World Order/Volume 1/Issue 8/Text

From Bahaiworks

[Page 279]

WORLD ORDER


EDUCATION IN WORLD FRIENDSHIP

GERTRUDE E. N. KING

•

PSYCHOLOGY AND CRIMINAL CONTROL

FLOYD L. CALDWELL

•

A PRAYER TO BE HEARD

Poem

JACQUELINE DELAMATER

•

THE ONENESS OF THE PROPHETS

RUHI AFNÁN

•

(Contents continued on inside cover)

•

NOVEMBER 1935

Price 20c


VIEWING THE WORLD AS AN ORGANISM


[Page 280]

CONTENTS OF THIS ISSUE

(Continued)


THE DIVINE SPRINGTIME

Words of BAHÁ’U’LLÁH

•

SOCIAL TRENDS IN AMERICAN LIFE

BERTHA HYDE KIRKPATRICK

•

KING HAAKON OF NORWAY

An Audience

MARTHA L. ROOT

•

I ANSWER “GOD!”

Poem

LE GARDE S. DOUGHTY

•

SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES

JACKSON H. RALSTON

•

WHERE IS SCIENCE GOING?

GENEVIEVE L. COY

•

THE DAY OF GOD

Editorial

•


World Order is published monthly in New York, N. Y. by the Publishing Committee of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá’ís of the United States and Canada.

Editors, Stanwood Cobb and Horace Holley.

Business Manager, C. R. Wood.

Publication Office—

135 East 50th Street, New York, N. Y.

Editorial Office—

119 Waverly Place, New York, N. Y.

Subscriptions: $2.00 per year, $1.75 to Public Libraries. Rate to addresses outside the United States, $2.25, foreign Library rate, $2.00, Single copies, 20 cents. Checks and money orders should be made payable to World Order Magazine, 135 East 50th Street, New York, N. Y. Entered as second class matter, May 1, 1935, at the post office at New York, N. Y., under the Act of March 3, 1879.

Contents copyrighted 1935 by Bahá’í Publishing Committee November, 1935. Vol. 1, No. 8



[Page 281]

WORLD ORDER

NOVEMBER 1935

NUMBER 8 VOLUME 1


•

DAY OF GOD

EDITORIAL

•

IN the present era of dense materialism, when selfish striving and will-to-power dominate political and commercial arenas and all divine authority is either purposely rejected or forgotten, the woes and tribulations of the world may well be seen as destined to lead us back to God—to bring us to a realization of His power and authority and of our helplessness and utter dependence on His Will.

Too long has the modernist, endowed with the regal power of scientific discovery and technological invention, deemed himself a world conquering Titan than whom no superior force existed in the Universe.

It remains to be seen whether this current materialist conception is correct; or whether, as in the over-ambitious strivings of the Titans of old, there can appear a force of Destiny capable of crushing the overwhelming egotism of mere individuals who would claim a power that can safely reside only in the Unity of Godhead.

Neither this planet, nor the Cosmos, was ever intended to be the arena of contest between myriads of human wills expressing the individualistic strivings of the ego—that lower self which Christ said man must lose in order to attain life eternal.

As far as each individual is concerned, it is his privilege—being gifted with free will—to assert himself “ad infinitum” in denial of the Divine Will. Tragic as is this possibility, it is nevertheless true that he may lose his soul if he so will. But what he may not and cannot do is to assert his private will in defiance and obstruction of the Unitary Will that is the Planner, Creator, Ruler, and Sustainer of the Universe as a whole and of that minuscular portion of it known to us as the planet Earth.

THERE comes recurrently a [Page 282] time when the collective will of a godless-grown humanity upon this planet calls for a projection of the Divine Will in the form of catastrophes and cataclysms utterly crushing the too prevalent evil-tending will of materialism; and bringing to bear on humanity as a whole and on every individual in it a Force so cosmic, so awe-inspiring, so inescapable that all but those insane with pride of human ego begin to cast aside the veils of materialism and awaken to a realization of a Supreme Power which controls events and individuals.

And when in utter helplessness they seek God and turn unto Him, they find in His abundant Grace the means of restoration to tranquillity. A new hope, a new cosmic faith inspires them to achieve the seemingly impossible, to restore order and prosperity, and to establish again God-consciousness in the affairs of men.

Such a period, Bahá’u’lláh warned us, would inevitably arrive. Seventy years ago He spoke in prophetic and world-moving tones of the approach ing “Day of God”, when “the foundations of all nations would tremble, the learned be bewildered, and the wise men confounded, save those who came near unto Thee, took from the hand of favor the pure wine of Thy inspiration, and drank in Thy name saying ‘Praise be unto Thee, O desire of the nations! Praise be to Thee, O Beloved of the hearts of the yearning!’”

This day is now upon us, as worldwide events fully signify. The evils, the chaotic conditions, the confusion which exists throughout the world are but a prelude to greater and more tragic ills unless the God-way out is sought.

As it is evident that humanity is not yet ready collectively to turn to God and seek to do His Will, this must remain, for the present, an individual endeavor. Therefore a grave responsibility of spiritual advance and leadership rests upon all individuals who are ready today to seek God that they may find Him. Such individuals as these compose the vanguard of humanity. Where they lead today, all will follow tomorrow.

Let us then forsake the Luciferan path of pride-of-ego which leads to individual and collective doom, and take that spiritual path of selfless obedience to the Divine Will which will lead us—and through us all humanity—to glorious heights of human perfection and achievement, culminating in the establishment of God’s Kingdom here on earth. Let us empty the heart of the dregs of self and become a clean vessel for the recipience of Divine grace. Mourn not the chaos of the pagan world about us, for this very chaos is destined to respiritualize humanity. Leaving the dead to bury the dead, let us press on to the high calling of sons of God to which all the prophets urge us.

S.C.


[Page 283]

As educators realize that the child must have not merely knowledge but also attitudes, effort to inculcate a broader spirit of unity as part of the necessary modern education has arisen in many schools. This article summarizes recent trends and activities making for peace.

•

EDUCATION IN WORLD FRIENDSHIP

By GERTRUDE E. N. KING

•

A FUNDAMENTAL cry of modern civilization, is what program of education and of action may be a possible solution for world problems? Because of ignorance, misunderstanding and prejudice, difficulties arise between races and nations as between individuals. Friendship exists among all people who understand and need one another. Traditional education has not advanced methods of reason and intelligence over methods of force and suppression.[1] The experiences of children are made up of sense impressions and emotional attitudes. Conditions which make for a reaction to peace develop in a child’s conduct at home, in school, on the playground, or with his relations to the community.

Why does the modern school recognize the development of wholesome personality as more important than the learning of facts? Why is it concerned with behavior in the yard and on the sandlot? Why is it interested in removing unthinking prejudices and unfounded discriminations against unfamiliar races, nations or religious creeds? Because it recognizes that a spirit of friendship and of appreciation for others can be established in youth. As in all experiences of life, first contacts with members of a different race set emotional reactions which are modified by following contacts with that race. Unpleasant experiences with an individual may cause an unfair or biased judgment of a whole nation. The gracious art of living together in sympathetic human relationships with those whose traditions and inheritance are different may be acquired by children with less difficulty than by adults. In adjustment to members of one’s own family, to playmates, to superiors or inferiors, and to individuals of another race, color or creed comes understanding of life. The biased child is handicapped. Milk for his breakfast, wool for his coat, soap for his bath may come from nearby sources. But he must be taught about the endless series of workers who furnish rubber for his tires, ink to fill his pen and variety in his food. To produce clothing, [Page 284] shelter, food, tools and a degree of culture for these workers, a great group of people has been necessary. Perhaps the whole world has been drawn upon for ultimate sources to supply the necessities of his life. He needs what these people of the world have for him. How can he understand them best? Their children need food, houses to live in, clothing, books to read, fires to warm them, schools to inspire, and friends to love them. Those children also play and celebrate holidays. They have problems of religion and of government. Their customs are beloved. Laws are made to guard their health and regulate their employment. “They” are much as “we”.

THEN why is war an accepted fact? What obligations and possibilities has the newer education to bring about understanding? Some world peaceways have been suggested. Study war not as an expected social inheritance, but as an unusual and horrible event. Accustom the child’s mind to associate the idea of war with mental or moral delinquency, not with a cause linked to glorious human qualities.[2] Build the thought “my country”, a group which contributes to the advancement of mankind, rather than a place to defend. Anticipate the arbitration of a dispute instead of a resort to arms, even at the child’s level. Guarantee to the playground leader reasoning and intelligence in supervision. Banish dictatorial methods and the use of force. Seize the unexcelled opportunities to teach better ways. Organize for the growth of the peace spirit.

International attitudes like character are caught, not taught. The “war spirit is a subtle interaction of experience . . .[3] . . .which pervades all life, reaches out its roots into all activities and expresses itself in various degrees during war and peace.” All influences working for the welfare of childhood need to cooperate in world friendliness. Common aims, associations and memories in which all peoples share are helpful. A child’s attitudes are very easily confused. He studies contributions to culture from a group different in race, creed or color than his own. Soon he hears a disparaging remark about that group, a remark made by some one whom he trusts. He sees a motion picture which misrepresents that race. He can not know what is authentic.

RECENT investigations seem to prove what long has been supposed as to the possibilities and the probabilities of education through the motion picture. The positive influence of its multiplied sense impressions may be as powerful an aid to help outlaw war as the negative influence may have been to create propaganda for war. A promising experiment along this line is the placing upon the screen of the picture “No Greater Glory”. Adapted by the Columbia Pictures Corporation from Ferenc Molnar’s novel, “The Paul Street Boys”, it has in it all the elements of an international war. Two sets of boys battle for a playground. There is no secondary theme, only the thesis that war is unprofitable, futile.

[Page 285]

Recognizing possibilities and responsibilities in education, great World organizations have been formed to promote peace. Definite aims of service characterize some of these organizations. Others produce the highly desirable result of making people think. Some international plans function in purposeful research. Others aim to bring about world friendship through education. A World Federation of Education Associations, organized in 1925 at San Francisco, indicates that hopes for international understanding and the cause of universal peace are in the hands of those who influence children and youth.

Another organization for continued practical service is the Committee on World Friendship Among Children.[4] Instituted in New York in 1925, it consists of some seventy-five specialists in child education. This Committee and its advisory council are non-sectarian. Protestant, Catholic, Jewish and Negro members are listed. The guiding principle of this organization is “we who desire peace must write it in the hearts of children”. Its activities include the exchange of messages, toys, and supplies on a vast scale reaching many children of the world.

