A Budget of Paradoxes.

Volume II.

by Augustus de Morgan.

ON SOME PHILOSOPHICAL ATHEISTS.

With the general run of the philosophical atheists of the last century the notion of a G.o.d was an hypothesis. There was left an admitted possibility that the vague somewhat which went by more names than one, might be personal, intelligent, and superintendent. In the works of Laplace,[1] who is sometimes called an atheist from his writings, there is nothing from which such an inference can be drawn: unless indeed a Reverend Fellow of the Royal Society may be held to be the fool who said in his heart, etc., etc., if his contributions to the _Philosophical Transactions_ go no higher than _nature_. The following anecdote is well known in Paris, but has never been printed entire. Laplace once went in form to present some edition of his "Systeme du Monde" to the First Consul, or Emperor. Napoleon, whom some wags had told that this book contained no mention of the name of G.o.d, and who was fond of putting embarra.s.sing questions, received it with--"M.

Laplace, they tell me you have written this large book on the system of the universe, and have never even mentioned its Creator." Laplace, who, though the most supple of politicians, was as stiff as a martyr on every point of his philosophy or religion (e. g., even under Charles X he never concealed his dislike of the priests), drew himself up and answered {2} bluntly, "Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothese-la."[2] Napoleon, greatly amused, told this reply to Lagrange, who exclaimed, "Ah! c'est une belle hypothese; ca explique beaucoup de choses."[3]

It is commonly said that the last words of Laplace were, "Ce que nous connaissons est peu de chose; ce que nous ignorons est immense."[4] This looks like a parody on Newton's pebbles:[5] the following is the true account; it comes to me through one remove from Poisson.[6] After the publication (in 1825) of the fifth volume of the _Mecanique Celeste_, Laplace became gradually weaker, and with it musing and abstracted. He thought much on the great problems of existence, and often muttered to himself, _Qu'est ce que c'est que tout cela!_[7] After many alternations, he appeared at last so permanently prostrated that his family applied to his favorite pupil, M. Poisson, to try to get a word from him. Poisson paid a visit, and after a few words of salutation, said, "J'ai une bonne nouvelle a vous annoncer: on a recu au Bureau des Longitudes une lettre d'Allemagne annoncant que M. Bessel a verifie par l'observation vos decouvertes theoriques sur les satellites de Jupiter."[8] Laplace opened his eyes and answered with deep {3} gravity, "_L'homme ne poursuit que des chimeres_."[9] He never spoke again. His death took place March 5, 1827.

The language used by the two great geometers ill.u.s.trates what I have said: a supreme and guiding intelligence--apart from a blind rule called _nature of things_--was an _hypothesis_. The absolute denial of such a ruling power was not in the plan of the higher philosophers: it was left for the smaller fry. A round a.s.sertion of the non-existence of anything which stands in the way is the refuge of a certain cla.s.s of minds: but it succeeds only with things subjective; the objective offers resistance. A philosopher of the appropriative cla.s.s tried it upon the constable who appropriated _him_: I deny your existence, said he; Come along all the same, said the unpsychological policeman.

Euler[10] was a believer in G.o.d, downright and straightforward. The following story is told by Thiebault,[11] in his _Souvenirs de vingt ans de sejour a Berlin_,[12] published in his old age, about 1804. This volume was fully received as trustworthy; and Marshall Mollendorff[13] told the Duc de Ba.s.sano[14] in 1807 that it was the most veracious of books written by the most honest of men. Thiebault says that he has no personal knowledge of the truth of the story, but {4} that it was believed throughout the whole of the north of Europe. Diderot[15] paid a visit to the Russian Court at the invitation of the Empress. He conversed very freely, and gave the younger members of the Court circle a good deal of lively atheism. The Empress was much amused, but some of her councillors suggested that it might be desirable to check these expositions of doctrine. The Empress did not like to put a direct muzzle on her guest's tongue, so the following plot was contrived. Diderot was informed that a learned mathematician was in possession of an algebraical demonstration of the existence of G.o.d, and would give it him before all the Court, if he desired to hear it. Diderot gladly consented: though the name of the mathematician is not given, it was Euler. He advanced towards Diderot, and said gravely, and in a tone of perfect conviction: _Monsieur,_ (a + b^{n}) / n = x, _donc Dieu existe; repondez!_[16] Diderot, to whom algebra was Hebrew, was embarra.s.sed and disconcerted; while peals of laughter rose on all sides. He asked permission to return to France at once, which was granted.

ROTATION OF THE MOON.

An examination of the Astronomical doctrine of the Moon's rotation. By J. L.[17] Edinburgh, 1847, 8vo.

