---
title: Improvement Era
description: Monthly periodical of the Mormon church, 1897 onward. This library holds the issues of November 1897 to December 1930.
authors:
  - Bennion, Milton
collections:
  - periodicals
tags:
  - magazine
  - improvement-era
periodical: Improvement Era
volume: 33
number: 3
published: 1930-01
publisher: Young Men’s Mutual Improvement Associations
publisher_place: Salt Lake City
language: en
type: magazine
reference: "Milton Bennion, “A Spiritual Philosophy of Life,” *Improvement Era* 33, no. 3 (January 1930): 208–211."
source:
  url: https://archive.org/details/improvementera3303unse
  transcription: Transcribed from the Internet Archive scan of each issue (the item for each issue is named in the issue's own source); unnumbered advertising leaves are omitted, printed page numbers are kept as page markers.
  identifier: improvementera3303unse
start_page: 208
end_page: 211
rights:
  status: public-domain
  basis: US publication 1930 or earlier (published 1930-01)
  source: https://archive.org/details/improvementera3303unse
  publication_year: 1930
  note: The Internet Archive item metadata carries a blanket "© Copyright by Intellectual Reserve, Inc." notice. The library owner judged it inapplicable because this issue was published in 1930, before 1931; a scan-level notice does not restore copyright.
---

# A Spiritual Philosophy of Life

<!-- page:208 -->

A Spiritual Philosophy of Life By MILTON BENNION Dean of the School of Education, University of Utah III Philosophic Conceptions of God TN OES philosophy reveal, or have been positive, have, therefore, answered in the affirmative by some of prove, the existence God? What various notions of God are current in philosophy? What are the philosophic grounds of faith in God? Whether or not philosophy di been anthropomorphic. In the very nature of the case it cannot be otherwise. This is sufficient ex- planation of the fact that if we identify him with people's notions of his characteristics, certainly in this sense, God is created by man reuK1 ,u ■"*? Z1" I! 5"' p„H« and chan§es with man's knowledge recti v reveals God to man depends « ., f ^ , , . s in some measure upon the kind of and ldeals- nBut; *hrou£ " *^i God is conceived to be. men' generally, believe that God being Uod is Those who identify him with the processes of creation as we expe- rience them may hold that this ex- perience is a direct revelation of God. Something of this view is expressed by Henri Bergson thus: really exists as their creator, bene- factor, or inspirer to a higher life, and, if they analyze their own thought, will hold that the changes in their notions of his characteristics are changes in them- selves. "He (God) is unceasing life, action, freedom. Creation so conceived, is not a mystery; we experience it in ourselves when we act freely."1 HTHIS belief in the reality of God ^ is essential to effective religious faith. On this point Professor J. qOME agnostics hold that God is A. Leighton of Ohio State Uni- d the "Eternal Energy" by versity writes : which all that we know comes in- to being. This "eternal energy" they call God; Herbert Spencer, however, calls it "The Unknow- able." Something of this sort is for H. G. Wells the "Veiled Being," still unknown and un- knowable, but not admitted by him to the category