Because Spinoza was dissatisfied with theology’s explanation of good
and evil, he opened the door of determinism and looked around quite a bit
but he did not know how to slay the fiery dragon so he pretended it wasn’t
even there: He stated, “We are men, not God. Evil is really not evil when
seen in total perspectiveâ€, and he rejected the principle of ‘an eye for an
eye.’ Will Durant, not at all satisfied with this aspect of Spinoza’s
philosophy, although he loved him dearly, could not understand how it was
humanly possible to turn the other cheek in this kind of world. He also
went in and looked around very thoroughly and he too saw the fiery dragon,
but unlike Spinoza he made no pretense of its non-existence. He just didn’t
know how to overcome the beast but refused to agree with what common
sense told him to deny.
The implications really need no further clarification
as to why free will is in power. Nobody, including Spinoza and other
philosophers, ever discovered what it meant that man’s will is not free
because they never unlocked the second door which leads to the discovery.
The belief in free will was compelled to remain in power until the
present time because no one had conclusive proof that determinism was
true, nor could anyone slay the fiery dragon which seemed like an
impossible feat. Is it any wonder that Johnson didn’t want to get into this
matter any further? Is it any wonder Durant never went beyond the
vestibule? Are you beginning to recognize why it has been so difficult to
get this knowledge thoroughly investigated?
Since the modern world of
science was playing havoc with religion it needed a boost and along came,
just in the nick of time, a scientist who gave seven reasons why he believed
in God. A. Cressy Morrison, who wrote his book, “Man Does Not Stand
Aloneâ€, was almost convinced that God was a reality. He challenged Julian
Huxley’s conclusions written in his book, “Man Stands Aloneâ€. Both tried
to answer the question, “Is there a Supreme Intelligence guiding this
universe?†Who is right? Huxley said ‘no there isn’t’, but Morrison’s
arguments were mathematically sound and he gave quite a boost to instilling
faith again in those people who were really beginning to wonder. I can
almost remember word for word how he tried to prove that nothing happens
by chance, and he did prove it except for this element of evil. It went
something like this:
“Chance seems erratic, unexpected and subject to no method of
calculation, but though we are startled by its surprises, chance is subject to
rigid and unbreakable law. The proverbial penny may turn up heads ten
times in a row and the chance of an eleventh is not expected but is still one
in two, but the chances of a run of ten heads coming up consecutively is
very small. Supposing you have a bag containing one hundred marbles,
ninety-nine black and one white. Shake the bag and let out one. The
chance that the first marble out of the bag is the white one is exactly one in
one hundred. Now put the marbles back and start again. The chance of the
white coming out is still one in a hundred, but the chance of the white
coming out first twice in succession is one in ten thousand (one hundred
times one hundred).
Now try a third time and the chance of the white coming out three times
in succession is one hundred times ten thousand or one in a million.
Try another time or two and the figures become astronomical. The
results of chance are as clearly bound by law as the fact that two plus two
equals four.
In a game in which cards are shuffled and an ace of spades was dealt to
one of the players, ace of hearts to the next, clubs to the third and diamonds
to the dealer, followed by the deuces, the threes and so on, until each player
had a complete set in numerical order, no one would believe the cards had
not been arranged.
The chances are so great against such a happening that it probably never
did happen in all the games played anywhere since cards was invented. But
there are those who say it could happen, and I suppose the possibility does
exist. Suppose a little child is asked by an expert chess player to beat him
at chess in thirty-four moves and the child makes every move by pure
chance exactly right to meet every twist and turn the expert attempts and
does beat him in thirty-four moves. The expert would certainly think it was
a dream or that he was out of his mind. But there are those who think the
possibility of this happening by chance does exist. And I agree, it could
happen, however small the possibility. My purpose in this discussion of
chance is to point out clearly and scientifically the narrow limits which any
life can exist on earth and prove by real evidence that all the nearly exact
requirements of life could not be brought about on one planet at one time by
chance. The size of the earth, the distance from the sun, the thickness of the
earth’s crust, the quantity of water, the amount of carbon dioxide, the
volume of nitrogen, the emergence of man and his survival – all point to
order out of chaos, to design and purpose, and to the fact that according to
the inexorable laws of mathematics all these could not occur by chance
simultaneously on one planet once in a billion times. It could so occur, but
it did not so occur. When the facts are so overwhelming and when we
recognize as we must the attributes of our minds which are not material, is
it possible to flaunt the evidence and take the one chance in a billion that we
and all else are the result of chance? We have found that there are
999,999,999 chances to one against a belief that all things happen by
chance. Science will not deny the facts as stated; the mathematicians will
agree that the figures are correct. Now we encounter the stubborn
resistance of the human mind, which is reluctant to give up fixed ideas. The
early Greeks knew the earth was a sphere but it took two thousand years to
convince men that this fact is true.
New ideas encounter opposition, ridicule and abuse, but truth survives
and is verified. The argument is closed; the case is submitted to you, the
jury, and your verdict will be awaited with confidence.â€