Educational varieties of peace producing units develop on the level of all school ages.[5] Parents and kindergarten teachers working on a negative basis may outlaw guns, swords, knives, sharp sticks, bows and arrows. Youthful public opinion may be guided away from hostility, tattling, interrupting and the use of adverse racial terms such as “Chink”, “dago”, “nigger”, and “sheenie”. On a positive basis these adults may foster whatever good will is at hand, discover good sportsmanship, notice am of courtesy and unselfishness, recognize sympathy for all forms of life and secure the regard of children for their own property and that of others. The unadjusted child of whatever age or nationality needs help to emotional stability and the happiness of mental health. A teacher who understands may free a little child from a fear or a prejudice which otherwise might be lifelong. In all grades world friendship may be promoted by stressing likenesses between nations. Authentic information removes wrong impressions. The Olympic games revealed that all peoples have ideas of fair play. Foreign born children bring valuable contributions to a class room, music, dances, games, dolls and interesting social customs. Any ability to speak a foreign language is a distinct advantage. Closely related to the adult war spirit is the gang spirit among boys and cliquishness among girls. A conflict on a playground is an opportunity of new education for real peace.

SCIENCE and mathematics have brought near neighbors. As geographical limitations disappear moral limitations offer a field for exploration to the secondary school. People have not learned how to live together. History taught comparatively becomes a record of human progress. World conflicts destroy faith in human nature but man is capable of perpetual modification. [Page 286] The first step to universal reconstruction is the abolition of war and of the needless destruction of human life. What compensating interests can be given to children to save them from the ideal of physical strife as the only way out of international situations?

Modern education claims not wishes for peace but a purpose to create peace. Newer ideals of heroism function in a universal determination to abolish war, poverty and disease. Wants and requirements of society are becoming one vast highly organized interdependent whole. The greatest ideas for deliverance from war have been: Abolish war by conference, outlaw war as crime, deal with a situation once relegated to war as a moral process, overcome evil with good and hate with love.

The ideas of this paper claim no individual origin. They have been gathered from many sources. Some author-teacher may recognize his own idea, claim it and rejoice in the advance toward international appreciation.


  1. ↑ Redefer, Frederick L. Child Education. World Peace-Ways, 1934.
  2. ↑ Overstreet, Harry A. Building Up the International Mind. World Unity.
  3. ↑ Redefer, Frederick L. Child Education World Peace-Ways, 1934
  4. ↑ Committee on World Friendship Among Children.
  5. ↑ Dowling, Evaline. World Friendship. School Publication, Los Angeles.



The two most unlike groups in modern society—children and criminals—are receiving special attention by students of psychology in their effort to remove long-oppressive barriers raised by ignorance to their proper treatment and development. The author of this article is head of the Department of Psychology in a Western University.

•

PSYCHOLOGY AND CRIMINAL CONTROL

By FLOYD F. CALDWELL

•

PEOPLE, as a rule, are inclined to think of the criminal as a strange species of human being and they are little concerned with the question of whether or not he might be a product of our social system, or whether or not there might be a possibility of rehabilitation. Their interests and motives for control are principally selfish and emotional. They are interested in his conduct, and the more unusual is the conduct the greater the interest. Generally this interest dies when the culprit has been brought to trial and the amount of vengeance which is to be exacted has been stipulated. On the other hand, there is a group which shows what might be called a sentimental interest. This sentimentality is probably as detrimental to advancement as the more morbid interest, for sentiments [Page 287] are not usually based on rational thought and there has been and still is too much irrational thinking in connection with crime control.

If any progress is to be made in the war on crime, we must take into account all that has been learned regarding the causal factors of criminality and the techniques of developing or altering human personality. Psychology can contribute much and can be expected in the future to contribute more toward the solution of these problems. It must be admitted that the forces which motivate conduct are so intangible and the subject of personality is so complex and baffling that there is still much work to be done but a recognition and application of many of the known basic principles would contribute much to a final solution.

In far too great a majority of cases our institutions, which ostensibly are for the purpose of correction, are failing miserably. They are not rehabilitating those who enter but are providing ways and means by which these individuals sink even lower into the sea of iniquity. Society has provided a stupendous melting pot where it attempts to prepare men for social life by reversing the ordinary processes of socialization. It has provided a place where outward conformity of rules repress all efforts at constructive improvement and expression; where motivation is provided by fear of punishment rather than by operation of economic motives or yes, even appeal to higher motives; where men are taught to cringe rather than to develop in strength of personality; where practically no attempt is made to develop attitudes of self-helpfulness and self-improvement.

MAN is by nature a social animal. He is born with certain impulses to behavior. When he finds himself blocked on every hand, what is there for him to do but to commune with those who are fellow sufferers. By ignoring this one basic principle of human nature society is itself promoting the convict solidarity which is the source of so much concern at the present time.

Another principle which is receiving very little consideration is that which has to do with individual differences. At the present time the emphasis is placed upon the type of crime committed and not upon the individual who commits the crime, We still assume that a human being or a group of human beings has the wisdom to know beforehand just what treatment is necessary to accord to the prisoner and what time it will take to rehabilitate him and return him to society a useful citizen. We are evidently still primitive enough to assume that all individuals suffer the same and react the same to the same kind of treatment. Psychology has developed instruments for measuring individual differences but these are only crude measuring devices and no psychologists worthy of the name would even attempt to predict only in a general way the outcome of a prescribed treatment and the time that will be necessary to realize the desired results.

It is probable that the prison, under the most ideal conditions, has accomplished [Page 288] all it can for some men the day they enter. For others a lifetime would not be sufficient to cure them. Why then should we turn those of the latter type again upon society at the end of a stipulated time when prison authorities know that they will only commit another crime and be an added financial burden upon the state?

With the vast majority, crime is a means and not an end. It is the result of certain inborn tendencies or urgings. The fact that these tendencies seek outlet and fulfillment in other than accepted ways of society or in ways which are anti-social makes them a part of society’s responsibility. This misdirection is due to two principal causes, first, the lack of proper training and, second, the lack of native capacity for inhibition. The emphasis on the study of the child the last few years has resulted in the accumulation of data which show us conclusively the extreme importance of early childhood training. By the time the child has reached school age his emotional pattern and habits of thought largely have been laid out. Is there any wonder that we have mal-adjusted individuals in our society when there are so many mal-adjusted homes? The wonder is that we do not have more. Taking this into consideration, we might offer the suggestion that probably the lack of native capacity for inhibition has been over emphasized in the past.

The average intelligence of the prison population is not significantly lower than the population at large. Then why should a large proportion of them innately lack the power of inhibition? A hint of why some mal-adjustment may be aggravated is found in a report of the New York State Crime Commission. Here it was found that the “Problem Boys” while being slightly inferior in abstract intelligence were quite superior in mechanical ability over all public school children. There is a possibility that the schools were not equipped to cater to this ability but instead made the boys restless in academic classes in which they could not possibly ever be happy or successful. Their desires for self-display and satisfaction in accomplishment were frustrated and they sought outlets in other ways.

TREATMENT of the mal-adjustment is largely a problem of prophylaxis, education, and re-education. As these are primarily the application of psychological principles, psychology is of paramount importance. Society must make more of an organized effort to provide a proper environment for the child from birth to maturity and even on throughout adulthood. In our institutions of learning and in our correctional institutions, those in charge find themselves much in the same predicament as a physician who locates the causes of a disease but has no drugs to administer. The child is under the supervision of the educator approximately only six hours of the twenty-four. When the aggravating difficulty lies in the home and surrounding environment, what is the educator to do to gain control of the situation? With the prisoner the life is so artificial that he may become adjusted to the situation within the prison but [Page 289] fail utterly when released again upon society. These individuals need training in social life and in economic independence. They have failed here, why not train here? Present practices, organization and social taboos, however, will not permit.

Education aims at discipline, but self-discipline. Is there much opportunity to carry out this idea in the present type of prison organization, where discipline is negative and not positive? Is there much opportunity for the exercise of human sympathy where the methods are brutally repressive; where every effort is made to break the spirit and where control is obtained through a cringing fear of punishment; where family bonds are broken and little or no attempt is made to appeal to higher motives? No! Rehabilitation must come through a more comprehensive understanding and application of the principles of psychology; of human nature. We cannot expect to make progress by continued ignorance and violation. If society is responsible for placing men in prison, cannot circumstances be so ordered that men may develop into manhood instead of degenerating into beasts? Cannot society early recognize those who are handicapped by inferior heredity and so guide them that they need not commit a crime before they gain recognition? We need only to examine the life histories of comparatively a few criminals to become convinced that society is itself to blame for a preponderance of the crime committed.

THE time has come when it must assume a larger part of this responsibility. The time has come when definite systems must be formulated and adopted in order that the harvest of psychological and physiological degenerates may be shrunken to a point where it is not a menace to, or a burden upon, the more fortunate members of the group. To do this, it will be necessary to prevent the degenerated stocks from reproducing their kind, it will be necessary for society to assume responsibility for a far greater number of youngsters who do not have adequate guidance and care on the pre-school and post-school levels and to provide also for an extended program for those who fall within that period which generally now is considered “school age”.

The correctional institutions should be such in fact and not in name only. They should be places in which all the knowledge concerning human nature is being applied intelligently with the definite aim in view of rehabilitation. To do this the prisons must be either more numerous and smaller than they are at present, or a force of skilled workers must be provided and be allowed the opportunity to give much individual attention to the inmates. For, we must remember that every inmate is an individual problem and cannot be considered otherwise. At the present time congested conditions in our prisons are deplorable, and little of a constructive nature can be expected until these conditions are remedied. A careful study should be made of each individual case before being retained in prison or being paroled. Under the present system, through the activity of friends, many individuals [Page 290] are released who have no intention of reforming while a friendless prisoner, who would die rather than commit another crime, may be forced to spend a lifetime behind the walls.

The method of sentencing must be modified and the shackles of tradition must be broken. Neither does an individual nor a group of individuals have the power to determine beforehand the time necessary for rehabilitation nor does any judge have either the time or the training to study the extremely complex and delicate problem of remedial treatment to be prescribed. This task should be assigned to a board of highly paid and highly trained experts in the fields of psychiatry, sociology, medicine and law. A more definite program must be provided whereby those members of our society who are a menace can be segregated without having first to commit a crime. Until these reforms are instituted we can reasonably expect a gradual rise of crime incidence, persistent prison breaks and prison riots, and the regular occurrence of crimes of the Hickman and Bischoff variety.



A PRAYER TO BE HEARD

By JACQUELINE DELAMATER

•

OH for a voice to lift from the very encompassing waters,
Out of the darkness and desperate danger;
Oh for a voice to resound in pulsating echo
Among the all encircling, precipitous mountains,
Sounding the clarion call of Thy Manifestations,
Whose insight conciliates both the eternal
Surges of waters that smother, the mountainous ridges
With ramparts unscaleable obstructing Thy sky!
YET to conquer the waters and mountains, engulfing, unscaleable
Is easy beside that gross ignorance, greed and
Squalor of hate by which men enslave themselves!
Oh for a voice to reiterate the tocsin
Call of Thy Prophets for return on their knees to Thy Knees
In contrition and the solidarity of love
Each for the other, to the happy unfolding of nations,
To the Glory of God Who Redeemeth!


