THE UNFATHOMED UNIVERSE 41 



for the enhancement of his life, and some way or means 

 of uniting the worshipper with God or the gods. 



It is evident, then, that the religious language is not the 

 scientific language, and that it is impossible to intermingle 

 the two. The religious concepts are different and apparently 

 more metaphysical ; their aim is interpretation rather than 

 description. In short, science and religion are incommen- 

 surables. 



But to call religion and science ^ incommensurables ' is 

 not to fall back on the old-fashioned impossible device of 

 having idea-tight compartments. Just as a novel scientific 

 generalisation is not incorporated in our scientific system 

 unless consistent with previously established conclusions, or 

 unless the latter can be adjusted to meet the new idea har- 

 moniously, so at a greater height, where philosophical dis- 

 cipline is invaluable, a religious idea, such as that of a Divine 

 Creator, must be congruent with the rest of our world-picture, 

 e.g., with the idea of evolution. It is the criterion of con- 

 sistency that saves from superstition. 



Men are led to religion along many pathways — from the 

 perplexities of the moral life, from an appreciation of 

 the facts of history, and from the experience of reaching the 

 limits of practical endeavour, of emotional expression, and 

 of intellectual inquiry. When we think of the last-named 

 three pathways to religion, which many tread, — through 

 baulked struggle, over-strained emotion, and baffled search 

 after clear understanding, — we can see why the rapid devel- 

 opment of science should, for a time of transition at least, 

 work against religion. For science gives Man from time to 

 time a greatly increased mastery over ISTature; science, with 

 its analytical triumphs, ever tends to diminish, in the shallow- 

 minded, the saving grace of wonder; and science is ever 



