Henry Sidgwick- Eye of the Universe
Page 126
such a designation as pragmatist. But the quest for certainty, the old
Apostolic soaring, had too strong a grip on him; if this was a shadow of
the Christian aspiration, then it is all the less surprising that he could
never fully reconcile himself to the loss of the grander project. It was in
his cycles of soaring and sinking that the shapes of things to come were
discernible.
Furthermore, despite his work with the ethical societies, Sidgwick had
still, to his mind, left a great deal to the mundane realm of contestable
calculation. As he explained to Bishop Creighton, in a letter of August ,
:
But I should like to say that the omission you note in my essay on Public Morality
is one of which I am quite conscious: and I entirely agreed with what you said
about it. The difficulty of weighing material gain against moral loss is one which
I was conscious of not being able to deal with in a manner that would satisfy or
edify the ‘plain man,’ for whom my little volume was supposed to be written. I
have no moral scales in which I can balance these disparate values: that is, when
anything like a delicate balance is required. Practically, I find that when my mind
comes to a clear decision on a particular problem of this class, it is not because I
can establish any sort of ‘ratio of exchange’ – so much material gain = so much
moral loss – but because one or other of the values compared, either the gain or the
loss, seems to me much more certain than the other in the particular case. (M )
P: IJD/GCV
c.xml
CY/Schultz
January ,
:
Henry Sidgwick: Eye of the Universe
In fact, the problem is even more pervasive. His admiration for
Symonds’s aesthetics points to many further dilemmas, poignantly ex-
pressed in “The Pursuit of Culture”:
Both art and morality have an ideal, and the aim in both cases is to apprehend
and exhibit the ideal in a reality that does not conform to or express it adequately; but the ideals are not the same, and it is just where they most nearly coincide – in
dealing with human life and character – that some conflict is apt to arise. Morality
aims at eradicating and abolishing evil, especially moral evil; whereas the aesthetic contemplation of life recognizes it as an element necessary to vivid and full interest.
The opposition attains its sharpest edge in modern realistic art and literature; but
it is by no means confined to the work of this school. Take, for example, the Paradise Lost of Milton – a writer as unlike a modern realist as possible. The old remark, that Satan is the real hero of Paradise Lost, is an epigrammatic exaggeration; but he is certainly quite indispensable to the interest of the poem; and the magnificent
inconsistency with which Milton has half humanized his devil shows that he felt
this. (PE )
Consequently, the more that we admire the poem aesthetically, “the
more satisfaction we must find in the existence of the devil, as an indis-
pensable element of the whole artistic construction; and this satisfaction
is liable to clash somewhat with our moral attitude towards evil.”
Needless to say, by “art” Sidgwick does not mean “the mere misuse of
technical gifts for the gratification of base appetites.” But even with art
“worthy of the name,” this form of conflict cannot be “altogether over-
come,” since its “root lies deep in the nature of things as we are compelled
to conceive it.” Thus, we have “an unsolved problem of philosophy, which
continually forces itself to the front in the development of the religious
consciousness.” For the “general man is convinced that the war with moral
evil is essential to that highest human life which is the highest thing we
know in the world of experience; and yet he is no less convinced that the
world with all its evil is somehow good, as the outcome and manifestation
of ideal goodness.” If the realm of art involves the latter, then it has a place
“along with our moral effort,” with the result that
we must endeavour to make the moods of aesthetic and ethical sentiment alternate,
if we cannot quite harmonize them; the delighted contemplation of our mingled
and varied world as beautiful in its mixtures and contrasts, though it cannot be
allowed to interfere with the moral struggle with evil, may be allowed to relieve
it, and give a transient repose from the conflict.
P: IJD/GCV
c.xml
CY/Schultz
January ,
:
Last Words?
And on the whole we must be content that science and art and morality are for
the most part working on the same side, in that struggle with our lowest nature
through which we “move upward, working out the beast.” Perhaps they will aid
each other best if we abstain from trying to drill them into perfect conformity of
movement, and allow them to fight independently in loose array. (PE –)
This might seem like just the type of “generous resolution” that
Sidgwick had found so objectionable in Mill’s work, but despite his yearn-
ing for some more exact determination of duty, much the same tolerance
can be found in the Methods, as shown in Chapter . At any rate, Sidgwick’s
ethics thus leaves considerable space for the lower Goethean personal point
of view, whether material or aesthetic, even suggesting that it might give
one a refreshing break from the weight of duty. The agenda was set for
Bloomsbury.
