ACCEPTING THE UNIVERSE 



Our greatest philosopher, William James, had a 

 wide grasp of fundamental questions, but it seems 

 to me that he did not fully grasp the problem of 

 evil; he saw the universe as a dual universe, two prin- 

 ciples, good and evil, struggling with each other. 

 He seemed to look upon good and evil as positive 

 entities in themselves, whereas naturalism sees in 

 them only names which we give to our experiences 

 with objects and conditions in this world. What 

 favors us, as I have so often said, we call good, and 

 what antagonizes we call evil; but absolute good 

 and absolute evil do not exist, any more than do 

 absolute up and down; or absolute near and far. 

 The absolute admits of no degrees, but there are all 

 degrees of good and bad. Some hostile germs are 

 worse than others, and some friendly germs are 

 better than others. Again I say, we live in a world 

 of relativity. 



Naturalism does not see two immeasurable 

 realities, God and Nature, it sees only one, that all 

 is Nature or all is God, just as you prefer. 



James was fond of quoting Walt Whitman, but 

 he does not see, as Whitman did, that there is no 

 evil, or, if there is, that it is just as necessary as the 

 so-called good. From James's point of view Na- 

 ture is a harlot to whom we owe no allegiance, and 

 another world is demanded to correct and com- 

 pensate the failures and disappointments of this. 



Our sacred books and traditions tell us of one God 



200 



