Overheard in Seville.5.1987

7/27/2019 Overheard in Seville.5.1987

1/60

Overheard in Seville

bulletin o f theSantayanaNo. 5Fall 1987


2/60

OVERHEARD IN SEVILLEBulletinof theSantayana SocietyN o. 5FALL 1987

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S 1

Irving Singer

Frederick W . C onner

J o h n M . Robson

Ang us Kerr-Lawson

Herman J. $aatkamp,Jr.

Herman J, Saa t kamp, Jr .

i1

17

27.

34

4145

46

47

Table of ContentsSantayana's Philosophyof LoveBeyond Truth: Santayanaon the Functional Relationsof Art, Myth, and ReligionPersons and Places Hold the EventsVariations on aGiven ThemeThe Santayana EditionAnnouncement: Frontiersin American PhilosophyAnnouncement of the1987 Annual Meeting |Bibliographical ChecklistFourth Update

Edited for the Santayana Society by Angus Kerr-Lawson, Department of Pure Mathematics,University of W aterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N 2L 3G 1, and by H erman J. Saatkamp,Jr., Department of Philosophy, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-4237. Allcommunications should be sent to one of the editors. The bulletin will appear annually. It isformatted and composed for typesetting with Waterloo Script, and printed by GraphicServices, University of Waterloo. It is published and distributed by the Department ofPhilosophy of Texas A&M University,


3/60

Santayana's Philosophyof LoveSan tayana ' s t h ink ing abou t the na tu re o f love has neve r been adequa te lys tud ied . In the f i r s t vo lume of th is t r i logy I discussed shor tcomings in h isconcep t o f idea l i za t ion . Hi s ideas a r e r i che r than I cou ld the re ind ica te ,however , and they mer i t r enewed inves t iga t ion . Speak ing o f San tayana a sthe g r ea te s t p roponen t o f P la ton i sm in the twen t i e th cen tu ry , I t r i ed toshow how he combined h i s P la ton i sm wi th an an t i the t i ca l ma te r i a l i sm .But i t would have been equal ly va l id to have s ta r ted wi th h is mater ia l i smas the basis o f h is ph i losophy . In h is specula t ions on love , sca t te redthrough a l l h is books, tha t i s how Santayana usual ly beg ins h is ana lysis . Ishall do l ikewise in t h i s chap te r . Over and beyond San tayana ' smater ia l i sm and Pla ton ism, I a l so de tec t a humanis t ic vo ice tha t d i f fe rsf rom bo th o f them. I cons ide r San tayana ' s " h u m a n i s m " t h e m o s tp romis ing e l emen t in h i s ph i lo sophy .

The imp l i ca t ions o f San tayana ' s ma te r i a l i sm appea r even in h i s ea r l i e s ts t a t e m e n t s a b o u t l o v e . I n Th e Sense o f Beau t y (1896 ) he in t roduces in to asec t ion on "The Mate r i a l s o f B e a u t y " a discussion about* "the in f luence ofthe pass ion o f love . " Though he i s do ing aes the t i c s in th i s p l ace , he makesre m ark s tha t a r e r e l evan t to the ph i lo sophy o f love . I n e f fec t, he a rgu estha t t he sexua l in s t inc t needed fo r pu rposes o f r ep roduc t ion unde r l i e s ou rpercep t ion of beau ty in another person as wel l as our ab i l i ty to love tha tpa r t ic u la r ind iv idu al . H e te l ls us tha t th er e ex is ts a "ma chinery "(unspeci f ied bu t p resumably d iscoverab le by empir ica l sc ience) whichd i r ec t s al l an ima l s to the i r p r op e r ob jec t of sexua l des i r e . H e evenanalyzes " l i fe long f idel i ty to on e ma te" as a d i f fe ren t ia t io n re la t ed tosuccessfu l re pr od uc t io n of th e spec ies . Bu t th ou gh the sexual ins t inc tca nn ot be sa ti s f ied un less an app ro pr ia t e ob jec t is s ing led ou t , San tay anabel ieves th is p rocess opera tes on ly wi th "a grea t dea l o f g rop ing andwas te . " F r om th i s th e r e a r i se the ef fec ts , wh ich San tayana cons ide r ssec on dar y , o f be au ty and of love: "Fo r i t is p rec ise ly f rom th e waste ,f rom the r ad ia t ion o f a sexua l pass ion , t ha t beau ty bo r rows warmth . . . .The capac i ty to love g ives ou r con temp la t ion tha t g low wi thou t wh ich i tmight o f ten fa i l to manifes t beau ty ." 1

In say ing th is , San tayana i s consc iously espousing a reduct iv is t ic thes isab ou t love as wel l as be au t y . Lik e m any o t he r mater ia l i s t s an d rea l i s t s , hedoes so wi th a sense o f admi ra t ion , even r eve rence , f o r the c r ea t ive

T h e f o l l o win g e x c e r p t s a r e t a k e n f r o m a c h a p te r i n I r v in g S in g e r ' s b o o k Th e Na ture o fLove: The Modern World, V o l u m e 3 o f his trilogy The Nature o f Love, published by TheUnivers i ty o f Chicago Press in Fa i l 1987 . The ed i to rs a re g ra te fu l to The Univers i ty o fChicago Press fo r permiss ion to p r in t th is chap ter , which was read to the San tayana Socie ty onD e c e m b e r 2 9 , 1 9 8 6 .

1 G e o r g e S a n t a y a n a , Th e Se nse o f B e au ty (New York : Ch ar les Scr ibne r ' s Sons , 1936) , p . 46 .


4/60

2 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L Egoo dne ss in th e sexual ins t inc t . H e sees i t as a "d um b an d pow erfu l"facu l ty tha t can never the less "suf fuse the wor ld wi th the deepestm e a n i n g . "

2Unl ike t r ad i t iona l mora l i s t s , he emphas izes the soc ia l andsp i r itua l t ende nc ie s tha t sexua l a t t r ac t ion can induc e . H e r em ind s u s o fStendhal , in one p lace c la iming tha t "a l l these new values c rysta l l i se aboutthe ob jec t s then o f f e r ed to the mind . " 3 On the nex t page he even c i t e sS t e n d h a l ' s De VAmour af te r say ing tha t when the new values focus in as ing le image " the ob jec t becomes per fec t , and we are sa id to be in love ."

San tay ana ' s r educ t iv i sm is o f a dou b le na tu re . N o t on ly does heexpla in love in te rms of sexual ins t inc t , bu t a lso he der ives a l l love f romthe r e l a t ions h ip be tw een a m an and a wo ma n . H e says tha t we bec om elovers o f na ture when the va lues normal ly c rysta l l ized wi th in the image ofano the r pe r son a r e "d i spe r sed" ove r the wor ld . And though "woman i sthe most lovely ob jec t to man, and man, i f female modesty would confessi t , t he mos t in t e r e s t ing to woman , " he r emarks tha t r ep ress ion o rf ru s t r a t ion o f ten r ed i r ec t sexua l pass ion tow ards o th e r ends . Th es einc lude r e l ig ion and ph i l an th ro py a s we ll a s the love o f na tu r e . "We maysay , th en , tha t fo r m an a l l na tu re i s a seco nda ry ob jec t o f sexual pass ion ,an d tha t to th is fac t the be auty of na tu re i s la rge ly du e ." 4 In a similarve in San tayana t r aces back to the needs o f the r ep roduc t ive func t ionvi r tua l ly a l l the soc ia l d isposi t ions tha t const i tu te c iv i l iza t ion andc o m m u n a l e n t e r p r i s e .