[Page 291]

The fatal diversity of religions has arisen from man’s inability or unwillingness to recognize the oneness of all the Prophets or Manifestations of God. In Bahá’u’lláh’s teaching of this oneness the people of this age have the supreme privilege of comprehending the Divine Plan for the evolution of man.

•

A WORLD FAITH

Studies in the Teachings of Bahá’u’lláh

III. THE ONENESS OF THE PROPHETS

By RUHI AFNAN

•

BAHÁ’U’LLÁH establishes the existence of three worlds, (1) the world of God or Divine Essence; (2) the world of the Prophets, otherwise known as the world of the Divine Will or the world of the Word; (3) the world of creation. The world of the Prophets is the bridge over the chasm existing between the other two worlds and forms the basis of our moral and spiritual life.

The outstanding feature that has distinguished the teachings of the Prophets from the trend of philosophy ever since the days of the Greeks is this: that whereas the latter mainmined the dualistic conception of being and bequeathed it, together with the insoluble problems arising from its logical consequences, to the thinkers that have since followed them, the Prophets of God have persistently maintained the existence of three fully distinguishable worlds of reality.

In one of His Tablets ‘Abdu’l-Bahá wrote the following: “In short, they (the Gnostics) limit being to God and the creatures; its inner aspect is God and its outer form is creature. The reality is the sea and the form its waves. Not so among the Prophets Who have proven the existence of three worlds; the world of God, the world of Command, and the world of creation. God is a transcendental Being that can in no wise be defined. It is sanctified and beyond all attributes and qualities. He has neither name nor sign. ‘The paths to Him are closed and the demand to attain Him refused. His proof is His signs and His affirmation bears witness to His existence.’

“The world of Command is the station of the Primal Will which is a universal reality that is dissolved into infinite forms. The sea of the Will is the world of Command.

“Thus beings, in so far as their existence is concerned, have been made real through God, that is through His creative power. ‘Were He to desire a thing and say be it shall exist.’

“Spiritual creation is re-birth, it is supreme guidance, eternal life, universal qualities, the acquirement of the all-inclusive divine perfections, [Page 292] and progress in all the stages of human endowments.

“This latter creation is realized as a result of the appearance of the Manifestations of God in the world of contingency. ‘Are we wearied out with the first creation? Yet are they in doubt with regard to a new creation.’ (Qu’rán, Kaf 15). ‘Shall the dead, whom we have quickened, and for whom we have ordained a light whereby he may walk among men, be like him, whose likeness is in the darkness’. (Qu’rán, Cattle 123). Similarly in the Holy Bible it is written: ‘That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit.’ (St. John, II, 6). From this explanation seek the true solution of your problem.

“Thus, things appear through the creative power of God. They are not His manifestations not the incarnations of His reality. Neither is divinity acquired. The purpose of the world of contingency, therefore, is to attain to the station of existence, and this existence is caused by God’s infinite divine bounty; re-creation and rebirth is progress in the stages of Divine perfections, the training of human capacities and the rising of the light of God.” (Tablets of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, published in Egypt, Vol. 11, page 139.)

To go over the history of the conception of the Logos as maintained in the different systems of philosophy from the early days of Heraclitus, is a tedious task that would little serve our purpose. It is sufficient to say that the doctrine has been stressed from three different angles: the metaphysical, the moral and the spiritual.

To those who consider the doctrine metaphysically, the Logos provides the active element of the creative power of God. A God, they reason, that is transcendental and unchanging cannot become the primal cause, for causation necessitates activity, and. activity cannot well apply to an eternally unchanging reality. Thus the Logos is in a sense indistinguishable from God, it is His indispensable active and creative element.

This doctrine of the Logos would have established our moral and spiritual conceptions upon a strong and secure foundation if it were maintained intact as expressed in the Gospel; but misconceptions, partly due to a lack of spiritual understanding, gradually crept in and darkened its basic truth, until today when it is generally considered as a mere metaphysical abstraction devised to overcome certain theoretical difficulties.

The true significance of this conception would have been maintained if two of the ideas involved in its primitive Christian form had been kept outstanding; namely (1) if the Logos had been preserved as a reality distinct from the transcendental Divine Essence and thus made to form the link between God and the world of creation; (2) if the Logos were not confined and identified with the person of Jesus, but with the reality of Christ or Messiah which appears in all the prophets.

Such views were not alien to early Christianity. However doubtful we may be as to the accuracy of St. John’s record of the actual words of Christ, [Page 293] of one thing we can be sure, namely that he was a Christian and that he expressed the views of his contemporaries when he said, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God.”

Even though there is no passage in the Gospels that establishes definitely and in unmistakable terms that the spirit of Christ is distinguishable from the Divine Essence, yet we see Jesus constantly referred to as the representative of God upon the earth, always speaking in the name of the Father.

It has remained for Bahá’u’lláh and ‘Abdu’l-Bahá to explain the whole question thoroughly and establish these fundamental truths which the fragmentary teachings of Jesus Christ merely imply.

In the writings and sayings of the Prophets, especially the later ones whose scriptures are preserved for us more or less intact, we can detect the idea that there are two creations to which man is subjected in this world. Through the first creation man obtains a physical being and through the second one he acquires a spiritual and moral consciousness. This second creation is also termed re-birth, the resurrection of the dead and the attainment of spiritual life. It is a new consciousness that is superimposed upon man’s physical being, for he can well be physically alive and spiritually dead. The spiritually awakened man is he who is born of the flesh and then re-born of the life of the spirit.

For example, does not the following saying of Jesus establish the existence and reality of these two creations: “I am the resurrection and the life: he that believeth in me shall never die.” (St. John, XI. 25,26). Similarly, Muhammed says in the Qu’rán: “Say, go through the earth and see how God hath brought forth all creation: hereafter will He give it another birth.” (Qu’rán, 29;19).

In one His Tablets ‘Abdu’l-Bahá says: “God in His exalted sanctity transcends earthly conditions, differentiations, individuations and even the understanding of created beings. It is rather the Primal Will, which is likened to the blessing and rays of the sun, that is the cause of the appearance and visibility of created things.” (Tablets of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, published in Egypt, Vol. 111, page 334).

The light the Prophet radiates, says Bahá’u’lláh, shines upon all things, but an object can reflect the power and beauty of that light and obtain meaning only to the extent of its inherent or acquired capacities. As man is the noblest of God’s creation, as he can operate as a perfect mirror, so he can reflect the light and attributes manifested by the Prophets in a manner that no other object can.

SUCH a conception of the reality of the Prophets establishes a fundamental qualitative similarity between them and God. Just as the sun reflected in the mirror can assert with full justification that it is the same sun, so can the Prophet say that He is God. It is due to such sharing of the Divine attributes that Jesus Christ said: “I and my Father are one.” (St. John, X. 25) and Mohammed [Page 294] proclaimed “He is I and I am He.” In His Tablet to Mohammed Shah the Báb wrote, “I am the Primal Point from which have been generated all created things . . I am the countenance of God Whose splendor can never be obscured, the light of God Whose radiance can never fade. . .” In even more stirring language Bahá’u’lláh writes in the Suriy-i-Haykal: “Naught is seen in My beauty but His beauty, and in My being but His being and in My self but His self, and in My movement but His movement, and in My acquiescence but His acquiescence, and in My pen but His pen, the Mighty, the All-praised. There hath not been in My soul but the truth, and in My self naught could be seen but God.” In another Tablet distinguishing between His human and His divine nature Bahá’u’lláh said: “When I contemplate, O My God, the relationship that bindeth Me to Thee, I am moved to proclaim to all created things ‘verily I am God!’ and when I consider My own self, lo, I find it coarser than day.”

“O Salmán! The door of the knowledge of the Ancient Being hath ever been, and will continue forever to be, closed in the face of men. No man’s understanding shall ever gain access unto His court. As a token of His mercy, however, and as a proof of His loving kindness, He hath manifested unto men the Day-Stars of His divine guidance, the Symbols of His divine unity, and hath ordained the knowledge of these sanctified Beings to be identical with the knowledge of His own self. Whoso recognizeth Them hath recognized God, whoso hearkeneth to Their call hath hearkeneth to the voice of God and whoso testifieth to the truth of Their Revelation, hath testified to the truth of God Himself. Whoso turneth away from Them, hath turned away from God, and whoso disbelieveth in Them, hath disbelieved in God. Every one of Them is the Way of God that connecteth this world with the realms above, and the Standard of His Truth unto every one in the kingdoms of earth and heaven.” (Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh).

INASMUCH as these Prophets are, on the one hand, manifestations of the divine attributes, and on the other belong to the world of man, they constitute the desired link between the transcendental God and humanity. Thus, they become the channel through Which we can know God and His will. We can look up to Them as true images of God, as the source of goodness, as true exemplars, as the object of our religious worship and the loving tutors of our spiritual and moral life.

Bahá’u’lláh says: “The purpose underlying the revelation of every heavenly Book, nay of every divinely-revealed verse, is to endue all men with righteousness and understanding, so that peace and tranquillity may be firmly established amongst them. Whatsoever assureth the hearts of men, whatsoever exalteth their station or promoteth their contentment, is acceptable in the sight of God. How lofty is the station which man, if he but chooseth to fulfill his high destiny, can attain!”

[Page 295]Man is born in this world endowed with latent and infinite potentialities with the object of developing them to the full. In this process of training he needs the counsel and guidance of a loving teacher who is above the prevailing social conceptions, who is not carried away by the trend of social influences, who is able to create his own environment as well as the environment for the whole world, and at the same time is himself guided by an inner and unerring Divine Light.

God who has created us loves us, and because He loves us desires our progress. Hence He has sent us His Prophets and given them the necessary power to raise us above our environment, overcome the forces of evil and set before us the true path of salvation and spiritual upliftment. But the Prophets do not act as spiritual educators only in this world, in all the worlds to come through which the human spirit passes on its road to progress, Prophets appear and help the development of man.

A NEW religion, therefore, comes into being whenever the previous one becomes too old to exert any appreciable and healthy influence upon society, whenever, in the words of Jesus, it becomes like a salt that has lost its savor. In one of His Tablets ‘Abdu’l-Bahá says: “This bounty and great opportunity shall end and this brilliant morn shall fade away into a dark night. When you find the world in this condition know and be sure that the day of certainty has neared, that the light of the merciful God shall soon shine upon the horizon and the Lord shall appear upon the dark clouds.”

How foolish, therefore, is the principle maintained by the generality of the followers of the different religions that with the advent of their Prophet revelation has ceased; that their religion is the “absolute religion”, the final word uttered by God to man. According to Bahá’u’lláh it is blasphemy “to believe that all revelation is ended, that the portals of divine mercy are closed, that from the day-spring of eternal holiness no sun shall rise again, that the ocean of everlasting bounty is forever stilled, and that out of the tabernacle of ancient glory the Messengers of God have ceased to be manifest.”

