hume - natural-730

hume - natural-730, książki, Philosphy

[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
THE NATURAL HISTORY OF RELIGIONDavid Hume17575/1/95Copyright 1995, James Fieser (jfieser@utm.edu). See end note fordetails on copyright and editing conventions. This is a workingdraft; please report errors.[1]Editor's Note: Hume's <Natural History of Religion> first appearedin 1757 in a collection of essays titled <Four Dissertations>. Thework may be topically divided into three parts. The first part(sections 1 and 4) argues that polytheism, and not monotheism, wasthe original religion of primitive humans. Monotheism was only alater development. The second part (sections 2-3, 5-8) establishesthe psychological principles which give rise to religious belief.His thesis is that natural instincts such as fear are the true causeof popular religious belief, and not rational argument. The thirdpart of this work (sections 9-15) compares various aspects ofpolytheism with monotheism showing that one is no more superior thanthe other. Both contain points of absurdity. From this he concludesthat we should suspend belief on the entire subject. The <NaturalHistory of Religion> was published seven additional times duringHume's life, each edition incorporating minor variations. Theposthumous 1777 edition is followed here, which includes Hume'sfinal alterations. Hume's bibliographical references to Greek andLatin classics have been expanded and clarified without brackets.Bibliographical references have not been expanded for thoseseventeenth and eighteenth-century works which have no moderneditions. For more detailed introductory comments and annotations tothis text, see <The Natural History of Religion>, (New York:MacMillan, 1992).* * * *THE NATURAL HISTORY OF RELIGIONINTRODUCTIONAs every enquiry, which regards religion, is of the utmostimportance, there are two questions in particular, which challengeour attention, to wit, that concerning its foundation in reason, andthat concerning its origin in human nature. Happily, the firstquestion, which is the most important, admits of the most obvious,at least, the clearest solution. The whole frame of nature bespeaksan intelligent author; and no rational enquirer can, after seriousreflection, suspend his belief a moment with regard to the primaryprinciples of genuine Theism and Religion. But the other question,concerning the origin of religion in human nature, is exposed tosome more difficulty. The belief of invisible, intelligent power hasbeen very generally diffused over the human race, in all places andin all ages; but it has neither perhaps been so universal as toadmit of no exception, nor has it been, in any degree, uniform inthe ideas, which it has suggested. Some nations have beendiscovered, who entertained no sentiments of Religion, if travellersand historians may be credited; and no two nations, and scarce anytwo men, have ever agreed precisely in the same sentiments. It wouldappear, therefore, that this preconception springs not from anoriginal instinct or primary impression of nature, such as givesrise to self-love, affection between the sexes, love of progeny,gratitude, resentment; since every instinct of this kind has beenfound absolutely universal in all nations and ages, and has always aprecise determinate object, which it inflexibly pursues. The firstreligious principles must be secondary; such as may easily beperverted by various accidents and causes, and whose operation too,in some cases, may, by an extraordinary concurrence ofcircumstances, be altogether prevented. What those principles are,which give rise to the original belief, and what those accidents andcauses are, which direct its operation, is the subject of ourpresent enquiry.S/ECT\. I. <That Polytheism was the primary Religion of Men>.It appears to me, that, if we consider the improvement of humansociety, from rude beginnings to a state of greater perfection,polytheism or idolatry was, and necessarily must have been, thefirst and most ancient religion of mankind. This opinion I shallendeavour to confirm by the following arguments.It is a matter of fact incontestable, that about 1700 years agoall mankind were polytheists. The doubtful and sceptical principlesof a few philosophers, or the theism, and that too not entirelypure, of one or two nations, form no objection worth regarding.Behold then the clear testimony of history. The farther we mount upinto antiquity, the more do we find mankind plunged into polytheism.No marks, no symptoms of any more perfect religion. The most ancientrecords of human race still present us with that system as thepopular and established creed. The north, the south, the east, thewest, give their unanimous testimony to the same fact. What can beopposed to so full an evidence?As far as writing or history reaches, mankind, in ancienttimes, appear universally to have been polytheists. Shall we assert,that, in more ancient times, before the knowledge of letters, or thediscovery of any art or science, men entertained the principles ofpure theism? That is, while they were ignorant and barbarous, theydiscovered truth: But fell into error, as soon as they acquiredlearning and politeness.But in this assertion you not only contradict all appearance ofprobability, but also our present experience concerning theprinciples and opinions of barbarous nations. The savage tribes ofA/MERICA\, A/FRICA\, and A/SIA\ are all idolaters. Not a singleexception to this rule. Insomuch, that, were a traveller totransport himself into any unknown region; if he found inhabitantscultivated with arts and science, though even upon that suppositionthere are odds against their being theists, yet could he not safely,till farther inquiry, pronounce any thing on that head: But if hefound them ignorant and barbarous, he might beforehand declare themidolaters; and there scarcely is a possibility of his beingmistaken.It seems certain, that, according to the natural progress ofhuman thought, the ignorant multitude must first entertain somegroveling and familiar notion of superior powers, before theystretch their conception to that perfect Being, who bestowed orderon the whole frame of nature. We may as reasonably imagine, that meninhabited palaces before huts and cottages, or studied geometrybefore agriculture; as assert that the Deity appeared to them a purespirit, omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent, before he wasapprehended to be a powerful, though limited being, with humanpassions and appetites, limbs and organs. The mind rises gradually,from inferior to superior: By abstracting from what is imperfect, itforms an idea of perfection: And slowly distinguishing the noblerparts of its own frame from the grosser, it learns to transfer onlythe former, much elevated and refined, to its divinity. Nothingcould disturb this natural progress of thought, but some obvious andinvincible argument, which might immediately lead the mind into thepure principles of theism, and make it overleap, at one bound, thevast interval which is interposed between the human and the divinenature. But though I allow, that the order and frame of theuniverse, when accurately examined, affords such an argument; yet Ican never think, that this consideration could have an influence onmankind, when they formed their first rude notions of religion.The causes of such objects, as are quite familiar to us, neverstrike our attention or curiosity; and however extraordinary orsurprising these objects in themselves, they are passed over, by theraw and ignorant multitude, without much examination or enquiry.A/DAM\, rising at once, in paradise, and in the full perfection ofhis faculties, would naturally, as represented by M/ILTON\, beastonished at the glorious appearances of nature, the heavens, theair, the earth, his own organs and members; and would be led to ask,whence this wonderful scene arose. But a barbarous, necessitousanimal (such as a man is on the first origin of society), pressed bysuch numerous wants and passions, has no leisure to admire theregular face of nature, or make enquiries concerning the cause ofthose objects, to which from his infancy he has been graduallyaccustomed. On the contrary, the more regular and uniform, that is,the more perfect nature appears, the more is he familiarized to it,and the less inclined to scrutinize and examine it. A monstrousbirth excites his curiosity, and is deemed a prodigy. It alarms himfrom its novelty; and immediately sets him a trembling, andsacrificing, and praying. But an animal, compleat in all its limbsand organs, is to him an ordinary spectacle, and produces noreligious opinion or affection. Ask him, whence that animal arose;he will tell you, from the copulation of its parents. And these,whence? From the copulation of theirs. A few removes satisfy hiscuriosity, and set the objects at such a distance, that he entirelyloses sight of them. Imagine not, that he will so much as start thequestion, whence the first animal; much less, whence the w... [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]