One can on ly specu la t e abou t the ex ten t to wh ich San tayana ' sth ink ing was in f luenced by Freu d a t t h is s t age . By 192 3 , how ever , t hepo in t s a t which*their ideas make contac t a re f i rmly es tab l i shed in theessay San tayana wro te a f t e r r ead ing Beyon d the Pleasure Principle . In "AL o n g W a y R o u n d t o N i r v a n a ; o r M u c h A d o a b o u t D y i n g , " S a n t a y a n acon t r a s t s F reud ' s dua l i s t i c ma te r i a l i sm wi th Bergson ' s be l i e f i n a "gene ra limpu l se toward some unknown bu t s ing le idea l . " 5 He r ecogn izes tha tbo th concep t ions a r e my th ica l , bu t F reud ' s he f inds t r ue to na tu re wh i l eBergson ' s he condemns as fo l ly . Speaking a lways as a mora l i s t andmetaphys ic i an , San tayana pe rce ives in F reud ' s app roach a chas t en ingin s igh t in to ou r cond i t ion a s ma te r i a l en t i t i e s . "The t r ans i to r iness o fth ings i s essen t ia l to the i r physica l be ing , and no t a t a l l sad in itself."6W ha t Santay ana does f ind sad i s th e f rus t ra t ion or des t ruc t ion ofin s t inc tua l impu l ses , a r r e s t ed be fo re the i r l a t en t po tency has had a chanceto express i t se l f and reach f ru i t ion . Assuming the Tightness o f Freud ' sdic tum th at "th e goal of al l l ife is de at h," S ant aya na im plies th at i f a l lt he i r i n s t inc t s cou ld be sa t i s f i ed ha rmon ious ly human be ings wou ld haven o f u r t h e r r e a s o n to s tay a l ive . In tha t event , he surmises , "we should besa t i s f ied once and for a l l and comple te ly . Then do ing and dy ing would

2 Ib id . , p . 47 .3 Ib id .4 I b id . , p . 4 8 .5 George Santayana, Some Turns o f Thou ght in Mo dern Ph i losophy: Five Essays (New York:

Ch a r l e s Sc r ib n e r ' s So n s , 1 93 3 ) , p . 9 2 .6 I b id . , p . 9 8 .


5/60

S A N T A Y A N A ' S P H I L O S O P H Y O F L O V E 3c o i n c i d e t h r o u g h o u t a n d b e a perfect p l e a s u r e . "7

Almos t twen ty yea r s ea r l i e r San tayana deve loped a s imi l a r no t ion int h e c h a p t e r o f Reason in Socie ty en t i t l ed "Love . " Dep ic t ing the sexua lo r ig in s o f love in gen e ra l , he sugges t s tha t w hen pass ion is veh em en t andcomple te i t may renounce even l i fe i t se l f "now tha t the one fa ted dest inyand a l l - sa t i s f ied good has been ach ieved ." 8 Quot ing S ieg f r i ed ' s paean toL i e b e s t o d a t t h e m o m e n t w h e n h e a n d B r u n n h i l d e m e r g e w i t h o n ea n o t h e r i n W a g n e r ' s Ring, San tay ana r e m ark s : "W hen love is ab so lu te i tf ee l s a p ro found impu l se to we lcome dea th , and even , by a t r anscenden ta lcon fus ion , t o invoke the end o f the un ive r se . " 9

In th e con tex t o f h is d iscuss ion , i t is ev id en t th a t S an taya na i s no tr eve r t ing to Roman t i c pess imism. Fo r he immed ia te ly invokes in s t inc t so the r than the sexua l , i n s t inc t s r e l a t ed to pa ren ta l i n t e r e s t . Thesesupe rvene upon pass ion and p reven t the " t r anscenden ta l i l l u s ion" f romcaus ing a to t a l ex t inc t io n . I n s t ead o f dea t h th e r e is t he c r ea t ion o f newlife, r enunc ia t ion be ing fo l lowed by a r e su r r ec t ion in the b i r th o fo f f sp r ing . By in t roduc ing pa ren ta l i n s t inc t s o f th i s so r t , San tayana r ema insfaithful to his vision as a materialist. For the na ture of pass ionate love i ss t i l l t aken a s bas i ca l ly dependen t upon the needs o f r ep roduc t ion . I n th i sve in he p r a i se s Luc re t iu s a s " the mos t ingenuous and magn i f i cen t o fpoets , " c r i t ic iz ing h im only because he descr ibed sex in te rms of i t sex te rna l behav io r and thus neg lec ted the beau ty o f i t s i nne r l i f e t he joyand fever ish in tensi ty of l ib id ina l ins t inc t as i t is ac tua l ly expe r i enced byeach member of a spec ies . San tayana ca l l s th is the "g lory of an imal love ."As a s t aunch ma te r i a l i s t and na tu ra l i s t i c ph i lo sophe r , he l amen t s thehuman t endency to cons ide r sexua l pass ion a shame o r s in r a the r than ano p p o r t u n i t y f o r c o m m u n i o n t h r o u g h " t h e m o s t d e l i g h t f u l o f n a t u r e ' sm y s t e r i e s . "1 0 Later in the chapter he re fers to " the qual i ty o f love" as " i t sth r i l l , f l u t t e r , and abso lu te sway ove r happ iness and misery . "1 1

T o exp la in ho w i t was poss ib le for th e inno cen t goodn ess of sex toh a v e b e e n d e g r a d e d i n t h e c o u r s e o f m a n ' s d e v e l o p m e n t , S a n t a y a n asugges t s tha t emo t ions such a s shamefu lness r e su l t f r om the r e l a t ivecomplex i ty o f human na tu re . Hav ing a l a rge gamut o f in s t inc tua l needs ,m an i s sub jec t t o th e con t inu ous in t e r a c t ion be tw een sexua l impu l ses an do t he r des i r e s tha t i nh ib i t sex wh i l e a l so subm i t t ing to i ts p r e ss u re . H i sb r i e f r e f e r ence to a f i e ld o f in t e r ac t ing fo r ces de te rmin ing the na tu re o fe ro t i c r e sponse San tayana doub t l e ss inhe r i t s f rom Wi l l i am James 'p sycho logy . T h e idea is im po r tan t h e r e becau se it imp li c it ly t akesSan tayana ' s concep t ion beyond i t s r educ t iv i s t i c l im i t s . Fo r i f shame (o rany o th e r a t t i t u de r e l a t ed to in t e rpe r son a l f ee lings ) occu r s a s a vec to r o fcon f l i c t ing fo r ces , i t c an no t be r ed uc ed to on e o f the m . A nd ind eed

7 Ibid. , p. 99.8 George Santayana, Reason in Society (New York: Dover , 1980) , p . 11.9 Ibid.10 Ibid. , pp. 14, 15, 16.11 Ibid. , p . 21 .


6/60

4 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L ES a n t a y a n a ' s a p p r o a c h c h a n g e s t h r o u g h o u t t h e re s t o f h is c h a p t e r . H e h a sless to say about the sexual bas is o f love than about i t s funct ion as animag ina t ive que s t ing fo r idea l s . A t th i s po i n t , San tayan a ' s N eop la to n i smbecomes the domina t ing theme in h i s ana ly s i s .