A systematic attack of the character afterwards made with less skill and more notice by Mr. Jellinger Symons.

July 1866, J. L. appears as Mr. James Laurie, with a new pamphlet "The Astronomical doctrines of the Moon's rotation ..." Edinburgh. Of all the works I have seen on the question, this is the most confident, and the sorest. {5} A writer on astronomy said of Mr. Jellinger Symons,[18] "Of course he convinced no one who knew anything of the subject." This "ungenerous slur" on the speculator's memory appears to have been keenly felt; but its truth is admitted. Those who knew anything of the subject are "the so-called men of science," whose three P's were a.s.sailed; prestige, pride, and prejudice: this the author tries to effect for himself with three Q's; quibble, quirk, and quiddity. He explains that the Scribes and Pharisees would not hear Jesus, and that the lordly bishop of Rome will not cast his tiara and keys at the feet of the "humble presbyter" who now plays the part of pope in Scotland. I do not know whom he means: but perhaps the friends of the presbyter-pope may consider this an ungenerous slur. The best proof of the astronomer is just such "as might have been expected from the merest of blockheads"; but as the giver is of course not a blockhead, this circ.u.mstance shows how deeply blinded by prejudice he must be.

Of course the paradoxers do not persuade any persons who know their subjects: and so these Scribes and Pharisees reject the Messiah. We must suppose that the makers of this comparison are Christians: for if they thought the Messiah an enthusiast or an impostor, they would be absurd in comparing those who reject what they take for truth with others who once rejected what they take for falsehood. And if Christians, they are both irreverent and blind to all a.n.a.logy. The Messiah, with His Divine mission proved by miracles which all might see who chose to look, is degraded into a prototype of James Laurie, ingeniously astronomizing upon ignorant geometry and false logic, and comparing to blockheads those who expose his nonsense. Their comparison is as foolish as--supposing {6} them Christians--it is profane: but, like errors in general, its other end points to truth. There were Pseudochrists and Antichrists; and a Concordance would find the real forerunners of all the paradoxers. But they are not so clever as the old false prophets: there are none of whom we should be inclined to say that, if it were possible, they would deceive the very educated. Not an Egyptian among them all can make uproar enough to collect four thousand men that are murderers--of common sense--to lead out into the wilderness. Nothing, says the motto of this work, is so difficult to destroy as the errors and false facts propagated by ill.u.s.trious men whose words have authority. I deny it altogether. There are things much more difficult to destroy: it is much more difficult to destroy the truths and real facts supported by such men. And again, it is much more difficult to prevent men of no authority from setting up false pretensions; and it is much more difficult to destroy a.s.sertions of fancy speculation. Many an error of thought and learning has fallen before a gradual growth of thoughtful and learned opposition. But such things as the quadrature of the circle, etc., are never put down. And why? Because thought can influence thought, but thought cannot influence self-conceit: learning can annihilate learning: but learning cannot annihilate ignorance. A sword may cut through an iron bar; and the severed ends will not reunite: let it go through the air, and the yielding substance is whole again in a moment.

Miracles _versus_ Nature: being an application of certain propositions in the theory of chances to the Christian miracles. By Protimalethes.[19] Cambridge, 1847, 8vo.

The theory, as may be supposed, is carried further than most students of the subject would hold defensible.

{7}

An astronomical Lecture. By the Rev. R. Wilson.[20] Greenock, 1847, 12mo.

Against the moon's rotation on her axis.

[Handed about in the streets in 1847: I quote the whole:] Important discovery in astronomy, communicated to the Astronomer Royal, December 21st, 1846. That the Sun revolve round the Planets in 25748-2/5 years, in consequence of the combined attraction of the planets and their satellites, and that the Earth revolve round the Moon in 18 years and 228 days. D. T. GLAZIER [altered with a pen into GLAZION.] Price one penny.

1847. In the _United Service Magazine_ for September, 1847, Mrs.

Borron,[21] of Shrewsbury, published some remarks tending to impeach the fact that Neptune, the planet found by Galle,[22] really was the planet which Le Verrier and Adams[23] had a right to claim. This was followed (September 14) by two pages, separately circulated, of "Further Observations upon the Planets Neptune and Ura.n.u.s, with a Theory of Perturbations"; and (October 19, 1848) by three pages of "A Review of M.

Leverrier's Exposition." Several persons, when the remarkable discovery was made, contended that the planet actually discovered was an intruder; and the future histories of the discovery must contain some account of this little afterpiece. Tim Linkinwater's theory that there is no place like London for coincidences, would have been utterly overthrown in favor of what they used to call the celestial s.p.a.ces, if there had been a planet which by chance was put {8} near the place a.s.signed to Neptune at the time when the discovery was made.

