17. Personalism of B. P.
Bowne.
B. P. Bowne1 says:
They (phenomena) are not phantoms or illusions, nor are they masks of a
back-lying reality which is trying to peer through them." "The
antithesis," he continues,2 "of phenomena and noumena rests
on the fancy that there is something that rests behind phenomena which we ought
to perceive but cannot, because the masking phenomena thrusts itself between
the reality and us." Just so far we agree with Bowne, but we think he is
mistaken in sharply distinguishing between body and self, saying3:
"We ourselves are invisible. The physical organism is only an instrument
for expressing and manifesting the inner life, but the living self is never
seen." "Human form," he argues,4 "as an object in
space apart from our experience of it as the instrument and expression of
personal life, would have little beauty or attraction; and when it is described
in anatomical terms, there is nothing in it that we should desire it. The
secret of its beauty and its value lies in the invisible realm." "The
same is true," he says
again, "of literature.
It does not exist in space, or in time, or in books, or in libraries . . . all
that could be found there would be black marks on a white paper, and
collections of these bound together in various forms, which would be all the
eyes could see. But this would not be literature, for literature has its
existence only in mind and for mind as an expression of mind, and it is simply
impossible and meaningless in abstraction from mind." "Our human
history" -- he gives another illustration1 -- "never existed in space, and never
could so exist. If some visitor from Mars should come to the earth and look at
all that goes on in space in connection with human beings, he would never get any
hint of its real significance. He would be confined to integrations and
dissipations of matter and motion. He could describe the masses and grouping of
material things, but in all this be would get no suggestion of the inner life
which gives significance to it all. As conceivably a bird might sit on a
telegraph instrument and become fully aware of the clicks of the machine
without any suspicion of the existence or meaning of the message, or a dog
could see all that eye can see in a book yet without any hint of its meaning,
or a savage could gaze at the printed score of an opera without ever suspecting
its musical import, so this supposed visitor would be absolutely cut off by an
impassable gulf from the real seat and significance of human history. The great
drama of life, with its likes and dislikes, its loves and hates, its ambitions
and strivings, and manifold ideas, inspirations, aspirations, is absolutely
foreign to space, and could never in any way be discovered in space. So human
history has its seat in the invisible."
In the first place, Bowne's
conception of the physical organism as but an instrument for the expression of
the inner, personal life, just as the telegraphic apparatus is the instrument
for the expression of messages, is erroneous,
because body is not a mere
instrument of inner personal life, but an essential constituent of it. Who can
deny that one's physical conditions determine one's character or personality? Who
can overlook the fact that one's bodily conditions positively act upon one's
personal life? There is no physical organism which remains as a mere passive
mechanical instrument of inner life within the world of experience. Moreover,
individuality, or personality, or self, or inner life, whatever you may call
it, conceived as absolutely independent of physical condition, is sheer
abstraction. There is no such concrete personality or individuality within our
experience.
In the second place, he conceives the physical organism simply as a mark or symbol,
and inner personal life as the thing marked or symbolized; so he compares
physical forms with paper, types, books, and libraries, and inner life, with
literature. In so doing he overlooks the essential and inseparable connection
between the physical organism and inner life, because there is no essential
inseparable connection between a mark or symbol and the thing marked or
symbolized. The thing may adopt any other mark or symbol. The black marks on
the white paper, to use his figure, are not essential to literature. Literature
may be expressed by singing, or by speech, or by a series of pictures. But is
there inner life expressed, or possible to be expressed, in any other form save
physical organism? We must therefore acknowledge that inner life is identical
with physical organism, and that reality is one and the same as appearance.
|