T o my know ledge Sa n tayan a neve r ca ll s h imse l f a Ne op la ton i s t , o r aPla ton is t o f any k ind . In th e ch ap ter on love he complains t h a t Platoi g n o r e d t h e "natural h i s to ry" o f th e sub jec t . Ne ve r the le ss , San tayanar e p e a t e d l y a c k n o w l e d g e s h i s i n d e b t e d n e s s t o much of what i s mostd is t inc t ive in Pla to ' s ph i lo sop hy: th e idea th a t pass ion , an d love as awhole , i s e l ic i ted by an ob jec t tha t seems good; t ha t t h i s ob jec t embod ieso r r ep resen t s o r symbo l i zes an idea l goodness and b e a u t y ; a n d t h a tul t imately - in i ts f inal def ini t ion - love yearns pr imar i ly for the ideali t se l f and no t f o r the imper f ec t ob jec t wh ich happens to p r e f igu re i t .T h o u g h h e d r e w u p o n t h e s e e l e m e n t s o f Platonic p h i l o s o p h y ,S a n t a y a n a rightly saw tha t t hey need not conf l ic t with his basicn a t u r a l i s m . I n Platonism an d the Spiritual Li fe h e attacks t h e "Platonict r ad i t ion" fo r hav ing a ssumed tha t i dea l s have any be ing a s subs tances .H e insists t ha t i dea l s have no ex i s t ence p r io r to the occu r r ence o f ma t t e r .T h r o u g h o u t h i s w r i t i n g s , S a n t a y a n a m a i n t a i n s that on ly na tu re ormater ia l i ty ex is ts as subs tanc e . I dea l s em erg e a s goa l s tha t o rgan i smsc r e a t e in t he p rocess o f adap t ing to the i r environment. F r o m t h i s itwould fo l low tha t the or ig ins of love a r e n a t u r a l even t ho ug h i ts a im o rob jec t ive is t h e pe r f ec t ion encom passe d by an idea l . SynthesizingPla ton i sm wi th na tu ra l i sm in th i s way , San tayana be l i eves tha t "every idea lexp resses some na tu ra l func t ion , a n d that no na tu ra l f unc t ion isincapable , in i t s f ree exerc ise , of evolv ing some idea l . . . . For love is abr i l l i an t i l l u s t r a t ion o f a p r inc ip le eve rywhere d iscoverab le : n a m e l y , t h a thu m an in t e r e s t l ives by tu r n i ng the f r ic t ion of mater ia l fo rces into t h el igh t o f idea l goods ." 1 2

Both ea r ly and l a t e , San tayana f r equen t ly desc r ibes love as a"subl imat ion" re la ted to an "an imal basis , " and to th is ex ten t h is k insh ipto Fr eud r em a ins in t ac t . Bu t P la to too had tho ug h t tha t l ove o r ig ina te sin each pe r son ' s h i s to ry a s a phys ica l , i ndeed sexua l , impu l se even thoughi t s ign i f ied the more u l t imate longing for possess ion of a t ranscendenta lgood . I n P la to ' s wr i t ings , how ever , we cons tan t ly encoun te r a sy s t ema t i camb igu i ty abo u t na tu ra l an d idea l l ove . T o wh a t ex ten t mu s t ma te r i a lin t e r e s t s be c l eansed o r e l imina ted in o rde r fo r the lover to fulfill hismetaphysical mission? Is love a harmonious comple t ion o f o rgan ic needs ,such as the sexual , o r i s i t ra ther a oneness wi th the pr inc ip le o f goodnessand beau ty tha t r equ i r e s quas i - a sce t i c con temp la t ion? By i n s i s t ing uponthe in t e r r e l a t ionsh ip be tween idea l s and na tu ra l p rocesses , San tayanacon t inues the e f fo r t o f Neop la ton i s t s i n the Rena i ssance who t r i ed toreso lve Pla to ' s am bigu i t ies . L ike Fic ino , Sa n tay ana sees love as a searchfo r idea l s tha t appea r in the mids t o f na tu re , and a s an inhe ren t pa r t o fna tu re . F ic ino , l ike o th e r P la ton i s t i c Chr i s t i an s an d like P la to himself,

12 R e ason in Soc ie t y , p . 9 .


7/60

S A N T A Y A N A ' S P H I L O S O P H Y O F L O V E 5t h o u g h t t h a t i d e a l s e m a n a t e f r o m a super-world b e y o n d n a t u r e . S a n t a y a n apa r t s com pany a t t h i s ju nc tu re , bu t he neve r dev ia t e s f rom t he bel i ef t ha tlove consis ts in the t ransmut ing of na tura l des i res in to a s t r iv ing for idea lstha t unde r l i e the goodness o f eve ry th ing tha t i s des i r ed .

I f th is were a l l tha t San tayana sa id about love , one might have beentempted to d ismiss h im as a na tura l i s t who weaves a b i t o f Neopla ton ismin t o h is fabr ic . De sp i te it s be l le t r i s t ic bea u t ie s , th e ch ap ter on love inReason i n Soc i e t y i s remarkable on ly in i t s repea ted c la im tha t idea ls suchas mar r i ed love o r the love o f human i ty may be exp la ined a s sub l ima t ionsof sexual des i re . Bu t even in 1905 , w hen th e boo k was publ is hed , th issug gest io n was ha rd ly nov el . I t i s on ly San taya na ' s sub sequ entdevelopment o f h is Pla ton is t ic ins igh ts tha t revea ls the grea t o r ig ina l i ty inh i s syn thes i s . T h e ma jo r t ex t is Th e Rea l m o f Spirit, the f ina l vo lume ofRealms of Being. I t appea red in 1940 , a t a bad momen t in the h i s to ry o fth e We s te rn w or ld , an d it has nev e r r ece ived th e a t t en t io n it dese rves . I ni t San tayana ' s t h ink ing abou t love r eaches a he igh t beyond any th ing hehad p rev ious ly a t t a ined .

In the f i r s t o f the ep ig raphs tha t p r ecede The Rea lm of Spirit San tayanaquotes f rom a passage in which Plo t inus , speaking of love , says " th is sp i r i ti s gene ra t ed ou t o f the p syche in the measu re in wh ich she l acks thegood , ye t yearns a f te r i t . " 1 3 Such a view of love and of spir i t is whollycoherent wi th wha t San tayana s t a t ed in Reason i n Soc i e t y a b o u t t h e" idea l i ty" of love . H e th er e a r gu ed tha t , in i ts pur i f ied an d subl im atedcond i t ion , l ove "yea rns fo r the un ive r se o f va lues . " 1 4 Despite i ts or igins inm a t t e r , i . e. r ep rod uc t ive necess ity , l ove 's " t rue ob jec t is no na tu ra l be ing ,bu t an idea l fo rm essen t ia l ly e te rna l and capable of endlesse m b o d i m e n t s . " 1 5

In Reason i n Soc i e t y t hese s t a t emen t s abou t the idea l i ty of loveadumbra te much o f wha t San tayana l a t e r deve loped in h i s ideas abou tsp i r i t . By the t ime tha t The Rea lm of Spirit was wr i t t en , however , he hadbecome sens i t ive to the con t r ad ic t ions wi th in sp i r i t itself. I t was not onlya l igh t tha t shone upon the ac tua l i ty o f what was g iven or the poss ib lequal i t ies o f what could be imagined , bu t a lso i t inc luded a pa infu law aren ess of i ts inab i l i ty to m ak e th e w or ld be t t e r . H e now saw sp i r i t asa d ispos i t ion re n t by two d i f feren t k inds of love . Sp i r i t , San tayan a f ina llym a in ta ined , " is i nward ly d iv ided and con fused . " 1 6 Since i t is a product ofun iversa l Wil l , which Santayana cap i ta l izes as i f in recogni t ion ofSc ho pe nh au e r ' s G erm an usage , sp i r it mu s t love th e love in eve ry th ing . I t

13 G e o r g e S a n t a y a n a , The Realm of Spiri t , in Realms of Being ( Ne w Yo r k : Ch a r l e sSc r ib n e r ' s So n s , 1 9 4 2) , p . 5 4 8 .