of the gods; the God of his own making he terms, "The Invisible King;" much more limited, but more to his liking. This process of making a god "In the case of the religious values, the success of the modes of action represented by worship, prayer, and meditation, de- pends upon the assumed conformity of these actions with the ultimate reality of God. A man may, indeed, believe in a certain kind of God because he wants or "wills so to believe. To worship the God whom one craves, and to feel oneself in communion with him, may be the most profoundly satisfying experience of value that a finite mind can have; but the con- tinuance and meaningfulness of this value is possible only if the God is held to be a reality, not a product of the worshiper's wishes."2 fashioned after one's own ideals and aspirations is defended by Trt7HETHER or not God is re- some on the ground that all his- vealed to man as a person, toric conceptions of God are made not merely in his creative acts, is in the same way. It is also de- nounced by others for the same reason. It must, of course, be ad- mitted that man can have no idea of God that does not grow out of his own experience. All historic notions of God, in so far as they =Leighton, J. A. — -Man and the Cos- mos, p. 403, D. Appleton & Co., New York. 1Creative Evolution, p. 248, Henry Holt 8 Co., New York. A CQUAINT thyself with God, if thou would' st taste -*-*- His works. Admitted once to his embrace, Thou shalt perceive that thou wast blind before: Thine eyes shall be instructed; and thine heart Made pure shall relish, with divine delight Till then unfelt, what hands divine have wrought. —Cowper. "The Task." Bk. V. line 782. mystics and by believers in divine revelation. It is now, however, the general verdict of scientists, in- cluding many advocates of belief in God, that science itself does not reveal God as a person, that it is not in the province of science to do so. On this point J. Arthur Thomson says; "We cannot by scientific searching find out God. Science is impersonal and un- emotional. We cannot base transcendent inferences on concrete data in regard to Nature. It is not by science that we can pass from Nature to Nature's God. The pathway is that of religious experience, just as the pathway to the vision of the beautiful is that of aesthetic discipline. It is possible, however, that science with its disclosure of the Order of Nature and all its wonders, may suggest and enhance the religious view."3 What of the Philosophical Proofs of the Existence of God? r\F these philosophical proofs ^ the teleological argument is perhaps oldest and most vital. It is based upon the evidences of pur- pose in nature, which, if admitted, implies a being capable of forming purposes and executing them in his creations. This argument was used by Plato as sufficient proof of God's existence. Artistotle supplemented this proof with what is called the cos- mological argument. It is based upon the conception that every event has a cause, and that this im- plies that there must have been a first cause or Prime Mover — God. St. Anselm, in the Middle Ages, added to these the ar- gument that since man has a conception of a most perfect and most real Being, it must be possible to infer his 'Science and Religion, p. 19 7, Charles Scribners Sons, New York.