If we take religion to mean that spiritual atmosphere which embraces moral and social laws as well as beliefs and motivating emotions that God creates for the spiritual development of man, then all that the Prophets do, is to renew that atmosphere and make it more healthy and invigorating. The Prophets do not come into the world to establish rival institutions and to rob one another of their adherents. They are all servants of the same Cause, revealers of the same ancient religion of God, which, at the hands of man, is constantly corrupted and obscured. This is why Jesus said: “I have not come to destroy but to fulfill.” He did not come to abolish the religion of Moses but to infuse it with a new life and spirit, to make it more effective in changing and uplifting the human heart.

Even though the Prophets do not reveal the same measure of the eternal [Page 296] truths nor establish the same social laws and principles, yet their reality is the same. They all manifest the same Word of God; they all occupy the same intermediary position between the transcendental God and man; they are all the creators of our spiritual and moral life. In the Iqan, Bahá’u’lláh, writes the following: “It is clear and evident to thee that all the Prophets are the Temples of the Cause of God who have appeared clothed in diverse attire. If thou wilt observe with discriminating eyes, thou wilt behold them all abiding in the same tabernacle, soaring in the same heaven, seated upon the same throne, uttering the same speech, and proclaiming the same Faith. Such is the unity of those Essences of being, those Luminaries of infinite and immeasurable splendor. Wherefore, should one of the Manifestations of Holiness proclaim saying, ‘I am the return of all the Prophets’ He verily speaketh the truth.”

It is due to this unity existing between the Prophets that every one of them accepts the truth of the mission of those Who went before Him and foretells the advent of future ones. It was to establish this truth that Jesus said, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day; he saw it and was glad.” (St. John, VIII 56) Consider how reverently He spoke of Moses and His laws, how He maintained that the purpose of His own mission was not to abolish but to fulfill the Mosaic dispensation. Furthermore, did He not say, “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever.” (St. John, XIV. 16) “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” (St. John, XIV. 26). With a similar reverence does in the Qur’án Muhammmed make mention of Moses, Jesus, as well as the many prophets that appeared before them. ‘O people! I swear by the one true God! This is the Ocean out of which all seas have proceeded, and with which every one of them will ultimately be united. From Him all the suns have been generated, and with Him they will all return. Through His porency the Trees of Divine Revelation have yielded their fruits, every one of which hath been sent down in the form of a Prophet, bearing a Message to God’s creatures in each of the worlds whose number God alone, in His all-encompassing knowledge, can reckon. This He hath accomplished through the agency of but one Letter of His Word revealed by His Pen —a Pen which His moving Finger hath directed, and which is in turn sustained by the power of God’s truth.” (Bahá’u’lláh).

WE have thus seen that all the Prophets are the manifestations of the Word of God, that they all come to the world for the same purpose, namely to help the spiritual development of man. Their mission is to renew the ancient religion of God, and so they all accept the Prophets who appeared before them and foretell the advent of the future ones. Hence, we should admit that [Page 297] they constitute members of the same race of spiritual and moral educators, destined by the hand of Providence to help the upliftment of man in this and in the myriad worlds to come.

To say that any of the Prophets is alone the revelation of the Word of God is to limit that infinite reality and to go contrary to their expressed teachings. What else could Jesus mean when He said, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am.” (St. John, VIII. 58). Similarly, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” (St. John, I. 1). Do not these verses imply that the reality of Jesus was ancient; that His appearance in this world two thousand years ago is only one of His many appearances? That the reality in Him, the Christ in Him, is a universal and eternal reality?

The Word is a universal reality. It is timeless and eternal for it has ever existed and will ever exist. It could not be considered as co-equal with God for it has its origin in Him. It is a mere appearance of that Divine Essence, and relies for its very existence upon Him. On the other hand it is God in the sense that Jesus meant by God when He said, “If he called them Gods, unto whom the Word of God came,” (St. John, X. 55). In other words, the Word is God in the sense that in it we find the perfecrion of all the divine attributes, all His powers and majesty.

We can know the Prophets: we ought to know the Prophets and recognize them whenever they appear in the world. But just as no member of an inferior stage of existence can fully grasp the reality of a being that is in a superior stage, so we can never comprehend the full reality of the Word of God. We can know the Prophets only to the extent that they reveal themselves to us.

The only bond, the only intermediary existing between this absolutely transcendental God and man is the Word, this universal reality which about once every one thousand years, at periods of great world crises, when man’s spiritual life is at its lowest ebb and social problems defy human ingenuity, appears in the person of a Prophet and causes the resurrection of the spiritual dead and the rehabilitation of society. Not any single one of them, but all the Prophets constitute this link; they are all the true mystic path that leads man to God, and the life through which we are re-born. They are all the channels of the outpouring of the divine grace through which we are saved.

“The Bearers of the Trust of God are made manifest unto the peoples of the earth as the Exponents of a new Cause and the Revealers of a new Message. Inasmuch as these Birds of the celestial Throne are all sent down from the heaven of the Will of God, and as they all arise to proclaim His irresistible Faith, they, therefore, are regarded as one soul and the same person. For they all drink from the one Cup of the love of God, and all partake of the fruit of the same Tree of Oneness.” (Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh).


[Page 298]

Amid what appear to men every evidence of calamity and every proof of unfaith, Bahá’u’lláh has asserted the Divine Springtime of spiritual renewal.

•

THE DIVINE SPRINGTIME

Words of BAHÁ’U’LLÁH

•

THE beginning of all things is the knowledge of God, and the end of all things is strict observance of whatsoever hath been sent down from the empyrean of the Divine Will that pervadeth all that is in the heavens and all that is on the earth.

THE Divine Springtime is come, O Most Exalted Pen, for the Festival of the All-Merciful is fast approaching. Bestir thyself, and magnify, before the entire creation, the name of God, and celebrate His praise, in such wise that all created things may be regenerated and made new. Speak, and hold not thy peace. The day-star of blissfulness shineth above the horizon of Our name, the Blissful, inasmuch as the kingdom of the name of God hath been adorned with the ornament of the name of thy Lord, the Creator of the heavens. Arise before the nations of the earth, and arm thyself with the power of this Most Great Name, and be not of those who tarry.

Methinks that thou hast halted and movest not upon My Tablet. Could the brightness of the Divine Countenance have bewildered thee, or the idle talk of the froward filled thee with grief and paralyzed thy movement? Take heed lest anything deter thee from extolling the greatness of this Day—the Day whereon the Finger of majesty and power hath opened the seal of the Wine of Reunion, and called all who are in the heavens and all who are on the earth. Preferrest thou to tarry when the breeze announcing the Day of God hath already breathed over thee, or art thou of them that are shut out as by a veil from Him?

No veil whatever have I allowed, O Lord of all names and Creator of the heavens, to shut me from the recognition of the glories of Thy Day— the Day which is the lamp of guidance unto the whole world, and the sign of the Ancient of Days unto all them that dwell therein. My silence is by reason of the veils that have blinded Thy creatures’ eyes to Thee, and my muteness is because of the impediments that have hindered Thy people from recognizing Thy truth. Thou knowest what is in me, but I know not what is in Thee. Thou art the All-Knowing, the All-Informed. By Thy name that excelleth all other names! If Thy overruling and all-compelling behest should ever reach me, it would empower me to revive the souls of all men, [Page 299] through Thy most exalted Word, which I have heard uttered by Thy Tongue of power in Thy Kingdom of glory. It would enable me to announce the revelation of Thy effulgent countenance wherethrough that which lay hidden from the eyes of men hath been manifested in Thy name, the Perspicuous, the sovereign Protector, the Self-Subsisting.

Canst thou discover any one but Me, O Pen, in this Day? What hath become of the creation and the manifestations thereof? What of the names and their kingdom? Whither are gone all created things, whether seen or unseen? What of the hidden secrets of the universe and its revelations? Lo, the entire creation hath passed away! Nothing remaineth except My Face, the Ever-Abiding, the Resplendent, the All-Glorious.

This is the Day whereon naught can be seen except the splendors of the Light that shineth from the face of Thy Lord, the Gracious, the Most Bountiful. Verily, We have caused every soul to expire by virtue of Our irresistible and all-subduing sovereignty. We have, then, called into being a new creation, as a token of Our grace unto men. I am, verily, the All-Bountiful, the Ancient of Days.

BEWARE, O believers in the Unity of God, lest ye be tempted to make any disrinction between any of the Manifestations of His Cause, or to discriminate against the signs that have accompanied and proclaimed their Revelation. This indeed is the true meaning of Divine Unity, if ye be of them that apprehend and believe this truth. Be ye assured, moreover, that the works and acts of each and every one of these Manifestations of God, nay whatever pertaineth unto them, and whatsoever they may manifest in the future, are all ordained by God, and are a reflection of His Will and Purpose. Whose maketh the slightest possible difference between their persons, their words, their messages, their acts and manners, hath indeed disbelieved in God, hath repudiated His signs, and betrayed the Cause of His Messengers.

LOOK not upon the creatures of God except with the eye of kindliness and of mercy, for Our loving providence hath pervaded all created things, and Our grace encompassed the earth and the heavens. This is the Day whereon the true servants of God partake of the life-giving waters of reunion, the Day whereon those that are nigh unto Him are able to drink of the soft-flowing river of immortality, and they who believe in His unity the wine of His Presence, through their recognition of Him Who is the Highest and Last End of all, in Whom the Tongue of Majesty and Glory voiceth the call: “The Kingdom is Mine. I, Myself, am, of Mine own right, its Ruler.”

Attract the hearts of men, through the call of Him the one alone Beloved. Say: This is the Voice of God. if ye do but hearken. This is the Day-Spring of the Revelation of God, did ye but know it. This is the Dawning-Place of the Cause of God, were ye to recognize it. This is the Source of [Page 300] the commandment of God, did ye but judge it fairly. This is the manifest and hidden Secret; would that ye might perceive it. O peoples of the world! Cast away, in My name that transcendeth all other names, the things ye possess, and immerse yourselves in this Ocean in whose depths lay hidden the pearls of Wisdom and of utterance, an ocean that surgeth in My name, the All-Merciful.

LAUDED and glorified art Thou, O Lord, my God! How can I make mention of Thee, assured as I am that no tongue, however deep its wisdom, can befittingly magnify Thy name, nor can the bird of the human heart, however great its longing, ever hope to ascend into the heaven of Thy majesty and knowledge.

If I describe Thee, O my God, as Him Who is the All-Perceiving, I find myself compelled to admit that they Who are the highest Embodiments of perception have been created by virtue of Thy behest. And if I extol Thee as Him Who is the All-Wise, I, likewise, am forced to recognize that the Well-Springs of wisdom have themselves been generated through the operation of Thy Will. And if I proclaim Thee as the Incomparable One, I soon discover that They Who are the inmost essence of oneness have been sent down by Thee and are but the evidences of Thine handiwork. And if I acclaim Thee as the Knower of all things, I must confess that They Who are the Quintessence of knowledge are but the creation and instruments of Thy Purpose.

