38 NATURE S GOOD: A CONVERSATION 



good, in which good is constantly destroyed by the 

 very power that produces it, in which there re 

 sides a temporary bird of passage consciousness 

 doomed to ultimate extinction what is such a Na 

 ture (all that Arthur offers us) save the problem, 

 the contradiction originally in question? A com 

 placent optimism may gloss over its intrinsic self- 

 contradictions, but a more serious mind is forced to 

 go behind and beyond this scene to a permanent 

 good which includes and transcends goods defeated 

 and hopes suborned. Not because idealists have 

 refused to note the facts as they are, but precisely 

 because Nature is, on its face, such a scene as 

 Arthur describes, idealists have always held that it 

 is but Appearance, and have attempted to mount 

 through it to Reality. 



Stair. I had not thought to say anything. My 

 attitude is so different from that of any one of 

 you that it seemed unnecessary to inject another 

 varying opinion where already disagreement reigns. 

 But when Arthur was speaking, I felt that perhaps 

 this disagreement exists precisely because the solv 

 ent word had not been uttered. For, at bottom, 

 all of you agree with Arthur, and that is the cause 

 of your disagreement with him and one another. 

 You have agreed to make reason, intellect in some 

 sense, the final umpire. But reason, intellect, is 

 the principle of analysis, of division, of discord. 

 When I appeal to feeling as the ultimate organ 