14 R e ason in Soc ie t y , p . 3 3 .15 Ib id . , p . 3 1 .16 The Realm of Spiri t, in Realms of Being, p . 6 4 1 .


8/60

6 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L Emust fee l sympathy for a l l the forms tha t l i fe may take and for a l l theidea l fu l f i l lments tha t a re poss ib le to l iv ing th ings in the i r d iversem anifes ta t ions . Bu t th e wi ll in on e org an ism competes with tha t o fano the r , and each occas ion o f sp i r i t occu r s within a psyche tha t seeks i t sown we l f a r e . H ow eve r m uc h sp i r i t may wish to iden ti fy wi th theuniversa l search for go odn ess , it i s ha m pe re d by th e se lf ish dem an ds of i tsown psyche and by the l imi ta t ions tha t th is imposes upon i t s capaci ty ford ispass ionate love . As Santayana says:

Will here must sympathize with all Will and must love with all lovers; yet itmust condemn each Will, not for loving that which it loves but for not lovingthat which it does not love; in other words, for not loving the good in all itspossible forms . But all goods canno t be realized or sanely purs ued in anypartic ular life. Only the specific goals of tha t place and ho ur are prop er tothat particular concretion of universal Will.17

Ar t i cu la t ing th i s con t r ad ic t ion wi th in sp i r i t , San tayana pe rce ives aninevi tab le conf l ic t be tw een ex is tenc e an d w hat he ca ll s jus t ice . Be ing aby -p roduc t o f ma t t e r i n one o r ano the r con f igu ra t ion , spirit arises as anasp i r a t ion tow ard pa r t i c u la r goa l s . Bu t in itself, i n acco rdance wi th i t sown essence , i t sympath izes wi th a l l po ten t ia l exempl i f ica t ions of goodnesso r beau ty , w her eye r an d how ever they may occu r . San tayan a cons ide r sth is " the most t rag ic o f conf l ic ts . " 1 8 He c la ims there i s no way in which i tcan be avoided . On the cont rary , he ins is t s tha t sp i r i t fu l f i l l s i t s na ture byaccept ing i t s inab i l i ty to e l iminate the conf l ic t , by submit t ing to i t s ownimpo tence in the wor ld , and in tha t sense choosing r enunc ia t ion a s i t sdest iny .

The re a r e va r ious c r i t i c i sms o f San tayana ' s concep t ion tha t one cou ldm ake . In th e fi rs t vo lum e of th is trilogy I a rgued tha t t he p r inc ip le o fidea l i za t ion wh ich San tayana emp loys p r even t s one f rom unde r s t and ingthe love of pe rso ns . Fo r if love perce ives it s ob jec t un d er th e aspec t o fan idea l beau ty or goodness tha t th is ind iv idual symbol izes and evenrepresen ts , i t i s the idea l which i s rea l ly loved ra ther than the object. Intha t event we are in love wi th a poss ib le per fec t ion and no t wi th th is manor woman , and the love o f pe r sons i s no t wha t we a r e expe r i enc ing .When San tayana says tha t i n love " the t r ue ob jec t i s no na tu ra l be ing , bu tan idea l f o rm essen t i a l ly e t e rna l and capab le o f end le ss embod imen t s , " hedescr ibes love as a k ind of idea l iza t ion tha t has l i t t le rappor t wi th lov ingsom eone a s ju s t t he pa r t i cu la r pe r so n tha t he o r she hap pen s to be . 1 9

This d i f f icu l ty appl ies to Santayana ' s la te r wr i t ings as wel l as h isear l ie r , to The Realm of Spirit as well as to Reason i n Socie t y . In te rms of h isf ina l t h ink ing abou t sp i r i t , t he p rob lems appea r wi th in the concep t s wehave ju s t d i scussed . As jo in t ly th e p rodu c t s o f p syche , bo th love andsp i r i t resu l t f rom desi re for a spec i f ic good embodied in a par t icu lar

17 ibid.18 Ibid., p. 642.19 R e ason in Society , p . 3 1 .


9/60

S A N T A Y A N A ' S P H I L O S O P H Y O F L O V E 7object . Spir i t ref ines love, and possibly issues into i ts own kind of love, aswe sha l l p r e sen t ly see , by de ta ch i ng the o rgan i sm f rom m erepossess iveness and focusing the l igh t o f adora t ion upon a un iversa lpo ten t i a l i t y fo r goodnes s . T h i s mean s tha t love has two types o f e ssences ,two mo da l i t i e s o r l eve ls o f be in g . I n one i t ope ra t e s wi th in the r ea lm o fm a t t e r . I n the o the r it r eac hes fo r a pu re ly sp ir i tua l l ove tha t t r anscen dsany a t tachment to a s ing le ob jec t whi le a lso accept ing i t as thea p p r o x i m a t i o n o f a n i d e a l .

T h e f irst of the se is w ha t I cal l a love of thi ng s, an d i t m ay possiblyaccoun t fo r the e ro t i c bond ing tha t i n s t inc tua l ly causes u s to seek one o ran o t he r k ind o f sexua l p l ea su re . T h e second love tha t San tayana de f inesis c loser to what I have descr ibed as a love of idea ls . 2 0 These i ssue f romh u m a n a s p i r a t i o n s a n d t h e y e n a b l e u s t o m o v e b e y o n d a n y m o m e n t a r y o rlocal con d i t ion in wh ich we ha pp en to ex i s t . Bo th a r e au then t i c m odes o flove , and in h i s sup reme awareness o f the ro l e tha t imag ina t ion p lays ineach , San tayana b r i l l i an t ly po r t r ays the i r complex r e l a t ionsh ip to onean o t he r . W ha t he does no t un de r s t a nd , o r r ecogn ize ful ly , is t he f acttha t a love of persons involves a type of love tha t these two do no texp la in e i th er ind iv idual ly or in con junc t ion . I t is a love tha t involvesne i the r possess iveness no r r enunc ia t ion , ne i the r in s t inc tua l g r a t i f i ca t ion o fa whol ly mater ia l sor t nor the sacr i f ic ia l mar tyrdom of one ' s ind iv idualin t e r e s t s , ne i the r a b l ind c r av ing for dominat ion , nor a wi l led and wi l l ingd e t a c h m e n t t h a t c u l m i n a t e s in c o n t e m p l a t i o n a t a d i s t a n c e . T h e lo v e o fpe r sons endu res by be ing wha t i t was in i t s o r ig in s - a v i t a l a t t achmen t .But , in be ing love d i rec ted towards o thers in themselves , as persons , i t i sa l so a bes towing o f va lues tha t may c r ea te a un ique and somet imesb e n e f i c i a l i n t e r d e p e n d e n c y that San tayana ' s pe r spec t ive can sca rce lya c c o m m o d a t e .