Exalted, immeasurably exalted, art Thou above the strivings of mortal man to unravel Thy mystery, to describe Thy glory, or even to hint at the nature of Thine Essence. For whatever such strivings may accomplish, they never can hope to transcend the limitations imposed upon Thy creatures, inasmuch as these efforts are actuated by Thy decree, and are begotten of Thine invention. The loftiest sentiments which the holiest of saints can express in praise of Thee, and the deepest wisdom which the most learned of men can utter in their attempts to comprehend Thy nature, all revolve around that Center Which is wholly subjected to Thy sovereignty, Which adoreth Thy Beauty, and is propelled through the movement of Thy Pen.

Nay, forbid it, O my God, that I should have uttered such words as must of necessity imply the existence of any direct relationship between the Pen of Thy Revelation and the essence of all created things. Far, far are They Who are related to Thee above the conception of such relationship! All comparisons and likenesses fail to do justice to the Tree of Thy Revelation, and every way is barred to the comprehension of the Manifestation of Thy Self and the Day-Spring of Thy Beauty.

Far, far from Thy glory be what mortal man can affirm of Thee, or attribute unto Thee, or the praise with which he can glorify Thee! Whatever duty Thou hast prescribed unto Thy servants of extolling to the utmost Thy majesty and glory is but a token of Thy grace unto them, that they may be enabled to ascend unto the station conferred upon their own [Page 301] inmost being, the station of the knowledge of their own selves.

No one else besides Thee hath, at any time, been able to fathom Thy mystery, or befittingly to extol Thy greatness. Unsearchable and high above the praise of men wilt Thou remain for ever. There is none other God but Thee, the Inaccessible, the Omnipotent, the Omniscient, the Holy of Holies.

ALL-PRAISE and glory be to God Who, through the power of His might, hath delivered His creation from the nakedness of non-existence, and clothed it with the mantle of life. From among all created things He hath singled out for His special favor the pure, the gem-like reality of man, and invested it with a unique capacity of knowing Him and of reflecting the greatness of His glory. This two fold distinction conferred upon him hath cleansed away from his heart the rust of every vain desire, and made him worthy of the vesture with which his Creator hath designed to clothe him. It hath served to rescue his soul from the wretchedness of ignorance.

This robe with which the body and soul of man hath been adorned is the very foundation of his well-being and development. O, how blessed the day when, aided by the grace and might of the one true God, man will have freed himself from the bondage and corruption of the world and all that is therein and will have attained unto true and abiding rest beneath the shadow of the Tree of Knowledge!



The pure truths of science, like clear water from a spring, become contaminated as they flow through the channels of economic and political influence. In this article is treated the vital subject of the place of science in a true society.

•

SOCIAL TRENDS IN AMERICAN LIFE

7. SCIENCE AS A SOCIAL MANIFESTATION

By BERTHA HYDE KIRKPATRICK

•

“OF all the elements of modern culture,” says Preserved Smith, “as of all the forces moulding modern life, science has been the greatest. It can be shown that all other changes in society are largely dependent upon this. Thought, philosophy, religion, art, education, law, morals, economic [Page 302] institutions, are to a great extent dependent upon the progress of science.”[1]

Is this great force something that man controls or is it controlling man? Is it “moulding modern life” according to the plans and desires of man or is it a blind force building haphazard a society in which man may or may not be able to survive? If it is working according to the desires of man is he using it to build a society that is devoted to the prosperity and happiness of all classes? Surely man, who by his power of reason, inquiry, and discovery has uncovered so many of nature’s secrets can direct the use of these discoveries and inventions as he will. Says Professor Counts in his chapter on science, “From one standpoint science is just a great new force let loose in the world: like the rays of the sun or the tides of the sea it is neither good nor bad: it stands ready to serve any master; it merely awaits the harness.”[2]

The slightest reflection reveals that at present science is being used both for good and for ill. We have countless physical benefits in the way of light, heat, disease control, travel facilities, relief from heavy labor and other comforts and luxuries too numerous to mention. But we have on the other hand weapons of war too terrible to contemplate, we have untold human misery caused by “technological unemployment.” Also it is charged “that the spread of science and the scientific mind from one area to another leads inevitably to the standardization, mechanization, and dehumanization of life. Some students therefore have predicted that science, if unchecked or uncontrolled by higher ethical purposes, will bring grief and disaster to mankind.”[3]

What is the rightful place of science in society? How at present is it “organized, supported, and controlled?” With these questions Professor Counts is concerned and would have those responsible for education in America concern themselves.

SCIENCE is no new thing. From man’s most primitive beginnings he has advanced because he was constantly asking why and seeking to understand, because he made tools and implements whereby he could perform his task more easily or perform a hitherto impossible feat. But scientific research as we know it today is very modern; indeed it has developed for the most part in this twentieth century, and practically all within a hundred years.

A little more than a century ago an English gentleman who had never visited the United States, Joseph Smithson by name, a chemist and mineralogist, died leaving his entire estate of something over half a million dollars “to the United States of America, to found at Washington under the name of Smithsonian Institution, an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men.”[4] In 1846 the Institution was chartered by act of Congress and further funds have been appropriated by that body from time to time. William Howard Taft speaks of this institution as the “parent of American Science.” While this act of Congress was a definite and public recognition of scientific research as [Page 303] something worthy of government concern, no one could then foresee its future importance.

From this beginning scientific research as an organized profession has developed slowly at first, then rapidly until today (up to 1929) it is estimated that some $200,000,000 are annually expended for its promotion. This sum is dispensed through four different kinds of agencies. Through various bureaus of the Department of Agriculture our government appropriates money “to acquire and diffuse among the people of the United States useful information on subjects concerned with agriculture in the most general and comprehensive sense of the word.” The Department of Commerce also has important bureaus of research, notably the Bureau of Standards. The Public Health Service is another agency for research supported by the federal government.

Our colleges and universities are also seats of research. Just how much research goes on in these it is difficult to know because “the colleges and universities of the country follow no comprehensive and coordinated program of scientific investigation.” However, Professor Counts believes that “The great colleges, technical schools, and universities, of which there are more than a score, are the most important centers of scientific endeavor in the country.” Not only is research in the fundamental sciences going on in these institutions but it is here that scientists are trained.

A third agency for research is the private foundation. Some of these, as for example the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research and the Carnegie Institution in Washington, are heavily endowed and devoted to inquiry in science and education. And finally there is the research carried on by business and industry. This last has practically all developed since 1900, and “today the country is literally dotted with industrial research laboratories most of which are maintained under private auspices.” Many of them are organized and equipped on a most elaborate scale. The Eastman Kodak Company laboratories are among the most extensive and were the first established. They “date from 1886 when George Eastman employed a young chemist to devote his time entirely to experimentation. According to the records, this young man was the first trained chemist to be engaged by an American manufacturer to devote himself wholly to research with no time limits on his efforts.”[5]

No one can question the enormous value of the work done in all these various institutions of research or the advantages and progress that society has reaped from them. But are the advantages distributed among all classes of society? What of the fundamental aims and purposes back of this research? Is it wholly in accord with the high aims of science itself? To answer these questions Professor Counts examines the close connection which exists between research and industry. Almost from the beginning this close relation existed. Not only the agencies conducted by private firms and the great endowed research institutions, but many of the government bureaus of research serve the [Page 304] interests of industry first while the welfare of all is secondary or neglected. “Even the universities,” says Professor Counts, “in spite of their long tradition as champions of the spirit of science, have by no means been free from the taint of commercialism.”[6]

SECRECY is one of the first consequences of this close relationship between science and private interests. The secrecy of the alchemist of old creeps in as a result of the fear that some one else may profit by one’s discovery. This practice is “hostile to the whole spirit of science.” One of the finest institutions of research in the country is built and equipped and endowed for the exclusive use of industry. The laboratories and equipment are at the disposal of the investigator; but his salary comes from some private firm or group of firms. Therefore “all discoveries which he makes during the period of his fellowship are the property of the concerns providing his salary.” To divulge such discoveries is considered a breach of honor. And of course it is under present conditions. The point is that the standard of honor established by industry is in direct conflict with the higher standard implicit in science itself. For, remarks Professor Counts, “science thrives on the freest exchange of ideas and publication of findings.”[7]

As a result of secrecy it sometimes happens that knowledge is suppressed that might be of great value to the public because industry sees no immediate profit in it. “There are countless numbers of patents,” says Chief Clerk Woolard of the United States Patent Office, “which, if in operation, would much cheapen the articles they could produce, but they are intentionally shelved to prevent competition. Concerns operating under old inventions for which they have expended great sums to erect plants, buy up these newer and cheaper methods to prevent competitors from getting hold of them. They then tuck them away in their safes never to be used.”[8]

THE research carried on by the Bureau of Standards furnishes another example of the strange contradictions into which our present policies lead us. Here, too, many of those engaged in research receive their salaries from industry. The findings of such a one “are immediately made available to the supporting firm or firms. They may or may not be reported to the general industry through the official channels of the bureau.”[9] The general public, too, is denied information which would be most valuable in determining what goods to purchase. “Although innumerable brands and makes of goods found on the retailed market are tested in the laboratories of the bureau, this vast store of useful information is not available to the general public.”[10] The government saves millions of dollars in its buying each year through these tests, but the public must base its decisions of what is best to buy on advertisements which are too often misleading, or on the expensive trial and error plan. It is perfectly plain why this cannot be otherwise under our present economic philosophy. “American industry,” says Professor [Page 305] Counts, “ . . . would find itself completely demoralized and forced to seek new foundations, if the objective light of science or even of disinterested informed judgment were permitted to play upon its products. At no point in the entire economy does the rationality of technology expose more clearly the irrationality of inherited economic practice and thought.”[11] Even more serious is his charge that science in its applied phases “may even be and often is employed in the obscuring of truth, the dissemination of falsehood, and the general exploitation of the people.”[12]

Many other examples are cited in this chapter to give added evidence that the present use of science falls far below the high standards of science itself. The spirit of science is the spirit of search after truth. “Its inner logic”, says Professor Counts, “is rational, integrated, and universal in character.” And this spirit is “profoundly out of harmony with the present social order with its emphasis upon competition, secrecy, and personal gain.”[13]

How far apart are these two is illustrated by an incident related by Professor Counts. “Recently”, he says, “American firms dealing in disinfectants, toilet waters, haberdashery, musical instruments, clothing, and other products, offered large sums of money to Albert Einstein on his visit to the United States, if he would only consent to sign his name to statements that he had used the articles and found them satisfactory. His comment on this effort to make profit out of an illustrious name reveals the breadth of the chasm that separates science from the countinghouse: ‘Is it not a sad commentary upon the commercialism and, I must add, the corruption of our time that business firms make these offers with no thought of wanting to insult me?’”[14]

It is evident that Professor Counts has no intention of decrying or belittling the noble work of scientists. His accusation is that their great achievements are too often for the benefit of the few and not for society as a whole. And this misdirected aim he blames, not on the particular individuals, who often do have high ideals, but on the commonly accepted low ethical standards of our present social order. With so much of research dominated by business interests “it becomes immediately devoted, not to the disinterested search for truth nor to the promotion of the common good, but rather to the discovery of knowledge that will be commercially valuable and that will be of pecuniary advantage to the owners of industry.”[15] It is true that the interests of society and those of private enterprise are not always contradictory, but there are conflicts which are “deep-seated and abiding.” “The American people today are confronted by the strange anomaly of a society uniquely dependent on science and yet lacking organization or machinery designed to develop and control this powerful force.”[16]

IS man capable of working out such an organization? No doubt he is. The teachings of Bahá’u’lláh show that latent in man is the capacity to do practically anything he desires. [Page 306] He has already shown this capacity in the physical world. He must turn his research into social fields. But first must come the desire. Man must see the need of a more worthy social order. There is much evidence that he is awakening to this need; but it would seem that even higher powers are demanded for the unraveling of social problems than for discovering nature’s secrets. We sometimes speak of these higher powers as spiritual powers. To awaken man’s spiritual powers is the next step. Listen to the commanding words of Bahá’u’lláh: “O Son of Spirit! Noble have I made thee, yet thou hast abased thyself. Rise then unto that for which thou wast created.”