<!-- page:209 -->

The Improvement Era for January, 1930 209 i ■ 1 L OVERTY, incessant drudgery and much worse evils, it has often been the lot of poets and wise men to strive with, and their glory to conquer. Locke was banished as a traitor; and wrote his "Essay on the Human Understanding" shelter- ing himself in a Dutch garret. Was Milton rich or at his ease when he composed "Paradise Lost?" Not only low, but fallen from a height; not only poor, but impoverished; in darkness and with dangers com- passed round, he sang his immortal song, and found fit audience, though few. Did not Cervantes finish his work, a maimed soldier and in pri- son!1 Nay, was not the "Araucana," which Spain acknowledges as its Epic, written without even the aid of paper; on scraps of leather, as the stout fighter and voyager snatched any moment from that wild war- fare?— Carlyle. existence; this was called the On- tological proof. 'T'HESE proofs were virtually set aside by the Scotch philoso- pher, Hume, who, in turn awoke the German philosopher, Kant, from his "dogmatic slumber" and led him by very elaborate philo- sophic procedure also to declare these proofs invalid. While this, at first, seemed to destroy the phil- osophic foundations of belief in God, Kant held that he had de- stroyed knowledge that he might make room for faith. He then offered what to him were convinc- ing reasons, based primarily upon moral grounds, for faith in a Divine Being, a sure guarantor of the validity of the moral life of man, of the ultimate triumph of righteousness and its perpetuation, in conjunction with happiness, in the persons of immortal souls. Since Kant it has been quite common for philosophers to aban- don the traditional proofs as such, of the existence of God. By many, however, the same arguments, in part, are used as evidences of the existence of an intelligent creative power. This is especially true of a modified form of the teleological argument which is now generally thought of, not after the analogy of a watchmaker and his product, but after the manner of organic growth, where purposes are seen to be realized. Various Historic Conceptions of the Nature of God SINCE philosophy grows out of the sum total of human ex- perience it is wider in its scope than the natural sciences. It may, there- fore, appeal to religious experience no less than to technical science. These experiences vary greatly with individual philosophers, which doubtless accounts in some measure for the great variety of philosophical theories concerning the nature of God. The follow- ing are typical examples of these varying theories: Pantheism identifies God with the universe, which is conceived as one, as the term universe indicates. The pantheist may, however, con- ceive the universe as primarily men- tal or as primarily physical or as an all absorbing, all powerful re- ality which is manifested to us in these two forms. Some of the Greek philosophers were panthe- ists, as are also some modern phil- osophers. Deism, which became popular in the eighteenth century, recognizes God as the creator of the universe, but holds that he set it in motion in conformity to the laws of na- ture, of which he is also the au- thor. Having done this and, ap- parently, established it on the per- petual motion plan, there was no further need of his services. This theory gave assurance to scientists that they might pursue with the utmost certainty their study of the operations of nature in agreement with fixed and invariable laws. There was no danger of divine interference in the affairs of the world. Not only was the possibili- ty of miracles and revelation ruled out but so also were prayer and worship, since these could be of no avail. It required no great in- sight to discover that, at least for all practical purposes, this God might be dispensed with; thus in some minds, deism was superseded by atheism, often associated with a thorough-going, materialistic- mechanistic metaphysics. /^\LDER and more persistent ^ than either pantheism or de- ism in European thought are the various forms of theism. In its earlier and more purely religious expressions, God is conceived in human form and as manifesting human mental characteristics. He- brew literature very well illustrates how this conception of God devel- oped from its primitive and crude forms to the highly ethical con- ception of God set forth by some of the Old Testament prophets and by the writers of the New Testament generally. It was not, however, until after Christianity had been influenced by Greek thought that a much more abstract notion of God was developed. The conception of God thus moved in the direction of pantheism, which it escaped by holding that God is not merely immanent in the world but that he is also transcendent. The tendency was, however, to- ward making him impersonal and toward describing him, in large measure, in negative terms, after the manner of Aristotle, who, in his metaphysics, says: "That there is then a substance which is eternal and immovable and separate from the objects of sense is evident from what has been said. And it has also been shown that this substance cannot have extension but is without parts and indi- visible. For it imparts motion through endless time, and nothing limited has unlimited potentiality. Now since every magnitude is either limited or unlimited, for the reason given, God cannot have limited magnitude; nor yet can he have unlimited magnitude because, in a word, there is no such magnitude. "And further that God is free from passion and from qualitative change has also been shown, for all other changes are subsequent to motion in space. Why these things are so is now clear."4 The Philosophic Grounds of Faith in Divinity TT IS generally assumed that life *■ is a good in itself but not any kind of life. It must be a develop- ing life, characterized by intelli- 4From Bakewell, C. M. — Source* Book in Ancient Philosophy, p. 233, Charles Scribners Sons, New York. I. N the mind of him who is pure and good, will be found neither corruption nor defilement nor any malignant taint. Unlike the actor who leaves the stage before his part is played, the life of such a man is complete whenever death may come. He is neither cowardly nor presuming; not enslaved to life nor indifferent to its duties; and in him is found nothing worthy of con- demnation nor that which putteth to shame. Test by a trial how excellent is the life of the good man — the man who rejoices at the portion given him in the universal lot and abides therein content; just in all his ways and kindly minded toward all men. This is moral perfection: to live each day as though it were the last; to be tranquil, sincere, yet not indifferent to one's fate. — Mar- cus Aurelius.

