Rudolph Eucken | Page 4

is the meaning, the value, and purpose of life, and what is the
highest and the eternal in life--the great reality? This is the question
that Eucken would solve. Before attempting a solution of his own, he
examines those that have already been offered. His discussion of these
theories is remarkable for the fairness, breadth of view, sympathy,
insight, and accurate knowledge that is shown. There is no superficial
criticism, neither does he concern himself with the inessential details of
the theories.
Jest-books tell us of a defendant against whom a claim for
compensation was made by a complainant who alleged that the former's
dog had bitten him. The defence was, first, that the dog was lame, blind,
and toothless; second, that it had died a week before; and third, that the

defendant never possessed a dog. A sensible judge would wish to be
satisfied in regard to the third statement before wasting time discussing
the others; if it proved to be true, then the case would be at an end. The
defences of philosophical systems are often similar, and the critic is
tempted to waste time discussing details when he should go to the root
of the matter. Eucken does not fall into this error. His special method is
to seek the idea or ideas which lie at the root of the proposed solution;
if these are unsatisfactory, then he does not consider it necessary to
discuss them further. Hence his work is free from the flippant and
superficial argument so common to-day; he makes a fair and serious
endeavour to find out the truth (if any) that is at the basis of the
proposed solutions, and does not hesitate to give them their due meed
of praise even though he considers them to be ultimately unsatisfactory.
Before a solution can be regarded as a satisfactory one, Eucken holds
that it should satisfy certain conditions. It should offer an explanation
for life which can be a firm basis for life, it must admit of the
possibility of human freedom, and must release the human being from
sordid motives--unless it satisfy these conditions, then it cannot be
accepted as final.
The solutions of the problem of life that have been offered he considers
to be five--Religion and Immanental Idealism, Naturalism, Socialism
and Individualism, the first two regarding the invisible world as the
reality in life, the others laying emphasis on man's life in the present
world. The reader will perhaps wonder how his choice has fallen upon
these systems of thought and these alone. The explanation is a simple
one: he considers it necessary to deal only with those theories which
can form, and have formed, bases for a whole system of life. Mere
theoretical ideas of life, especially negative ideas such as those of
agnosticism and scepticism, do not form such a basis, but the five
chosen for discussion can, and have to some extent, posed as complete
theories of life, upon which a system of life can be built.
Has Religion solved the question? If it has, then it must have done so in
that which must be considered its highest form--in Christianity.
Christianity has attempted the solution by placing stress upon a higher

invisible world, a world in sharp contrast with the mere world of sense,
and far superior to it. It unites life to a supernatural world, and raises
mankind above the level of the natural world. It has brought out with
great clearness the contrast between the higher world and the world of
sin, and has shown the need for a break with the evil in the world. It has
given to man a belief in freedom, and in the necessity for a complete
change of heart. It has proved a source of deliverance from the feeling,
of guilt, and a comfort in suffering. Indeed, considering all the facts,
there seems to be no doubt that, of all the solutions offered, religion has
been the most powerful factor in the history of mankind.
Its influence would continue for the present and future, were it not that
doubt has been cast upon its very foundations, and had not
circumstances arisen to take men's minds away from thoughts of a
higher and invisible world, and to concentrate them to a greater extent
than formerly upon the world of sense. The progress of the natural
sciences has done much to bring about the change. Christianity made
man the centre of the universe, for whom all things existed, but the
sciences have insisted upon a broader view of the universe, and have
deposed man from his throne, and given him a much humbler position.
Then as the conception of law became more prominent, and scientists
became more and more inclined to explain all things as the result of
natural laws, the