Furthermore, since the field of human relationships is such a difficult one in which to investigate, Bahá’u’lláh has pointed out the pathway along which we must search. This guiding principle is the oneness of mankind. Does this principle seem far afield from our subject—the right use of scientific research? Reflect, and you will find how closely are the two connected. True education is based upon this understanding.


  1. ↑ Social Foundations of Education, by George S. Counts, p. 314.
  2. ↑ Ibid, p. 316.
  3. ↑ Ibid, p. 316.
  4. ↑ Ibid, p. 318.
  5. ↑ Ibid, p. 328.
  6. ↑ Ibid, p. 339.
  7. ↑ Ibid, p. 333.
  8. ↑ Ibid, p. 334.
  9. ↑ Ibid, p. 337.
  10. ↑ Ibid, p. 337.
  11. ↑ Ibid, p. 337.
  12. ↑ Ibid, p. 341.
  13. ↑ Ibid, p. 346.
  14. ↑ Ibid, p. 335.
  15. ↑ Ibid, p. 330.
  16. ↑ Ibid, p. 342.



A Bahá’í author and lecturer who has met leading men and women in many countries finds in the ruler of Denmark that enlightenment and goodwill which the ancient philosopher associated with the office of King.

•

KING HAAKON OF NORWAY

By MARTHA L. ROOT

•

MEET His Majesty King Haakon of Norway, and you will be as charmed as was the writer of this article. Here is a King with a most delightful manner: why, he can laugh at himself and with everybody else! He speaks his thoughts so frankly, so sincerely, his sense of humour is so sparkling, his sense of proportion so balanced, he is an artist in knowing how to live. Is he spiritual? Yes, very! The fire of his predecessor on the throne, King Haakon the Good of Norway (who in 965 A.D. first brought Christianity to the attention of this great land of the North) burns in his deep, dark eyes, but he is one of the smiling kings who gave to humanity religion full of joy. It was a merry audience full of fun and wisdom, but the man who can command this radiant, vital spirituality is a King of courage and evolved personality.

WHAT impressed me most in this ever memorable conversation in the Royal Palace in Oslo, May ninth, 1935, was His Majesty’s profound [Page 307] belief that the security of the world and universal peace depend upon religion. If we had one religion that peoples could agree upon and live, it would bring the tranquillity of the nations. Every point touched upon came back to this one solution, the spiritual foundation for enduring peace. His most passionate desire is for world peace. Our editor wrote with discernment when in his recent letter of recommendation for me, he added: “It is our conviction that it is these nations of Northern Europe which may be expected to take a leading part in all plans intended to make peace and bring about an amelioration of the present very troubled and uncertain international condition.” Mr. Frank Buckman, inaugurator of the Oxford Group Movement had the guidance to come to Norway this year with a team of one hundred spiritual helpers; he thinks it may be these Northern countries that will save the world. These strong, Norwegian people, neutral, whose eyes are lifted up to high mountains and look down into deep valleys, are serious thinkers, and what they believe, they live, they promote.

HIS Majesty King Haakon, I observed, knows very well the religious movements of the twentieth century and spoke of some of them with much appreciation. He mentioned one which he says does great good and it does not ask to what church one belongs; some of His Majesty’s bishops favor it we know, but as Norway has a state religion, Lutheranism—and also as His Majesty’s government is composed of many parties, this wise King did not permit the audience to become an interview.

If one could write what he says about religion, about the economic solution, if one could give his scintillating psychological comments on the universal principles needed to make a better world, it would be eagerly read. He told me it would never do, for if one quotes a King, something he may say with a smile, when one reads it without the smile and doesn’t hear the nuance, the world, the political parties, the church may take issue! He laughingly said it is hard to be a King; it is hard enough to be a President, but that is only for a term of years, it is more difficult to be a King because he is chosen for life!

However, there is another way of [Page 308] knowing this great King and that is through his life. What one could never learn from an interview with him, I relate to you as coming direct from the hearts of the Norwegian people. I was ill in Norway immediately upon arrival, and after many weeks when convalescing, I walked daily in a beautiful park of silver birches where many Norwegians came and went enjoying its loveliness. The first day I asked my nurse: “What is that great splendid building on the summit of this people’s park”? She replied 1n astonishment: “Do you not know that is the Royal Palace and this is the King’s Park?” I saw the standard waving from the flagstaff— and my inner eye saw his warmly-human heart that makes him share so generously all his King’s Park!

THE Norwegian people said to me: “We love our King, he makes us feel he is one of us though he lives in the great palace and we in our houses. He is so wise, so honest, so energetic. We call him our ‘King Haakon the Good’; every Sunday he goes to the Palace Chapel or to one of the regular church services, the Palace Chapel is a place where every one may come.”

“Our King loves sports, be himself skiis, and he goes to many places in Norway where the big outdoor sports’ events are held.” The writer can understand why His MajeSty always is received so enthusiastically, he radiates vitality and enthusiasm, the poorest classes, the richest classes, the conservatives, the radicals of Norway give their King a spontaneous loyalty that is beautiful to witness.

THIS tall, slender, handsome King moves among his people, he may be seen walking in the streets of Oslo, he is often at the opera and very frequently at the social functions arranged to help the needy. One could hardly think of him—yet—as the father of his country. He seems more the brother who understands, sympathizes, he is gentle, careful and has all the human perfections in activity.

An audience With His Majesty King Haakon may be more illuminating and unforgetable than an interview. This spiritually lovable King of Norway who will never talk about himself, who in the whole conversation did not use the words “me, I, my or mine”, made me happy. It was so good to laugh, so Gibraltar-reassuring to find His Majesty standing firm for religion, liberal, vitalizing religion to change hearts and bring the enduring peace.

Gloriously the sun streamed through the palace windows of his room and fell full upon his pleasing, thoughtful countenance as he said good-bye; the sun did not need to say that morning, “I am shining”, and the King did not need to give any interview, for his life spoke it!

LONG may His Majesty King Haakon of Norway live! And through his way of “living the life” teach all the world and begin with us, the joyous adventure of following God’s Will, the fun of fellowship and sharing and the enchantment of being charming and spiritually ideal even to the humblest!



[Page 309]

I ANSWER, “GOD!”

By LE GARDE S. DOUGHTY

(“It is no defence of the poets to say that our present Babel has been caused by the modern doubt of all ultimate truth, for it is just the office of the poets to discover and to teach those very ultimates. If poets are ready to surrender their high office to the scientists then they and their readers are indeed in miserable plight.”—Henry Seidel Canby.)

“Two and two make four; and four is four;
And always sure and tangible four.
But God—
Hope and Fear make God; and God's a shadow,
An abstract coinage of the barbarous mind.” .....
So you speak and speak on, falsely accurate,
Laying a clear wrought architrave
Upon the rigid shaft of specious fact.
And so you do. — But still I answer, “God!”
Then stack your keen-cut squares again;
And prove again. And build again with all
Your fleet facility this certain proof.
But still I answer, “God!” And still you prove
And prove your certain proof. I answer, “God!”
Ah, superior scientist, epitome of reasoning,
I say to you the soul that is human being
Is born of God and breathes of God and touches God.
I answer, "God!” for all your shrewd exactitudes.
For all your syllogisms I answer, “God!”
And “God!” though all the ferrets of your intellect
Thrust out their cold keen noses
Into the sweet warm atmosphere of truth
And smudge it — Truth so mammoth that the universe
(The universe?), ten-thousand universes
Are like so many gnats caught in its sleeve.
For all your ferrets, and if they were ferrets
With half a thousand noses overgrown,
I still say, “God!” and still say, “God!” and “God!”
Let your ferrets sniff their stark cold fathoming,
And lay the bone-picked proof of it before me.
I answer, “God!” Your proof! Then prove again
Your proof.
The human being, the soul that is human being

[Page 310]

Is born of God, breathes God, lives God, knows God.
Then hang your pretty grain of certainty
Upon a self-consuming meteor
And let it dissipate, a whining swish,
Through voids of interplanetary dark .....
The human being, the soul that is human being
Still lives of God, breathes God and answers, “God!”



A fair measure of civilization in any age is its recognition of the principle of arbitration in the settlement of disputes. A distinguished jurist and member of the Society of International Law here traces the historic evolution of this vital principle.

•

DEVELOPMENT OF SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES

By JACKSON H. RALSTON

•

RESEMBLANCES and dissimilarities mark the course of the development of national and international settlement of disputes. To some of the most important of these we shall refer. A complete history would be too long.

We may readily conceive that in the beginnings of society and when the first appreciation arose of the necessity for the preservation of order, men would turn either voluntarily or by requirement of authority to their chiefs to settle difficulties. Such determination would carry the sanction of physical force and assured respect. It became an easy and natural thing for the chiefs to delegate their power to chosen men and thus in the fullness of time great judicial systems to be created.

When we turn to international affairs we find the original unit—the man—multiplied into many, and these called the state. The size of the new creation offered many new difficulties, though the fundamental problem was scarcely changed. Nevertheless, all infra-national experience was not forgotten.

VERY largely among the ancient Romans men sought to settle differences with their fellows, not by going to a chief or to an official judge, but by reference to indifferent and impartial persons. A usual form was through the appointment of one individual by either contestant and the selection of a third by those so named. This general plan was designed not so much to secure abstract justice— [Page 311] that was the business of the courts— as according to Cicero to settle the difference by a sort of compromise in which each would be required to yield something in order to end the controversy. Perhaps from this early condition originated the idea still persisting that international arbitration like the old private system means merely a method of compromise and not an effort to arrive at justice.