<!-- page:210 -->

210 The Improvement Era for January, 1930 gence, good-will, sympathetic un- derstanding of all human life, and appreciation of what are common- ly called the higher values of life. This kind of life is, by thoughtful people, an object of desire, not only for themselves but also for their fellow-men. The desire to promote this type of life is normal- ly accompanied by faith in the possibility of realizing it, both in- dividually and socially. This is the basis of faith in humanity and in the ultimate good of the world. Both of these are closely allied to faith in God, so closely that some philosophers identify faith in God with faith in humanity, or in the ultimate good, or with both. The case is, in one way, analo- gous to the thought of a New Testament writer who said: "For he that loveth not his brother, whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?'" TO complete the analogy, how- -*- ever, faith in fellow-men, while essential to faith in God, is not to be regarded as identical with it. Faith in fellow-men implies faith in the ultimate supremacy of the good, and this, in turn, stim- ulates faith in a superhuman power that makes for triumph of the good. A judgment that any end thought of is good is a judgment of value. All judgments of value re- fer, directly or indirectly to per- sons. In human experience, at least, judgments of value wholly out of relation to persons are impossible. Faith in the ultimate good of the world, then, is very naturally as- sociated with faith in a great, all good person, the embodiment of the highest ideals of the believer, the finest conceivable qualities of personal character. This is not merely faith in a God of his own making; it is faith in a God who is thought of as having real object- ive existence, but whose attributes have to be conceived in terms of the worshiper's experience, real and ideal. Man's earlier conceptions of such a deity emphasized his cosmic powers and his activities as creator of the world. Present tendencies in philosophy emphasize his ethi- cal relation to man and his moral power in the spiritual world. From this standpoint it is not essential A BOVE all, it is ever to be kept in mind, that not by material, but by moral power, ate men and their actions governed. How noiseless ts thought! No rolling of drums, no tramp of squadrons or immeas- urable tumult of baggage-wagons, attends its movements: in what ob- scure and sequestered places may the head be meditating, which is one day to be crowned with more than imperial authority; for kings and emperors will be among its min- istering servants; it will rule not over, but in, all heads, and with these its solitary combinations of ideas, as with magic formulas, bend the world to its will! The time may come when Napoleon himself may be better known for his laws than for his battles-, and the victory of Waterloo prove less momentous than the opening of the first Me- chanics' Institute. — Carlyle. !1 John IV:20. to regard God as the author of all that is. It is conceivable that some sort of substance may co-exist with God, and that his creative power may be manifested in and limited by this substance, conceived either as material, as spiritual or as both. TF God is creator of all the evil and irrationality in the world it raises a perplexing problem in phil- osophy, the problem of theodicy, so-called. That physical evils, un- der some circumstances, have value as moral disciplinary measures, may readily be defended. The same is true of moral evil. It is, how- ever, difficult to defend the thesis that moral evil is good for its au- thor. It is more understandable to assume that there is some degree of irrationality, selfishness, and ill- will in the world which may in- volve failure of some personalities — real spiritual losses. This also seems to the writer a saner view than that of those who hold that all evil is due to our limited vision, that if we could see the whole, as God sees it, we would realize that there is no evil. If this view is correct what a lot of effort is wast- ed in trying to overcome this phan- tom of our intellectual myopia. The idea that evil is wholly nega- tive, or only good in the making, while somewhat less objectionable, hardly squares with human ex- perience. It should be noted that it is the business of philosophy to explain experience, rather than dogmatically to explain it away. If then, God is not regarded as the author or the creator of all that is, what is his relation to the world? Are there also other cre- ative energies in the world? If so, are they mental or physical or both? Again experience seems to indicate that there are minds pos- sessed of some degree of freedom and creative activity whose activi- ties can hardly be attributed to God. To do so would be to jeop- ardize his standing, even with saints, except those whose mystic vision is so powerful as to com- pletely transform mundane experi- ence. It is bad enough for men to attribute their evil deeds to the devil, and thus to divest them- selves of responsibility. The fact, however, that some notable charac- ters in history have attributed to God responsibility for their evil deeds has led some of their fellow- men to abandon the idea of a per- sonal God; they would even dis- card the term God because of its bad historical associations. It should be noted, however, that if the same procedure were generally used, family, state, and society as a whole would have to go also. The main point here, however, is that there are in the world persons other than God who have some degree of creative power, some de- gree of initiative — persons who should not attempt to shift re- sponsibility for their own conduct to either God or the devil. It is, to say the least, unmanly. "Vf AY, then, God be conceived as ■*■ A the great but not the only personality in a universe in which the most ultimate reality is mind? May it not be assumed that mind, in some form or other, has always existed? In our experience mind is always expressed through individ- uals or persons. It is also known to be very complex, to include subconscious as well as, in its high- er manifestations, conscious ele- ments; it is known to include feel- ing and desire, and that these are factors no less significant than is intelligence, often regarded as pri- marily an instrument for securing the ends of feeling and desire. When a mind, thus conceived, rises to the ethical or moral plane it is called a person. It may then not only reflect upon itself, its meaning and its relation to other minds and to the world in general, but as a person it may also relate itself to other persons through its feelings and desires; these are factors in the development of human society of no less importance than is mere intellectual understanding. In the

