"But what must a philosopher think of those vain reasoners who,
instead of regarding the present scene of things as the sole object
of their contemplation, so far reverse the whole course of nature,
as to render this life merely a passage to something further; a
porch, which leads to a greater and vastly different building; a
prologue which serves only to introduce the piece, and give it more
grace and propriety? Whence, do you think, can such philosophers
derive their idea of the gods? From their own conceit and
imagination surely. For if they derive it from the present
phenomena, it would never point to anything further, but must be
exactly adjusted to them. That the divinity may _possibly_ be
endowed with attributes which we have never seen exerted; may be
governed by principles of action which we cannot discover to be
satisfied; all this will freely be allowed. But still this is mere
_possibility_ and hypothesis. We never can have reason to _infer_
any attributes or any principles of action in him, but so far as we
know them to have been exerted and satisfied.
"_Are there any marks of a distributive justice in the world?_ If
you answer in the affirmative, I conclude that, since justice here
exerts itself, it is satisfied. If you reply in the negative, I
conclude that you have then no reason to ascribe justice, in our
sense of it, to the gods.
Pages:
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183