The Making of Religion by Andrew Lang
page 32 of 453 (07%)
page 32 of 453 (07%)
|
The anthropologist and psychologist, then, must either admit that their
evidence is no better than ours, if as good, or must say that they only believe evidence as to 'possible' facts. They thus constitute themselves judges of what is possible, and practically regard themselves as omniscient. Science has had to accept so many things once scoffed at as 'impossible,' that this attitude of hers, as we shall show in chapter ii., ceases to command respect. My suggestion is that the trivial, rejected, or unheeded phenomena vouched for by the evidence here defended may, not inconceivably, be of considerable importance. But, stating the case at the lowest, if we are only concerned with illusions and fables, it cannot but be curious to note their persistent uniformity in savage and civilised life. To make the first of our two main positions clear, and in part to justify ourselves in asking any attention for such matters, we now offer an historical sketch of the relations between Science and the so-called 'Miraculous' in the past. [Footnote 1: _Primitive Culture_, i. 156. London, 1891.] [Footnote 2: _Ueber psychische Beobachiungen bei Naiurvülkern_. Leipzig, Gunther, 1890.] [Footnote 3: See especially pp. 922-926. The book is interesting in other ways, and, indeed, touching, as it describes the founding of a new Red Indian religion, on a basis of Hypnotism and Christianity.] [Footnote 4: Programme of the Society, p. iv.] |
|