Of course, as already shown, in the practical realization of Sidgwick’s
vision everything seemed to ride on the sincerity of the inquirer and the
degree of civilization that he or she represented. And of course, as his
involvement with the Synthetic Society might suggest, Sidgwick had not
actually forsaken his hope of so long ago, expressed in his diary:
. Why should not God be willing to give us a few glimpses of the unseen world
which we all believe exists; . as to law of Nature, it may be that God governs
Spirits not according to rules similar to physical rules & that we can no more
expect to find out the law of these appearances than the law of the action of grace
in our own hearts. . as to cause, the appearance may be (besides ,) to work effects on the spirits of the seers which we cannot expect to know. (CWC)
The nineties had produced fresh evidence of “phenomena.” His toying
with the coherentist justification for theism must be read in light of his
continuing efforts at harmonizing duty and interest with the aid of the
“other world” – his “working philosophy” was, as always, entangled in
parapsychology, though Sidgwick was not quite ready to come out.
III. Dreams and Visions
We shall contemplate the relation of virtue to the happiness of the virtuous agent,
as we believe it actually to be in the present world, and not refer to any future
world in which we may hope for compensation for the ap
parent injustices of the
present. And in thus limiting ourselves to mundane motives we shall, I hope, keep
a middle path between optimism and pessimism. That is, we shall not profess to
P: IJD/GCV
c.xml
CY/Schultz
January ,
:
Henry Sidgwick: Eye of the Universe
prove that the apparent sacrifices of self-interest which duty imposes are never in
the long run real sacrifices; nor, on the other hand, shall we ignore or underrate
the noble and refined satisfaction which experience shows to attend the resolute
choice of virtue in spite of all such sacrifices –
“The stubborn thistles bursting
Into glossy purples, which outredden
All voluptuous garden-roses.”
It may, however, be said that it is not merely the function of Churches to supply
motives for the performance of duty, but also to teach what duty is, and that here
their work must inevitably coincide – and perhaps clash – with that undertaken
by an Ethical Society. My answer would be that there is at least a large region of
secular duty in which thoughtful Christians commonly recognize that an ideal of
conduct can be, and ought to be, worked out by the light of reason independently
of revelation; and I should recommend our Society to confine its attention to this
secular region. Here no doubt some of us may pursue that quest of moral truth
by study or discussion in a non-religious spirit, others in a religious spirit; but I conceive that we have room for both.
Sidgwick, “The Scope and Limits of the Work of an Ethical Society” (PE )
Sidgwick’s “middle way,” defining his work with the ethical societies,
reflected his state of mind in , when his disillusionment with psychical
research inclined him to focus on daily duty and forget the “blackness of
the end.” But as his work with the Synthetic Society so amply testifies,
his interest in the deepest problems would persist. George Eliot’s stance
was something he could admire, but not quite emulate. He would still
finger the “old Gordian knot,” even while gathering up the “fragments
that remain.” There was only so much serenity to be found, in his true
self.
Surely a big part of what determined Sidgwick’s direction during his last
decade had to do with the reinvigoration of his hopes for psychical research.
Notoriously, there was Eusapia Palladino, the Neapolitan medium who was
the object of McTaggart’s nasty remarks to the Apostles about Myers’s
erotic interests. She was by all accounts an earthy, illiterate woman who
did indeed add a highly sensuous element to the séance. According to
Oppenheim:
The SPR connection with Palladino began in , when Myers, Lodge, and the
Sidgwicks held séances with her in southern France, as guests of Charles Richet,
professor of physiology in the Paris Faculty of Medicine. Myers and Lodge were
certain that they were witnessing the real thing, at least some of the time. The
P: IJD/GCV
c.xml
CY/Schultz
January ,
:
Last Words?
Sidgwicks were, as ever, guarded and noncommittal, but not unwilling to have
another round with Palladino. She was, accordingly, invited to Cambridge for a
long visit in the summer of .
But Oppenheim has not caught the genuine excitement over Palladino
that Sidgwick showed. Consider the following letter to Bryce, from August
of , marked “Private”:
My wife hoped to have had an opportunity yesterday of explaining to you the
sudden change in our plan of foreign travel: but fate did not permit. The truth
is, the call of duty has descended on us in connexion with the S.P.R. – in whose
affairs a crisis is impending. Three chief members of our group of investigators: F.