<!-- page:211 -->

The Improvement Era for January, 1930 211 creation of spiritual values the de- sire for a thing may be a most es- sential factor in securing it. It is often so in the ordinary experiences of all normal people. A LL of these aspects of human "^ nature and human relations naturally and properly enter into relations between man and God. In this light it is easy to under- stand how love is a most funda- mental element in religion. Man's experience of God then includes at least three fundamental elements: faith, love, service, altogether in- volving, on the psychological side, intelligence, knowledge, feeling, in- terest, and desire. In the light of the spiritual phil- osophy thus far developed in this series it seems reasonable to suggest the following notions concerning the nature of God and his relation to man: I HTHE person of God is the em- bodiment of all the ideals and principles of action by which other personalities may develop toward moral and religious perfection, making those who thus sincerely strive sons and daughters of God, and sharers in the intelligence and the creative activity of God. Thus is formed a spiritual community, a community whose unity rests upon participation in the same ideals and purposes and upon con- formity to the same spiritual laws. This most fundamental unity is at- tained without destroying the iden- tity of the persons who constitute such a community. The goal of creation seems, therefore, to be de- velopment of personalities, which involves development, on the high- est conceivable plane, of a com- munity of progressively perfected persons, of which God is the head, the Supreme Personality. Has Youthful Utah Lost the Faith? {Continued from page 207) with no medical aid at hand, to fear of crops failing in an isolated land, to deep snows and dry sum- mers! Having "safely arrived," they paused long enough to give thanks to a providential guidance, then with renewed faith, set out to make a place where they could worship God as they chose. There was deep need for faith in those days! A ND after a first settlement was ^~ effected, the whole procedure had to be gone through once more. Settlers were sent to all the valleys of Utah, and the old battle of con- quering nature was begun all over again. Faith became once more the prime force in their lives. Log cabins were built, wild animals and often the surprise at- tacks of intoxicated Indians were resisted. When the Sabbath ar- rived, old Betsy was hitched to any passenger vehicle about, and through heat of summer and cold- ness of winter, early Utah drove to church. Neither the extremities of the weather nor the fear of un- civilized Indians held them from paying their weekly thanks to a Divinity in whom they trusted as implicitly as does a child in his earthly parents. For the food they ate, for the clothes they wore, early Utahns prayer to God, also for their health and their daily welfare, for any need the fulfillment of which they could not see. Modern Utah, prosperous, influential, cultivated, stands a proud monument to their faith. And now, what of the youth of Utah of the fourth generation? Have they kept the faith? In a day of many luxuries and few privations, have they any need to retain, to exercise the faith of their fathers? Viewed from any angle, the answer is always and always, 'They have need. And they do retain and exercise this, the richest heritage of pioneer forefathers." XTEVER a day so happy, never a -^ year so replete that youthful Utah can afford to forget the power, the glory of simple, un- affected faith. But the faith of modern days has a new motif, is turned into different channels from that of its forefathers'. The same old faith with a new application, which now has recourse to plainly spiritual matters. The expansion of scientific knowledge has developed new horizons for the exercise of faith. With ministers of the world ex- pressing doubt as to the divinity of Christ and the virginity of Mary, there is more need of faith to retain faith. With some so-called scientists intimating that man and monkey came from the same source, and that the garden of Eden is only a myth, it requires faith of the profoundest sort to say with conviction, "I will keep the faith! Though I do not fully understand certain things about the creation and purpose of the earth, these things are not there- fore untrue." UOW many young Latter-day 11 Saints upon first hearing a scientific theory of the formation of the earth have had their faith shaken! How many upon being unable to reconcile the religious and scientific versions have been temporarily estranged from the Church of their childhood! Not many, perhaps, yet too many! A well-grounded faith would have carried them over to the safety of trusting in' God's intelligence, knowing that could we but see through the veil of mysteries, many of them would cease to be. "MOW that the Latter-day Saints -^ need not worry about per- sonal fear, now that there is free- dom from hunger possibilities, now that going to church entails no particular hardship or effort, comes a new evil to be battled. A pleasure-mad world hurrying, run- ning, screaming for happiness ! All the world clamoring for "life." What different interpretations they give it! To some, high-powered motor cars, to some sparkling jewelry, expensive clothes — lux- urious unessentials ! Youthful Utah surrounded by pleasure- seekers has new need to exercise the faith of its fathers. On a Sunday bursting with sun- shine, on a Mutual night aching with Spring, youthful Utah needs something more than parental urg- ing to attend to Church duties. When friends and neighbors picnic or attend the theatre on the Sab- bath, present-day Utah has strong need of its faith. Small matters, these, yet large enough to try many a "Mormon's" integrity. But youthful Utah, rich in the lore of faithful pioneer fathers, filled with the pride of religious tradition, aware of the power and the glory of faith, makes a gallant effort toward gaining the faith of "a mustard seed" in order to move the mountains of doubt from its modern mind.