I f my cr i t ic i sm is jus t i f ied , on e mus t co ncl ud e tha t San tayan a ' sa t t em p t ed syn thes i s has no t succee ded . M a t t e r and sp i r it have bee nin te rp re t ed in a way tha t does no t e luc ida te wha t i s mos t in need o fexp lana t ion . I t h ink tha t is wh a t Wi l l iam Ja m es m ean t wh en he ca ll edSan tayana ' s ph i lo sophy the "pe r f ec t ion o f ro t t enness . " 2 1 He d id no t wishto ma l ign Santayana or to den y h is com pe te nce a s a ph i lo so phe r : he wasno t say ing tha t San tayan a ' s ph i lo sop hy was pe r f ec t ly ro t t en . H e wasre f e r r ing to San tayana ' s combina t ion o f P la ton i sm and ma te r i a l i sm, wh ichJa m es con sid ere d fau l ty . Fo r if Sa n tay ana ' s v is ion of th e wo r ld inc lude don ly the supe r impos ing o f poss ib le pe r f ec t ions on the ro t t enness wh ichbelongs to i t s mater ia l substance , was he no t ignor ing man 's ab i l i ty to l ive

20 See my book The Nature of Love: Plato to Luther, second edition (Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1984), p. 39ff.21 For James' remark, see Th e Selected Letters of William James, ed. Elizabeth Hardwick(New York: Farr ar, Straus and Cudahy , 1961), p. 183. For Santayana's comm ent on James*remark, see George Santayana, "On My Friendly Critics," in Soliloquies in E ngland a nd La terSoliloquies (Ann Arbo r: University of Michigan Press, 1967), pp . 247-48. See also Timo thy L.S. Sprigge, San taya na: A n E xamina t ion o f his Philosophy (London: Routledge 8c Kegan Paul,1974), p. 22 5.


10/60

8 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L Ea good though imperfect l i fe wi th in a natural env i ronment tha t i s no tent i re ly ba d or com plete ly hos t ile? San taya na formu lates h is analysis ashe does in an a t tempt to remain absolute ly fa i thful to real i ty as he knewit . His was a trag ic view of l ife precisely be ca use h e saw n o gr ou nd s formin imiz ing fundamenta l d i f f e rences be tween the r ea lms o f mat te r and o fspir it . W ha t jus t i f icat ion could th er e be in pu t t i ng on a bra ve show ofconf idence , a s he th ou gh t th a t J am es pervas ively d id , ins tead o f ad mi t t in gthe f r igh ten ing t ru ths o f our on to logy and lea rn ing how to cope wi ththem? San tay ana ' s cou rag e is un den iab le . Bu t even so , h i s ph i losophyfai ls to show us how human beings may overcome the spl i t betweenma t te r and sp i r it . In mis rep resen t ing th e love o f pe r son s , he neg lec t s amajor segment of man 's real i ty that cuts across these phi losophicalca tegor ies .

The c rack in San tayana ' s go lden bowl r ecur s in a l l h i s s t a tementsabou t love . As in P la ton i sm th ro ug ho u t the cen tu r ies , i t r epea ted lyintrod uce s a no te of sadness an d desp air . H u m an bein gs s t r ive for idealsthat l i f t the hear t and invigorate the spir i t but e ternal ly e lude our graspbecause we a re c rea t u re s fo rever b ou nd by an a li en mate r ia l i ty . Severa lt imes in these vo lumes I have quo ted San tayana ' s ep ig ram abou t P la ton iclove: *A11 b e a u t i e s attract by suggesting the ideal and then fail to satisfyby not fulfilling it." 2 2 I now wish to cal l a t tent ion to the aura off rus t ra t ion an d depres s ion tha t su r rou nd s these wo rds . T h ou g h theyexpres s a v iew of the wor ld tha t has insp i red much o f the g rea tes t poe t ry ,and though they hones t ly r e f l ec t the d i sappo in tmen ts tha t a re a lwaysposs ib le in love despi te the grandeur of i t s ques t , they a lso reek ofperso nal fa i lure arbi t rar i ly pro jec ted u po n the facts of l ife . I t is anou t look tha t be longs to the exper ience o f those homosexua l s who a re no tproud of thei r erot ic or ienta t ion and who do not l ive in a socie ty thata llows the m to a t t a in the i r own type o f f r ee dev e lop me nt .

P la to h imself vaci l la tes in h is opinions about sexual i ty between males :he somet imes accep t s i t a s a means o f ha rmoniz ing mate r ia l and sp i r i tua linc l ina t ions , bu t f r equen t ly he condemns i t a s unna tu ra l , even c r imina l .Wi th in San tayana ' s wr i t ings we o f ten f ind h im re fe r r ing to homosexua lbehav io r in l angu age tha t is qu i te unfavorab le th ou gh som ewh at ve i l ed .L ike F ic ino and o ther Neop la ton i s t s , he speaks of i t as depraved andpossib ly d iseased. Bu t in a con versa t ion with Dan iel Co ry he a l lude d toh i s own homosex ua l p roc l iv i t ie s , and Jo h n M cCorm ick ' s r ec en t b iogra phygives evidence about the love he fe l t for several men. 2 3 San tayana kep this hom osex ual feel ings secret , as i f he tho ug ht they we re shame ful . O n

22 "Platonic Love in Some Italian Poets," in Essays in Literary Criticism b y George S a n t a y a n a ,ed. Irving Singer (New York: Scribner's, 1956), p. 99-23 On this, see Daniel Cory, S a n t a y a n a : The Later Years, A Portrait with Letters (New York:George Braziller, 1963), pp. 40-41; John McCormick, George S a n t a y a n a : A Biography (NewYork: Alfred A. Knopf, 1987).


11/60

S A N T A Y A N A ' S P H I L O S O P H Y O F L O V E 9th e o th e r h an d , th e r e is l i t tl e r ea so n to be l i eve tha t he savo red the va r i eddel ig h ts o f he ter os ex ua l love . Al l bea u t ies - m ale an d female - m ay wellhave a t t r ac t ed h im, bu t cou ld any e l imina te the pa in fu l i nh ib i t ions wi thwh ich he was r ea r ed?

I do no t wish to magn ify th e re lev anc e of thes e b iog raph ica l de ta i l s . Imen t ion them on ly to h igh l igh t San tayana ' s a sse r t ion tha t "A pe r f ec t l ovei s fou nde d on des pa i r . . . . T h e perfect l o v e r m u s t r e n o u n c e p u r s u i t a n dthe hope o f possess ion . " 2 4 In another work he ampl i f ies th is by say ingt h a t "possession leaves th e t r ue lover unsa t i sfied : h is joy is in thecha rac te r o f the th ing loved , in the essence i t revea ls ." 2 5 The f i r s t par t o fth is se n te nc e is rem in is cen t o f Pr ou st s ta t ing tha t in sexual possess ion o nepossesses no th ing ( and the re fo re r ema ins unsa t i s f i ed ) ; t he second pa r tsounds l ike Proust us ing Pla ton is t ic language to ta lk about essences .Desp i t e the d i f f e r ences be tween Prous t and San tayana , t hey wr i t e a s menwho have been d isqual i f ied f rom apprec ia t ing the poss ib i l i t ies o f asa t is fy ing sexual love for any o t h er pers on . San tayan a could be speak ingfo r P ro us t wh en h e conc ludes tha t "c on tem p la t ion i s t he who le ob jec t o flove , and the so le ga in in lov ing ." 2 6

