Sunday, January 25, 2015

Reason Alone and Blind Chance

Of a truth, it is purely a matter of accident that an individual should have received from nature a larger or smaller amount of mental vigour. This amount, always an unknown quantity to him, is in no way dependent on him, and is just so much as nature has bestowed, not a fraction more. How, then, can any one prudently abandon himself to the guidance of his reason alone? Is not this the same as committing one's destinies to blind chance? Some may perhaps wonder at my saying that the amount of our own mental vigour "is always an unknown quantity to us, and in no way dependent on us;" yet, singular as it may appear, it is none the less a simple, undeniable fact.

The power of the instrument by which we know all other things always remains, and by the nature of the case must always remain, hidden from our knowledge. We cannot measure the power of our intelligence. How could we do so except by means of another intelligence? And if there are two intelligences in us (an absurd thing to say) by what will the power of the second be measured ?

Antonio Rosmini, Theodicy, volume 1, Signini et al, tr., p. 34.


  1. Enbrethiliel4:25 PM


    How, then, can any one prudently abandon himself to the guidance of his reason alone?

    Well, that hit me between the eyes!

  2. branemrys6:34 PM

    It's definitely the kind of argument you don't hear very much, but it definitely has a point to it. Trusting only to our own abilities is a kind of reckless gambling.


Please understand that this weblog runs on a third-party comment system, not on Blogger's comment system. If you have come by way of a mobile device and can see this message, you may have landed on the Blogger comment page, or the third party commenting system has not yet completely loaded; your comments will only be shown on this page and not on the page most people will see, and it is much more likely that your comment will be missed.