Among the ancient Greeks inter-city arbitration was extensively practised, but with a clearer idea of reaching a just conclusion. Often many people, sometimes as high as 600, took part in determining the fate of an arbitration. This was ordinarily under the charge of an impartial city which established what may be correctly termed a special Court of Arbitration.

Justice was the end consciously sought for by such tribunals and not merely compromise and adjustment.

When Rome became supreme, then arbitration in anything like an internnational sense came to an end. The former self-asserting cities and nations had become subject to orders, ceasing to be independent contracting bodies. Thus it was that until about the 13th century international arbitration in every form suffered an eclipse. A new description of independent units known as nations had to rise.

THE progress of the idea of international arbitration was not free from difficulty. Very quickly it was realized that this scheme was in essence opposed to the exercise to its fullest extent of what has come to be known as the doctrine of national sovereignty, under which its head claimed an unimpeachable right to determine for the nation the rightfulness of any dispute in which he or it might be engaged. Arbitration was a proposal that as to the particular controversy some person other than the head of the nation should have the last word—a contention intolerable to the chiefs, particularly if the arbitrator were a private individual of lesser dignity than a chief of a state. Thus we understand the philosophy which led to the hanging of a private individual acting as arbitrator who had given a distasteful decision. It happened, however, that all the nations with whom at least we are particularly concerned recognized a common religious superior, the Pope. To him it was more easy to refer disputes than to any individual, and in addition papal determinations carried with them a mystical sanction belonging to no other judgments. Papal decrees thus constituted but slight invasions of the idea of national or kingly sovereignty, and were oftened welcomed. The papal conclusions, however, were the dictates of a superior and not necessarily based upon law. When, between the 15th and 18th centuries, the papal authority diminished at the same time that the doctrine of sovereignty strengthened, it came to pass that arbitration fell almost entirely into disuse, save in rare cases where another monarch was usually selected as an arbitrator.

During this period questions of varied natures were submitted to arbitration. Usually, however, they [Page 312] were matters of territorial control or boundaries and inheritances. A judgment which may now seem odd to us directed to whom a girl should be married and the amount of her dowry. Her own wishes seem not to have been consulted by the arbitrators.

THE modern era of arbitration dates from the Jay Treaties between Great Britain and the United States in the year 1794. This provided for three separate Boards of Arbitration, one of which was an entire failure, the second resulted in speedy and satisfactory agreement, and the third passed upon many questions of high importance. It was assuredly something more than an accident that these Boards were created by the two most advanced nations of the time, for a certain degree of intelligence and urbanity was needed to refer to private individuals disputes as to which the heads of governments had been unable to agree, and to submit to the implied limitation upon the doctrine of sovereignty.

The arbitrations under the treaty of 1794 were, notwithstanding, crude in certain details. The arbitrators were nationals chosen in equal numbers by each of the two nations and the odd man selected by lot, neither one of these provisions being calculated to secure the best results. However, the general cause of arbitration between nations received a great impetus, and from that time on arbitrations to settle disputes of almost every category were resorted to with increasing frequency and with some development as to methods. Occasionally, though rarely, considering the great number of arbitrations, the old plan of reference to the head of another government was used. The method of choosing the odd man by lot, which was often followed, and even as late as 1853 between the United States and England, was abandoned in favor of his selection by agreement between the parties, or by the choice of the nationals on the Board when they should come together. Improved ways in creating this Board were shown in the selection of the arbitrators in the Alabama dispute at Geneva, wherein England and the United States named each one, and Italy, Switzerland and Brazil named the three remaining, while the whole body on coming together selected its president. The central idea of the Geneva plan has even found its way into the Hague Arbitral Convention of 1907, which provides in the absence of other disposition for the appointment of one representative from each of the two contending nations and two more selected from the Hague panel, with a fifth elected by the four so named.

SO rapid became the development of the arbitral idea that the Hague Conference of 1899 devoted much time to the subject, creating what was termed a Permanent Court of Arbitration. This provided for the possible naming of four members of a permanent court by each of the signatory powers, which members however formed a panel to be drawn upon when desired by any nations wishing to refer disputes to them. The Hague Conference of 1907 fortified and extended somewhat the provisions [Page 313] of the Convention of 1899. It has been said of the Permanent Court of Arbitration so created that it was not permanent, in that it was simply a panel of judges appointed temporarily and never meeting, and that it was not a Court in any sense the word. Nevertheless, it represented a very important step toward providing a method for the final settlement of international disputes.

The year 1907 witnessed the constitution under the auspices of the United States of a Central American Court of Justice, with Wide powers as to the determination of disputes between the republics of that region. The treaty under which the Court was formed limited its operation to a brief term of years. When this limit was reached, the Court having given a decision contrary to the desires or opinion of the American government, it was permitted to lapse.

Recognizing the essential weakness as lacking important features usually pertaining to a court in the Hague Court of Arbitration, the American delegates to the Hague Conference of 1907 were instructed to and did urge the creation of a real court of permanent judges, limited in number and open at all times for the settlement of disputes. Their work, joined with that of other nations, notably England, resulted in a draft of rules to govern such a court when it should be created, and these were adopted and recommended to the several governments. The plan, however, lacked an essential, in that it left for a future agreement the matter of the final constitution of the court and the selection of judges. The larger powers desired to be assured of representatives on the court and not to be dominated by judges upon the court named by the great number of small nations, and the smaller powers, possessed of a like ambition and fearing the great powers, would only favor a court having a membership infinitely too numerous for judicial business. Upon this rock the whole plan foundered and nothing of an effective character took place until after the formation of a League of Nations. When this was formed and a Commission of jurists agreed to draft the provisions relative to a Court, it was the happy suggestion of Mr. Root that the judges to be chosen should receive a majority of votes in the Council, where the larger nations are more influential, and in the Assembly where the small nations preponderate, thus securing a choice of judges acceptable to all nations, great and small.

WITH the details of this Court and an account of its powers, I have not the time to concern myself. It is, however, to be noted that we have progressed from a more or less haphazard system of arbitrations to a full-fledged Court, marking resemblance, although a crude one perhaps, to progress from the original private arbitrations to national Courts of Justice.

It is within my purpose to say a few words with regard to the formation and work of Courts of Arbitration. The original idea, as I have stated, contemplated the formation of a Board composed of representatives of two nations, presided over [Page 314] by a more or less impartial man. This plan, which was customary in private arbitrations and still largely persists in international arbitrations, carries with it certain weaknesses. The national arbitrator on such a Board brings into its work and consultations the prejudice and feelings of his nation, and only in exceptional instances has he been able to divest himself entirely of them. So thoroughly was this recognized that in the Geneva Arbitration the British and American members of the Board did not sit side by side with the three impartial members of the Court. The tendency, therefore, of the judgment of Arbitration Boards so formed is to become frequently the conclusion of the one impartial man. He is exposed to the solicitation and pressure of those whom he must regard as his colleagues, and arrive at his conclusions under circumstances hostile to independent judgment. In so far as arbitration has been attacked as offering a compromise instead of true judicial determination, it has been largely due to this fact.

The criticism, however, is upon the method of choosing arbitrators rather than upon arbitration itself, though the distinction is scarcely noted. A pure arbitration would demand that no national form any part of the Court of Arbitration. Unfortunately, this has rarely been the case.

The most distinguished illustration of an arbitration conducted under the best possible circumstances was afforded in the case of the Pious Fund of the Californias. Herein there were five arbitrators chosen from the panel of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague. These included an Englishman, a Russian, two Hollanders, and as the presiding officer, a Dane, all of them being men of the highest possible standing and internationalists of repute. Their deliberations were free from any possible extraneous influence. It is to be recorded that although the United States has since resorted on several occasions to the Hague Court of Arbitrators, it has not adhered to the high standard attained between the United States and Mexico in the case to which we have referred, though offering what was tantamount to lip service in one instance.

Nor is it well that a single man should be the sole real arbitrator, as is so often the case even when three are named. The parties in interest then in a fashion gamble upon his mental peculiarities and tendencies, which are best checked up and balanced by a Board of three or more independent men.

DESPITE the weaknesses of which I have spoken in arbitration as usually practised, the career of Boards of Arbitration has been remarkably successful.

Boards of Arbitration have usually sought to regard themselves as controlled by the principles of international law and have shown a tendency to respect its precepts as far as ascertainable. They have created a large body of international law, governing topics treated insufficiently or not at all by international law writers. In doing this they have drawn greatly upon the general principles of law applicable as between man and man. [Page 315] Their conduct induces one to believe international law rightfully viewed is not a science far apart from that which we employ in settling personal disputes. Indeed there are few questions of an international nature which do not find their close analogies in the law of the several nations. The development of this fact has been one of the major results of international arbitration.

From the foregoing it may be believed that arbitration will continue with relation to the settlement of minor matters, while for questions of real international importance resort to the International Court of Justice will be favored.



This book review presents the views of a scientist who knows where the material universe ends and the spiritual world begins. His analysis of the problem of free will is an important contribution to current discussions of reality.

•

WHERE IS SCIENCE GOING?

By GENEVIEVE L. COY

•

“WE are always being brought face to face with the irrational. Else we couldn't have faith. And if we did not have faith but could solve every puzzle in life by an application of the human reason, what an unbearable burden life would be. We should have no art and no music and no wonderment.”

An artist or musician, reading these sentences, might well think, “Who is this man of discernment who has arisen to defend the life of faith and imagination against the inroads of an age which has exalted science to a religion?” But if the reader continued to the next sentence following those quoted he would find, “And we should have no science; not only because science would thereby lose its chief attraction for its own followers—namely, the pursuit of the unknowable—but also because science would lose the cornerstone of its own structure, which is the direct perception by consciousness of the existence of external reality.”

What manner of writer is it, then, who says that without faith we should have neither art nor music nor science?

The sentences quoted are from “Where is Science Going?”, by Max Planck, an eminent German scientist.[1] His name is not so well known to the average American reader as that of Albert Einstein,—yet when Einstein was asked to write an introduction to Planck’s book he replied [Page 316] that “it would be presumptuous on his part to introduce Max Planck to the public; for the discoverer of the quantum theory did not need the reflected light of any lesser luminary to show him off.”

When James Murphy, the translator of “Where is Science Going?” finally prevailed upon Einstein to write a short introduction, the propounder of the theory of relativity concludes by exclaiming, “Well! Why should I tell of his greatness? It needs no paltry confirmation of mine. His work has given the most powerful of all impulses to the progress of science. His ideas will be effective as long as physical science lasts. And I hope that the example which his personal life affords will not be less effective with later generations of scientists.”

The underlying purpose of Planck’s book is that of defending science— and, in especial, physical science— from the statements of certain scientists, pseudo-scientists and litterateurs who have drawn conclusions from scientific data which are not warranted by strict scientific thinking. He discusses at length certain popularizations of physical science which he considers to be based on misinterpretations of scientific findings. He makes it clear that science is concerned with a study of external reality, and that there are realms of philosophy, of religion, of conduct in which science cannot be a guide. At this point he differs radically from certain scientists who have attempted to deduce principles of conduct and faith from scientific theories. Planck says categorically “Science brings us to the threshold of the ego and there leaves us to ourselves. Here it resigns us to the care of other hands.”