San tayana ' s doub t s abou t the love o f pe r sons appea r mos t c l ea r ly in ach ap te r en t i t l ed "D is t r ac t ion . " H e beg ins by a sse r t ing tha t " f rank love , "by wh ich he m e a n s l o v e m a k i n g d i r e c t e d t o w a r d i m m e d i a t e p l e a s u r e s o fth e senses , i s no t an im pe dim en t to sp i r i t . In it se lf th e f lesh doe s no tcrea te d is t rac t ions , par t icu lar ly when " love tu rns the f lesh in to lovel iness ."Fa r f rom be ing th r ea tened by an appe t i t e f o r sexua l goods , wh ichSantayana considers innocent in themselves , sp i r i t can read i ly a r i se as apur i f ic a t ion of on e ' s pass ion . T hi s ha pp en s w hen love "ceases to be ac r av ing fo r th e un kn ow n . .. . T h e ob jec t t he n p rove s to have bee n anessence and no t an ex i s t ing pe r son o r th ing ; and among e ssences the r e i sno j ea lousy o r con t r ad ic t ion , an d no decay . "2 7 Dis t r ac t ion occu r s whensp i r i t becomes enmeshed in a t t achmen t s to th ings o r pe r sons tha t maycrea te "domest ic v i r tue" bu t scarce ly sp i r i tua l f reedom. "In m a r r i a g e , "Santayana remarks , " love i s soc ia l ized and mora l ized in to a l i fe longp a r t n e r s h i p w h i c h i t w o u l d b e d i s h o n o u r a b l e t o b e t r a y ; a n d c o m m u n i t y o fin t e r e s t s and hab i t s bu t t r e sses tha t l ove in to mu tua l t r u s t and a ss i s t ance . "Bu t in the ve ry nex t sen tence , he adds : "A hous eho ld r a th e r sm o the r sthe love tha t es tab l i shed i t . " 2 8

H ow th en can sp i r i t escape the d is t rac t ions of th e wor ld? Ho w can i tl ibera te i t se l f f rom the du t ies and responsib i l i t ies tha t i t knows to bemora l ly defensib le though inev i tab ly imposing a conf inement to i t s f reeexe rc i se? As a lways , San ta yana ' s an swer p r e supp oses the need tot r ans fo rm pe r s ona l invo lve me n t in to con tem p la t ive sub l ima t ion . T o avo id2 4 G e o r g e S a n t a y a n a , Persons and Places, ed. Wil l i a m G . Ho lz b e r g e r a n d He r m a n J .

Sa a tk a m p J r . ( Ca m b r id g e : T h e M I T Pr e ss , 1 9 8 6 ), p . 4 2 8 . I t al i cs d e l e t e d f ro m f ir st s e n t e n c e .25 The Realm of Essence, in Realms of Being, p . 16.2 6 I b id .27 The Realm of Spiri t, in Realms of Being, p . 6 8 6 .28 I b id .


12/60

1 0 O V E R H E A R D IN S E V I L L Edis t ract ion, sp i r i t "wi l l d is t inguish the loveliness in t h i n g s or the c h a r m inpersons f rom the ex is t ing per sons and t h i n g s . T h e s e w e r e the veh ic le ,t h a t was the r e v e l a t i o n . "

2 9W h a t he calls "the s t r a igh t jacke t imposed bysocie ty" seemed less pernic ious to S a n t a y a n a t h a n "the i l lusions,revuls ions , suspic ions , and disas ters suffered by love i tself when given af r ee r e in . " 3 0 San tayana cons ider s these poss ib le occur rences the "vitalc o n t r a d i c t i o n s " of love . He scarcely in t imates that the love of p e r s o n s caninc lude a system of values not at all in imical to spir i t .

In San tayana ' s de fense one m i g h t a r g u e t h a t the c o n d i t i o n he wishesto exp l ica te is a puri ty of sp i r i t tha t mus t not be r e d u c e d e v e n to the lovebe tw een per so ns . W he n San taya na t a lks abo u t "pure sp i ri t " or "thespir i tual l ife," he s h o u l d be t a k e n as r e f e r r i n g to a poss ib le ach ievement an exce l lence in spir i t , a k i n d of super ior subdivis ion with in the r e a l m ofspir i t . While Santayana def ines spir i t as the actual i ty of m i n d w h e n ita t t e n d s to w h a t is given or is poss ib le (in o t h e r w o r d s , w h e n it mere lyc o n t e m p l a t e s or imag ines ) , he def ines spiri tual i ty as spir i t t ry ing to e x c l u d ee v e r y t h i n g but itself. T h o u g h the spir i tual l ife, l ike spir i t in g e n e r a l , isa n o u t g r o w t h of psyche and the r e a l m of m a t t e r , it seeks to d is in tox ica tei tse l f f rom them. Th e word "d i s in tox ica te" o f ten occurs in S a n t a y a n a ' swr i t ings , as if to sugges t tha t sp i r i t becomes sober and pel lucid only wheni t t reats its mater ia l o r ig ins as if they were fo re ign to its b e i n g .Santayana does ins is t that pure spir i t wi l l recognize the g o o d n e s s of allmundane loves : hav ing d i s in tox ica ted itself, it wil l perceive the b e a u t yt h a t is in t h e m . But it will not l o v e a n y t h i n g as the wor ld does . For itwill not concern i tse l f wi th exis tence focused in a par t i cu la r ob jec t ,w h e t h e r a p e r s o n or a t h i n g , and it will avoid all b o n d s t h a t i m p a i r itsown pur i f i ed k ind of love .

O n m o r e t h a n one occas ion, Santayana ins is ted that he himself wascloser to the G r e e k s t h a n to the I n d i a n s , and t h a t he asp i red to a life ofr a t iona l i ty r a ther than sp i r i tua l i ty . The fo rmer s eeks a h a r m o n y a m o n gin te res t s , whereas the l a t t e r is a s ing le -minded pursu i t tha t wou ld seem tocas t a s ide every th ing but itself. Do we h a v e to c h o o s e b e t w e e n t h e s ea l t e rna t ives? Tha t is the ques t ion that Santayana examines d ia lect ical ly ino n e of the c h a p t e r s of his Di a l og ues in Li mbo. In the d ia logue en t i t l ed" T h e P h i l a n t h r o p i s t " S o c r a t e s and The S t r a n g e r c o n v e r s e a b o u t two waysi n w h i c h m a n k i n d can be loved . In effect , one is love coheren t w i th thelife of r e a s o n and the o t h e r is love that i s sues f rom pure spir i tual i ty .

