refutations of them: it passes a death sentence on them, and they disappear without a trace into the darkness of oblivion.