PLANCK discusses at length the recent findings which some scientists and their lay followers have interpreted as implying that the law of cause and effect has been overthrown in the physical universe. He states his reaction to this in no uncertain terms.

“I must definitely declare my belief that the assumption of a strict dynamic causality is to be preferred, simply because the idea of a dynamically law-governed universe is of wider and deeper application than the merely statistical idea . . . I have never been able to find the slightest reason, up to now, which would force us to give up the assumption of a strictly law-governed universe, whether it is a matter of trying to discover the nature of the physical, or the spiritual, forces around us.”

The explanation of the seeming break-down of the law of cause and effect lies in the lack of fineness in certain scientific measurements. “The non-fulfillment of the statistical rule in particular cases is not therefore due to the fact that the law of causality is not fulfilled, but rather to the fact that our observations are not sufficiently delicate and accurate to put the law of causality to a direct test in each case. If it were possible for us to follow the movement of each individual molecule in this very intricate labyrinth of processes, then we should find in each case an exact fulfillment of the dynamical laws.”

If the law of causality is to be considered [Page 317] as applying strictly in the physical universe, what is the author’s attitude toward the play of cause and effect in the field of human conduct? “Just as at each and every moment the motion of a material body results necessarily from the combined action of many forces, so human conduct results with the same necessity from the interplay of mutually reinforced or contradicting motives, which partly in the conscious and partially in the unconscious sphere work their way forward towards the result.” “In practical everyday life our attitude toward our fellow beings is based on the assumption that their words and actions are determined by distinct causes, which lie in the individual nature itself, or in the environment, even though we admit that the sources of these causes cannot be discovered by ourselves.”

THIS brings Planck directly face to face with the problem of the freedom of the human will. If all our conduct is under the rule of cause and effect, how can there ever be a point in a man’s life when he can really choose which of two courses of action he will follow? Must he not necessarily act in accord with the stronger of the forces which play upon him?

Planck’s argument here is exceedingly interesting. He begins by stating his firm conviction that the “question of the human will has nothing whatever to do with the opposition between causal and statistical physics. Its importance is of a much more profound character and is entirely independent of any physical or biological hypothesis.”

But even though we agree that the question of the freedom of the will is not a problem of science, how can we avoid the conclusion that man can act only in terms of the forces past and present which have played upon him?

Planck replies that a man can never fully know himself, never fully comprehend the forces which have controlled his conduct in the past. He can attempt to trace the causes which have influenced him, but only an intelligence superior to the human could fully trace the sequence of cause and effect in a human life. And as man weighs one course of conduct against another, in the attempt to decide which is wiser or more expedient, he changes himself. And this change brought about in himself influences his conduct, so that he acts differently from what he would had he not thus “willed” his action.

“In principle every man can apply the law of causality to the happenings of the world around him, in the spiritual as well as in the physical order, according to the measure of his own intellectual powers; but he can do this only when he is sure that the act of applying the law of causality does not influence the happening itself. And therefore he cannot apply the law of causality to his own future thought or to the acts of his own will. These are the only objects which for the individual himself do not come within the force of the law of causality in such a way that he can understand its play upon them. And these objects are his dearest and most intimate treasures. On the wise management [Page 318] of them depend the peace and happiness of his life.”

“We cannot possibly study ourselves at the moment or within the environment of any given activity. Here is the place where the freedom of the will comes in and establishes itself, without usurping the right of any rival. Being thus emancipated, we are at liberty to construct any miraculous background that we like in the mysterious realm of our inner being . . . I might put the matter in another way and say that the freedom of the ego here and now, and its independence of the causal chain, is a truth that comes from the immediate dictate of human consciousness.”

In the foregoing quotation, Planck seems to ignore the possibility that whether we do or do not desire to construct a “miraculous background” may be determined by forces outside the individual’s control. Although his argument, that the act of “willing” changes the one who does the willing, is worthy of thoughtful consideration, Planck seems in the last analysis to say that man’s will is free because to feel free is “the immediate dictate of human consciousness.”

And there is no uncertainty in his declaration that man’s will is free. “The fact is that there is a point, one single point in the immeasurable world of mind and matter, where science and therefore every causal method of research is inapplicable, not only in practical but also on logical grounds, and will always remain inapplicable. This point is the individual ego. It is a small point in the universal realm of being; but in itself it is a whole world, embracing our emotional life, our will and our thought. This realm of the ego is at once the source of our deepest suffering and at the same time of our highest happiness. Over this realm no outer power of fate can ever have sway, and we lay aside our own control and responsibility over ourselves only with the laying aside of life itself.”

“The law of causality is the guiding rule of science; but the Categorical Imperative—that is to say, the dictate of duty—is the guiding rule of life. Here intelligence has to give place to character, and scientific knowledge to religious belief. And when I say religious belief here I mean the word in its fundamental sense.” “And so we arrive at a point where science acknowledges the boundary beyond which it may not pass, while it points to those farther regions which lie outside the sphere of its activities.” “Science as such can never really take the place of religion.”

Planck thus makes clear a fact that many scientists seem not to appreciate, —that science cannot determine goals of human conduct, nor can it provide the motives which will impell man to seek the realization of his ideal aims. For a “guiding rule of life” man must turn to religion.

IN a talk which ‘Abdu’l-Bahá gave to an English Bahá’í he discussed freedom of will under the interesting analogy of the weaving of a fabric. “The human soul is to be compared to a weaver; the human life is the thing woven, the cloth; the human body, principally the [Page 319] brain, is the tool, the instrument, with which the weaving is done. God the Lord, the Master of the Works, prepares the (warp for the) loom, —that is, the human milieu or environment, with the ground threads of fate. Thereby will be forced on the human being the place, the time, the parents, the religion, nationality, society, qualities, etc.

“The human soul then throws across the warp-threads the filling or woof, by means of the shuttle,—the five senses, imagination, action,— whereby to the end of life are developed the masterpieces of the human life.

“The materials for weaving may be of hemp, yarn, wool or silk or some other mixture, which cannot be chosen by the soul, nor can the soul select the tools, but only the pattern and the method of weaving, in so far as it is not already predetermined by the material itself to a certain degree. The material represents the inherited body organization. . . .“The human being has a relative freedom of will. Man is able to resist the insistance of instinct—the driving force thereof—by an ability created from knowledge and reason which enables him to define the motives, causes and consequences . . .

“Our mission lies between will and duty, and God alone can judge and estimate the responsibility of our free will, influenced by inheritance and instinct, and the demands of duty. And this He will do in His eternal justice. To whom God the Lord has given in the cradle much, from him He will sometimes demand very much.”[2]


  1. ↑ Published by W. W. Norton & Co., 1932.
  2. ↑ Quoted in “Sonne der Warheit”, April, 1933.



When Christ said: ‘Whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the left one also,’ it was for the purpose of teaching men not to take personal revenge. He did not mean that if a wolf should fall upon a flock of sheep and wish to destroy it, that the wolf should he encouraged to do so. No, if Christ had known that a wolf had entered the fold and was about to destroy the sheep, most certainly He would have prevented it.

As forgiveness is one of the attributes of the Merciful One, so also justice is one of the attributes of the Lord. The tent of existence is upheld upon the pillar of justice, and not upon forgiveness. The continuance of mankind depends upon justice and not upon forgiveness. So if, at present, the law of pardon were practiced in all countries, in a short time the world would be disordered, and the foundations of human life would crumble. For example, if the governments of Europe had not withstood the notorious Attila, he would not have left a single living man.—‘Abdu’l-Bahá, in “Some Answered Questions.”



[Page 320]

WORLD ORDER

“The world’s equilibrium hath been upset through the vibrating influence of this most great, this new World Order.”—BAHÁ’U’LLÁH.

WHY this ominous breakdown of civilization, these revolutionary movements, this consuming strife of race, class and nation—this swift descent to some overwhelming political or economic war?

The old order perishes, not to be restored, but beneath the forces of destruction a universal, a divine Spirit remolds humanity within the creation of a new order and a new cycle of unity, of spiritual knowledge and of peace.

The central point of this progressive world movement is Bahá’u’lláh. His Life restored to the human heart its power of faith in God. His Teachings are a pure mirror reflecting purpose and meaning where all was chaos an confusion.

World Order Magazine is devoted to the promotion of these Teachings, which are the laws and principles of the new cycle. Month by month it affords glimpses of the new way of life and the New Civilization arising from the wreckage of the dead past.



SUBSCRIPTION ORDER FORM

WORLD ORDER

135 EAST 50TH STREET,

NEW YORK, N. Y.

I enclose $ for which please fill my order as checked.

[ ] Copy of current issue, .20c

[ ] Introductory subscription, seven months, $1.00.

[ ] Annual subscription, $2.00 (Public or University Library rate, $1.75.)

[ ] Gift subscriptions, five or more annual subscriptions on one order, $1.50 each.

[ ] Extra copies—ten copies of any issue sent to one or more addresses, $1.50.

(Add 25c for additional postage on foreign subscriptions).

Name___________________________________


Address__________________________________

_________________________________________


[Page 321]

THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE

•

GLEANINGS FROM THE WRITINGS OF BAHÁ’U’LLÁH

Tablets on the Day of God, the Manifestations, the reality of man, the oneness of mankind, and universal peace, in excerpts selected and translated by Shoghi Effendi. 346 pages and Index. Bound in cloth, $1.80. In fabrikoid, $2.25.

•

BAHÁ’U’LLÁH and the NEW ERA, by J. E. Esslemont

An exposition of the teachings and history of the religion established by Bahá’u’lláh for the unification of peoples in one faith and one order. This work has been translated into more than twenty languages within the past decade. 308 pages. Bound in leather, $1.00. Paper covers, $0.50.

•

SOME ANSWERED QUESTIONS

Compiled by Laura Clifford Barney from the recorded explanations given her by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in 1907 to questions concerned with the significance of the Prophets, the renewal of civilization, the spiritual reality of man, and sociological subjects. 350 pages. Bound in cloth, $2.00.

•

SECURITY FOR A FAILING WORLD, by Stanwood Cobb

The psychological approach to economic and political problems, emphasizing the vital need for a new spirit in humanity as well as a new order for societh. 202 pages. Bound in cloth. $2.00.

•

THE PROMISE OF ALL AGES, by Christophil

The spiritual content of religion, with its evolving social implications, traced through the succession of Prophets to its culmination in the Dispensation of Bahá’u’lláh. 254 pages. Bound in cloth, $1.50.


BAHÁ’Í PUBLISHING COMMITTEE

135 East 50th Street

New York City

Retrieved from "https://bahai.works/index.php?title=World_Order/Volume_1/Issue_8/Text&oldid=209515"
Powered by MediaWiki