In depict ing both poss ib i l i t ies , Santayana voices aspects of his ownph i losophy tha t cou ld eas i ly appear to be in c o n t r a d i c t i o n to one a n o t h e r .O n the one h a n d , we are p r e s e n t e d w i t h a c o n c e p t i o n of h u m a n i s t i c"ph i lan th ropy , " which Socra tes de fends . As agains t th is idea , TheS t r a n g e r a r g u e s for w h a t he calls "char i ty ." Ph i lan thr op y is a love ofmankind which Socra tes desc r ibes as real ly being "the love of an idea ,a n d not of ac tua l men and w o m e n . " 3 1 Phi lan th ropy d i r ec t s i t s e l f toward

29 Ibid., p. 687.30 Ibid., p. 691.


13/60

S A N T A Y A N A ' S P H I L O S O P H Y O F L O V E 11what i s t ru ly good for human be ings; i t i s geared to the rea l i t ies o f the i rna tu re and a ims fo r a "pe r f ec t human i ty" tha t i dea l ly wou ld p rov idefu l f i l lmen t , r ega rd le ss o f wha t some ind iv idua l may happen to des i r e .T h e S t r a n g e r c l a i m s t h a t " a n y a d o r a t i o n o f m a n k i n d i s m e r esen t im en ta l i ty , k i l led by con ta c t wi th ac tua l m en an d wo m en . To w ard sactual people a doting love signif ies si l l iness in the lover and injury to thebeloved, un t i l tha t love is ch as ten ed i n to char i ty . .. ,"32 San tayanaemploys the word "cha r i ty " in app rox ima t ion o f the med ieva l concep t( ca ri t as ) an d no t a s th e wo rd is m or e com mo nly u sed nowadays . H econs id e r s cha r i ty god l ike even if i t ex i s ts on ly in hu m an be ings . T h eSt ra ng er ca ll s i t "a sob er an d pr of ou nd com passion . . . suc cou r ing d is t resse v e r y w h e r e a n d h e l p i n g a l l t o e n d u r e t h e i r h u m a n i t y a n d t o r e n o u n c eit ."

3 3In th i s no t ion o f cha r i ty we may r ecogn ize the d i spos i t ion tha tSan ta yana gene ra l ly a ss igns to pu re sp i r it . T r an sc en d in g the sea r ch fo rpe r f ec t ion and a sp i r ing toward emanc ipa t ion f rom the wor ld , t he sp i r i tua ll if e is an exc lu s ive co m m i tm en t to cha r i ty . T h e S t r a nge r r em arks tha tchar i ty " is less than ph i lan thropy in tha t i t expects the defea t o f man 'sna t u ra l des i r e s an d accep t s tha t de f ea t; and i t is m or e than ph i l an th rop yin tha t , in the face of defea t , i t b r ings conso la t ion ." 3 4 Socra te s sums upthe d i scuss ion wi th the sugges t ion tha t "ph i l an th ropy i s a sen t im en tp rope r to man in v i ew o f h i s des i r ed pe r f ec t ion , and cha r i ty a sen t imen t

proper to a god , o r to a man insp i red by a god , in v iew of the necessaryimper f ec t ion o f a l l l i v ing c r ea tu re s . " 3 5San tayana l eaves the d i a logue wi th th i s min ima l syn thes i s be tween thetwo idea ls . T h o u g h cha r i ty is a Chr i s t i an conc ep t , he makes l i tt l e a t t em p tto de fend Chr i s t i an i ty itself. The St ranger c lass i f ies tha t re l ig ion as oneamong o the r "domes t i ca t ed ev i l s o r ton ic po i sons , l i ke the a rmy , thegove rnmen t , t he f ami ly , and the schoo l ; a l l o f t hem t r ad i t iona l c ru tches ,wi th wh ich , t hough l imp ing , we manage to wa lk . " 3 6 Even th is halfhea r t ed r ecommenda t ion seems ove r ly gene rous to Soc ra te s , who g ives

tha nks tha t he d i ed be fo re th e Chr i s t i an e r a . A l l t h e same , we mus trea l ize tha t the d ia lec t ica l p lay be tween the vo ices of Socra tes and TheSt r ange r dup l i ca t e s the amb iva lence in Chr i s t i an i ty be tween i t s i nd igenousconc ep t s o f e ro s an d aga pe . I n The Rea lm of Spirit , in a passage sub t i t led"Char i ty versus Eros , " San tayana d i scusses the theo log ica l con t rove r syabout love tha t descends regard less o f what the ob jec t mer i t s as d is t inc tf rom love th a t seeks to a t ta in per f ec t io n . In d i f feren t p laces he of fersvarying s o l u t i o n s t o t h e p r o b l e m .In re la t ions be tween sp i r i t s , San tayana recognizes no possib i l i ty o f

31 G e o r g e S a n t a y a n a , Dialogues in Limbo (New York : S cr ibn er ' s , 1925) , p . 155 .32 I b id .33 I b id .34 Ib id . , p . 139 .35 I b id . , p p . 1 5 6 - 5 7 .3 6 Ib id . , p . 158 .


14/60


15/60

SANTAYANA'S P H I L O S O P H Y O F LO V E 13compat ib le wi th sympathy , even compassion , bu t i t te l l s us very l i t t leabou t the idea l o f in t e rpe r sona l love .

Nonethe less , we may f ind Santayana ' s concept ion he lpfu l i f we wish toemanc ipa te ou r se lves f rom possess iveness , egoism, se l f -decept ion , and theres t less hunger for dubious goods tha t makes i t impossib le for any o therk ind of love to ex is t . San taya na shows us how pu re sp i ri t may a t ta injoyfu l seren i ty by acc ept i ng wha t is g iven an d conte m pla t ing w hat is t ru eor imag inab le . T hi s is a k ind of sa tor i tha t ne ed no t p re ve nt anind iv idual f rom re turn ing to the wor ld and l iv ing in i t as an organismcapable of sat isfying al l i ts facult ies. Indeed, the ideal of happiness as theto ta l fu l f il lment o f na tur a l imp ulses is def end ed in m uc h of wh atSan ta yana wro te , pa r t i cu la r ly in h is ea r l i e r work . T h e imp or tanc e o fu n d e r t a k i n g m u n d a n e a c t i v i t i e s , t h e p h i l o s o p h e r d e s c e n d i n g f r o m h i scon temp la t ive s t a t e and pa r t i c ipa t ing in the wre tched wor ld , he does no tem pha size as m uc h as Nie tzsch e or even Pla to . But he leaves th is op en asa v i ab le p ro jec t t ha t can somet imes fill per iods o f sp i r i tua l i n t e rmi t t encewi th opp o r tu n i t i e s fo r m ora l beha v io r . T h e pu r i f i ed sp ir i t wou ld the n bejo in ing fo r ces wi th the p syche f rom wh ich i t a ro se , t he two combin ingharmoniously and seek ing un i f ica t ion wi th the in teres ts o f o ther sp i r i t s .

I n San tayana ' s l a t e r ph i lo sophy these in t ima t ions o f bene f i cen tha rm on y a r e l ef t l a rge ly und eve lope d . T he y a r e com pa t ib l e , how ever ,wi th h is fo rm er w r i t ings ab ou t th e l ife o f rea son . H e h imsel f den ied th a tthere was s ign i f ican t inconsis tency be tween the two s tages in h is thought .He accoun ted fo r the d i f f e r ences be tween them in t e rms o f new a reas o fin t e r e s t t ha t p r eoc cup ied h im as he go t o lde r . I t h ink San tayana wasr igh t abou t th i s : he under s tood the na tu re o f h i s ph i lo soph ica ldev e lo pm en t be t t e r t han th e c r it i cs wh o tho ug h t he was r e j ec t ing r easonin favor of sp i r i tua l i ty . A l th ou gh Realms of Being calls itself ontology, itmay wel l be taken as a quasi - l i te rary express ion of Santayana ' s exper ienceaf te r m idd le ag e . T h o u g h tha t was inev i tab ly d i f feren t f rom h isexper ience as a younger man, he d id no t c rea te a new system of ana lysiswh ich con t r ad ic t s h i s p r ev ious ph i lo sophy .In th i s connec t ion San tayana ' s commen ts abou t f r i endsh ip , sca t t e r edt h r o u g h o u t h i s w r i t i n g s , a r e e x t r e m e l y p e r t i n e n t . T h e y r e p r e s e n t t h ehuman i s t i c s t r and tha t a lways accompan ies , and en r i ches , h i s concep t ionof ei th er th e l ife of rea so n or the li fe of spir i t . In So l i loquies in England,he suggests that "One ' s f r i ends a r e tha t pa r t o f the human r ace wi thw h i c h o n e c a n b e h u m a n . " 4 0 The k ind of f r iendsh ip tha t main ly in teres tsSan tay ana i s t he "un ion o f on e who le ma n wi th an o th e r who le m an , "which he in terpre ts as " the fe l t harmony of l i fe wi th l i fe , and of l i fe wi thn a t u r e . " 4 1 Does the word "man " he re r e f e r to bo th sexes? Seven teenyea r s ea r l i e r , i n a chap te r on "Free Soc ie ty , " San tayana ma in ta ined tha t"f r iends are genera l ly of the same sex , fo r when men and women agree ,i t i s on ly in the i r conclusions; the i r reasons are a lways d i f feren t ." 4 2 A few