EARLY IDEAS OF AVIATION.

Aerial Navigation; containing a description of a proposed flying machine, on a new principle. By Daedalus Britannicus. London, 1847, 8vo.

In 1842-43 a Mr. Henson[24] had proposed what he called an aeronaut steam-engine, and a Bill was brought in to incorporate an "Aerial Transit Company." The present plan is altogether different, the moving power being the explosion of mixed hydrogen and air. Nothing came of it--not even a Bill. What the final destiny of the balloon may be no one knows: it may reasonably be suspected that difficulties will at last be overcome.

Darwin,[25] in his "Botanic Garden" (1781), has the following prophecy:

"Soon shall thy arm, unconquered Steam! afar Drag the slow barge, or drive the rapid car; Or, on wide-waving wings expanded, bear The flying chariot through the fields of air."

Darwin's contemporaries, no doubt, smiled pity on the poor man. It is worth note that the two true prophecies have been fulfilled in a sense different from that of the predictions. Darwin was thinking of the suggestion of Jonathan Hulls,[26] when he spoke of dragging the slow barge: it is only very recently that the steam-tug has been employed on the ca.n.a.ls. The car was to be driven, not drawn, and on the common roads. Perhaps, the flying chariot will {9} be something of a character which we cannot imagine, even with the two prophecies and their fulfilments to help us.[27]

THE SECRET OF THE UNIVERSE DIVULGED.

A book for the public. New Discovery. The causes of the circulation of the blood; and the true nature of the planetary system. London, 1848, 8vo.

Light is the sustainer of motion both in the earth and in the blood. The natural standard, the pulse of a person in health, four beats to one respiration, gives the natural second, which is the measure of the earth's progress in its daily revolution. The Greek fable of the t.i.tans is an elaborate exposition of the atomic theory: but any attempt to convince learned cla.s.sics would only meet their derision; so much does long-fostered prejudice stand in the way of truth. The author complains bitterly that men of science will not attend to him and others like him: he observes, that "in the time occupied in declining, a man of science might test the merits." This is, alas! too true; so well do applicants of this kind know how to stick on. But every rule has its exception: I have heard of one. The late Lord Spencer[28]--the Lord Althorp of the House of Commons--told me that a speculator once got access to him at the Home Office, and was proceeding to unfold his way of serving the public. "I do not understand these things," said Lord Althorp, "but I happen to have ---- (naming an eminent engineer) upstairs; suppose you talk to him on the subject." The discoverer went up, and in half-an-hour returned, and said, "I am very much obliged to your Lordship for introducing me to Mr. ----; he has convinced me {10} that I am quite wrong." I supposed, when I heard the story--but it would not have been seemly to say it--that Lord A. exhaled candor and sense, which infected those who came within reach: he would have done so, if anybody.

THE TRISECTION AND QUADRATURE AGAIN.

A method to trisect a series of angles having relation to each other; also another to trisect any given angle. By James Sabben. 1848 (two quarto pages).

"The consequence of years of intense thought": very likely, and very sad.

1848. The following was sent to me in ma.n.u.script. I give the whole of it:

"_Quadrature of the Circle_.--A quadrant is a curvilinear angle traversing round and at an equal distance from a given point, called a center, no two points in the curve being at the same angle, but irrept.i.tiously graduating from 90 to 60. It is therefore a mean angle of 90 and 60, which is 75, because it is more than 60, and less than 90, approximately from 60 to 90, and from 90 to 60, with equal generation in each irrept.i.tious approximation, therefore meeting in 75, and which is the mean angle of the quadrant.

"Or suppose a line drawn from a given point at 90, and from the same point at 60. Let each of these lines revolve on this point toward each other at an equal ratio. They will become one line at 75, and bisect the curve, which is one-sixth of the entire circle. The result, taking 16 as a diameter, gives an area of 201.072400, and a circ.u.mference of 50.2681.

"The original conception, its natural harmony, and the result, to my own mind is a demonstrative truth, which I presume it right to make known, though perhaps at the hazard of unpleasant if not uncourteous remarks."

I have added punctuation: the handwriting and spelling {11} are those of an educated person; the word _irrept.i.tious_ is indubitable. The whole is a natural curiosity.

The quadrature and exact area of the circle demonstrated. By Wm.

Peters. 8vo. _n. d._ (circa 1848).[29]

Suggestions as to the necessity for a revolution in philosophy; and prospectus for the establishment of a new quarterly, to be called the _Physical Philosopher and Heterodox Review_. By Q. E. D. 8vo. 1848.

These works are by one author, who also published, as appears by advertis.e.m.e.nt,