Myers, O. J. Lodge, and Richet (Professor of Physiology in Paris) have convinced
themselves of the truth of the physical phenomena of Spiritualism! They have been
experimenting with an Italian “medium” Eusapia Palladino, on a small island in
the Mediterranean, close to Hyéres, which is Richet’s private property: they have
had her alone there, no one being on the island but Richet’s servants and the
experimenters: we have read the notes taken from day to day of the experiments,
and it is certainly difficult to see how the results recorded can have been produced
by ordinary physical means.
At the same time as the S.P.R. has now for some years acquired a reputation
for comparative sanity and intelligence by detecting and exposing the frauds of mediums; and as Eusapia’s “phenomena” are similar in kind to the frauds we
have exposed, it will be rather a sharp turn in our public career if our most
representative men come forward as believers. Consequently we both feel bound
to accept Richets’ invitation and go for ten days or a fortnight to the “Ile Roubaud”, and if possible, obtain personal experience. (CWC)
Sidgwick goes on to say that this “will be rather a bore,” but his excite-
ment is palpable. In fact, in a follow-up letter from August , , he is
on the brink of conversion:
I promised to write and tell you the results of our experiments here: if I have
delayed it has been partly from the uncertainty of our plans, but still more from a
desire not to fix my ideas prematurely. But we are now near the end of our series of sittings, and it is improbable that any of the experiences which remain will
materially alter my view.
In brief, then, we have no doubt that our experiences confirm those of Lodge,
Myers and Richet: that is, if I can rely on myself and my wife to know whether or
not we have hold of a medium’s hand in the dark, then it is certain that effects are
somehow produced, similar to those which human hands would produce, when
actually there are no hands so employed. The effects are of a very elementary
P: IJD/GCV
c.xml
CY/Schultz
January ,
:
Henry Sidgwick: Eye of the Universe
kind – touches, grasps &c or movements of objects such as billiard balls, melons
&c – and they occur in the dark, or in a very dim light: so that everything depends on the reliance to be placed on any investigator’s statement that he is holding a hand, foot, or head, at the time that a ‘phenomenon occurs.’ Now I shall not be
surprised if I find that statements of this kind are regarded as unreliable: and I do not think I should be disposed to rely on them, except when made by experienced
persons – aware of the tricks by which one hand may be made to appear two
&c. But then my wife and I have had a good deal of experience: and so have our
friends Richet and Lodge (who is here). Accordingly our present state of mind
is that we do rely on ourselves and each other, for the purpose
of such holdings: meanwhile, we continue the experiments at intervals of two or three days, varying
and if possible improving the conditions. (CWC)
In a letter from September, there are some doubts as to whether the
views of Myers and Lodge had been completely confirmed, but even so,
we do not see any way – even so far as our own experiences go – of avoiding
the conclusion that effects are produced such as human hands would produce,
when no such hands are there to produce. Thus we are able to confirm a part of the experiences which have led Myers, Lodge & Richet to the conclusion that
we have at last got hold of a genuine case of the ‘physical phenomena’ which
the Spiritualists attribute to Spirits. Nothing, however, that we have seen at all
supports the Spiritistic hypothesis, so far as we can judge. (CWC)
Perhaps the gullibility that Sidgwick brought to such investigations
suggests how he could have been so gullible on other counts – say, the
activities of the empire. What could he have supposed was being proved
by the mysterious moving of a melon? The Theosophists had at least had
some familiar mystical philosophizing attached to their phantom letters
and so forth, of the sort that would again become popular with Aldous
Huxley’s Perennial Philosophy, a sacred text of the s.
But at any rate, the thrill of discovery could not survive the more sober
scrutiny that Palladino met with when she visited Cambridge, a scrutiny
that came from none other than the old debunker of Theosophy Richard
Hodgson. As Oppenheim explains:
In this quandry, during the Cambridge sittings, they sent for Richard
Hodgson, who was in Boston serving as executive secretary of the American
Society for Psychical Research, affiliated with the British SPR at the time. With
Myers and Sidgwick paying for his transportation, Hodgson crossed the ocean in
August, in time to render judgment on Palladino. Her talents, he ruled, included
P: IJD/GCV
c.xml
CY/Schultz
January ,
:
Last Words?
nothing more noteworthy than the ability, through a variety of deceptive move-
ments, to wriggle hands and feet free from the control of sitters. That agility,