Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion | Page 5

David Hume
wanting,
I am persuaded, in prudence, than in industry. I shall, therefore, communicate to you a
maxim, which I have observed with regard to my own children, that I may learn how far
it agrees with your practice. The method I follow in their education is founded on the
saying of an ancient, "That students of philosophy ought first to learn logics, then ethics,
next physics, last of all the nature of the gods." [Chrysippus apud Plut: de repug:
Stoicorum] This science of natural theology, according to him, being the most profound
and abstruse of any, required the maturest judgement in its students; and none but a mind
enriched with all the other sciences, can safely be entrusted with it.
Are you so late, says PHILO, in teaching your children the principles of religion? Is there
no danger of their neglecting, or rejecting altogether those opinions of which they have
heard so little during the whole course of their education? It is only as a science, replied
DEMEA, subjected to human reasoning and disputation, that I postpone the study of
Natural Theology. To season their minds with early piety, is my chief care; and by
continual precept and instruction, and I hope too by example, I imprint deeply on their
tender minds an habitual reverence for all the principles of religion. While they pass
through every other science, I still remark the uncertainty of each part; the eternal
disputations of men; the obscurity of all philosophy; and the strange, ridiculous
conclusions, which some of the greatest geniuses have derived from the principles of
mere human reason. Having thus tamed their mind to a proper submission and
self-diffidence, I have no longer any scruple of opening to them the greatest mysteries of
religion; nor apprehend any danger from that assuming arrogance of philosophy, which
may lead them to reject the most established doctrines and opinions.
Your precaution, says PHILO, of seasoning your children's minds early with piety, is
certainly very reasonable; and no more than is requisite in this profane and irreligious age.

But what I chiefly admire in your plan of education, is your method of drawing advantage
from the very principles of philosophy and learning, which, by inspiring pride and
self-sufficiency, have commonly, in all ages, been found so destructive to the principles
of religion. The vulgar, indeed, we may remark, who are unacquainted with science and
profound inquiry, observing the endless disputes of the learned, have commonly a
thorough contempt for philosophy; and rivet themselves the faster, by that means, in the
great points of theology which have been taught them. Those who enter a little into study
and study and inquiry, finding many appearances of evidence in doctrines the newest and
most extraordinary, think nothing too difficult for human reason; and, presumptuously
breaking through all fences, profane the inmost sanctuaries of the temple. But
CLEANTHES will, I hope, agree with me, that, after we have abandoned ignorance, the
surest remedy, there is still one expedient left to prevent this profane liberty. Let
DEMEA's principles be improved and cultivated: Let us become thoroughly sensible of
the weakness, blindness, and narrow limits of human reason: Let us duly consider its
uncertainty and endless contrarieties, even in subjects of common life and practice: Let
the errors and deceits of our very senses be set before us; the insuperable difficulties
which attend first principles in all systems; the contradictions which adhere to the very
ideas of matter, cause and effect, extension, space, time, motion; and in a word, quantity
of all kinds, the object of the only science that can fairly pretend to any certainty or
evidence. When these topics are displayed in their full light, as they are by some
philosophers and almost all divines; who can retain such confidence in this frail faculty of
reason as to pay any regard to its determinations in points so sublime, so abstruse, so
remote from common life and experience? When the coherence of the parts of a stone, or
even that composition of parts which renders it extended; when these familiar objects, I
say, are so inexplicable, and contain circumstances so repugnant and contradictory; with
what assurance can we decide concerning the origin of worlds, or trace their history from
eternity to eternity?
While PHILO pronounced these words, I could observe a smile in the countenance both
of DEMEA and CLEANTHES. That of DEMEA seemed to imply an unreserved
satisfaction in the doctrines delivered: But, in CLEANTHES's features, I could
distinguish an air of finesse; as if he perceived some raillery or artificial malice in the
reasonings of PHILO.
You propose then, PHILO, said CLEANTHES, to erect religious faith on philosophical
scepticism; and you think, that if certainty or evidence be expelled from every other
subject of inquiry, it will all retire to
Continue reading on your phone by scaning this QR Code

 / 48
Tip: The current page has been bookmarked automatically. If you wish to continue reading later, just open the Dertz Homepage, and click on the 'continue reading' link at the bottom of the page.