Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 9.djvu/126

 CRITICAL NOTICES : possible after any amount of experience, and so constitute an insuperable menace to any doctrine of complete redemption ? The truth seems to be that so long as absolute creation is attributed to the deity the monads cannot be rendered independent enough not to pass the burden of evil on to their creator. It is better, therefore, to assume an original plurality of the world's con- stituents, and to regard evil as due to the friction of a non- equilibrated universe which has not yet learnt to work smoothly and harmoniously. Then God can be good and good victorious, just because neither God nor good is all. Secondly it is to be regretted that the Nouvelle Monadologie retains the name of the pre-established harmony. It always was a cumbrous and unnatural device, and it has now been whittled away to such an extent that the name can only mislead. And it contributes nothing to the solution of the problem of causation. For practical purposes we shall and must continue to suppose that things act on one another. For the purposes of the physical sciences the notion of a cause is a caput mortuum which only introduces perplexity into the manipulations of equations whereby we calculate the sequences of events. And for the purpose of solving the ultimate metaphysical question of how interaction is possible at all, all theories are equally impotent (because equally invalid), and the pre-established harmony is no more successful than the transeunt cause or the unity of substance. For it explains the apparent interaction of things by a miracle that adds nothing to our knowledge and our comprehension ; and moreover involves transeunt causation which it was intended to avoid, as between the deity and the monads. The monistic explanation by the unity of the universe, is, it may be added, just as impotent ; for we can as little explain the changes in A's states as the action of A upon B. It is fortunate, therefore, that the problem does not really stand in need of solution. For it really reduces itself to the question why anything exists at all, and that question is admittedly illegitimate. Granting, however, that existence must ultimately be factual, it can easily be seen that its constituents must be in interaction. For otherwise no world can result, which is contrary to fact. An appreciation of this situation would not only relieve the monadology of the pre-established harmony, but will also serve to defend it against the charge certain to be brought against it, of ultimately deriving the world from irrationality, in this case an irrational and arbitrary act of creation. To this charge pluralism can confidently retort with a tu quoque. For by monism also existence must be accepted as initially factual, while the unity of its principle renders the subsequent conflict of phenomena profoundly irrational. Evil is theoretically unintelligible because practically insuperable. For the vice from which we suffer is of the substance of the All and therefore incurable. Pluralism on the other hand is not compelled to regard the perversity of things