4 0 " F r i e n d sh ip s* in Sol i loquies in England and Later Sol i loquies, p . 5 5 .41 I b id . , p p . 5 5 - 5 6 , 5 8 .


16/60

1 4 O V E R H E A R D IN S E V I L L Epages la ter , however , he te l ls us that in contemporary socie ty "a wel l -as so r ted mar r iage" approx imates , indeed "mos t near ly r esembles , " theanc ien t idea l o f f r i endsh ip tha t he wan ts to fu r the r .

4 3T h e pas sage is wo r th qu o t in g mo re ful ly :

In spite of intellectual disparity and of divergence in occupation, man andwife are bound together by a common dwelling, common friends, commonaffection for children, and, what is of great importance, common financialintere sts. Th ese bonds often suffice for substantial and lasting unanim ity,even when no ideal passion preceded; so that what is called a marriage ofreason, if it is truly reasonable, may give a fair promise of happiness, since anormal married life can produce the sympathies it requires.A declarat ion such as th is re inforces my bel ief that Santayana does notg ive us an adeq ua te ana lys is o f the love o f pe r so ns . T h e s ta tem entreveals that h is approach to marr ied love mainly concerns i t se l f wi th thecoord ina tes o f a su i t ab le pa r tn er sh ip . T h e "ma r r iage o f r eason" tha tSan tayana advoc a tes is the s ame as th e social a r r an ge m en t Sc hop enh aue rcon t ras ted wi th the bond o f s exua l love . Schopenhauer despa i red o fun i t ing the two wi th in the mar i t a l r e la t ion , and San tayana makes noa t t e m p t t o s h ow h o w t h a t m i g h t h a p p e n . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , o n e c o u l dargue tha t San tayana ' s r e fe rences to sympathe t i c and l as t ing unan imi ty do

t a k e u s p a r t o f t h e w a y t o w a r d u n d e r s t a n d i n g h o w m a r r i a g e c a n b e c o m ea mani fes ta t ion o f he te rose xua l f r i endsh ip .The humanis t i c ( and p lu ra l i s t i c ) r each o f San tayana ' s ph i losophy o flove appear s mos t p rominen t ly in h i s pos thumous es say en t i t l ed"Fr ie ndsh ip ." In it he sketches a spe ctru m of af fect ive values , f r iendshipand char i ty be ing the two tha t in t r igue h im mos t though they a re no t theonly on es he wishes to defe nd. H e con tras ts f r iendsh ip wi th bro the r ly o rs is ter ly love, s ince they depend on family or ig in ra ther than f ree choice .Fr i en dsh ip is "dis tinct ly se lect ive , per son al , and exclus ive: in th is respec ti t resem bles the pass ion of love." Bu t f r iendsh ip d i f fers f rom pass ion atelove , San tayana s ta tes , in d i r ec t ing the imag ina t ion ou tward , toward thewor ld as a whole , r a the r than focus ing i t on the r e la t ion be tween thelovers them selves . "W hat f ill s th e ima gina t ion of friends is the world, asa s cene fo r ac t ion and an ob jec t o f ju dg em en t ; and th e per son o f thef r iend is d is t ing uishe d an d selected f rom al l o th ers because ofexcep t iona l ly accep tab le ways o f ac t ing , th ink ing , and fee l ing abou t o therth ings o r o ther pe r sons . " San tayana conc ludes tha t f r i endsh ip i s " theun ion o f two f r ee ly r ang ing sou l s tha t mee t by chance , r ecogn ize andpr ize each o ther , bu t r emain f r ee . " 4 4In c i t ing the f reedom bas ic to f r iendship , Santayana sets i t apar t f romot he r k inds of love th at he d iscusses. Fo r it is bo un d nei the r by ins t incts42 Reason in Socie ty , p . 148 .43 Ibid. , p. 156.44 George Santayana, "Friendship," in The Birth o f Reason and Other Essays, ed. Daniel Cory

(New York: Colum bia University Press, 1968), p. 81 .


17/60


18/60

1 6 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L EIt i s th is p lural is t ic subs tra tum that I par t icular ly admire inSan taya na 's mor al phi losoph y. I t is th e aspect of h is v ision f rom which

we can l ea rn the mos t . 4 8 I R V I N G S I N G E R 1 9 87

Massachuset ts Insti tu te o f Techno logy4 8 For a d iscuss ion o f San tayana ' s p lu ra l i s t ic mora l ph i losophy , see my book San tay ana ' s

Aesthe tics: A C ritical Introdu ction ( W e s tp o r t : Gr e e n w o o d P r e ss , 1 9 7 3 ) , p p . 20 1 - 2 2 .


19/60

Beyond Truth: Santayanaon the Funct ional Relat ionsof Art , M y t h , and Re l ig ionG e o r g e S a n t a y a n a ' s The Realm of Truth (1938) , the th i rd vo lume o f h i ss e c o n d magnu m opus, Realms of Being, ends wi th a shor t chap te r a r r es t ing lye n t i t l e d "Beyond Tru th . " I t was in tended , as he s ta ted e l s ewhere , 1 mere lyto p rov ide a connec t ion wi th the p rospec t ive four th vo lume, Th e Rea l m o fSpiri t , and i t i s of no great consequence in itself. The idea b roached in i t st i t l e , however , i s o f g rea t impor tance no t on ly in h i s ph i losophy b road lycons idered bu t a l so in the r e la t ion o f th i s ph i losophy to the perenn ia l lyengag ing top ic o f the mee t ing fo r which th i s paper was o r ig ina l lyp r e p a r e d , n a m e l y , "the funct ional re la t ions of ar t , myth , and re l ig ion . "T h e idea tha t th e r e is a k ind o f a f f i rmat ion some how sup er io r to tha t o ft ru th gets to the hear t of the synthes is which made his wr i t ing especia l lyappea l ing to the many reader s o f h i s t ime who fe l t themse lves to rnbe tween idea l in te res t s on the one hand and the impersona l mechan ismsof sc ience on the o ther . Indeed, in h is own l i fe he had f discovered that i twas poss ib le wi thout s t ra in or d is t ress a t the same t ime to be a declaredmate r ia l i s t and a the i s t 2 and to bel ieve that re l ig ion is " the head and f ronto f e v e r y t h i n g . " 3 H e had lea rn ed ea r ly f rom h i s pa r en t s , bo th a rde n tant ic ler icals , that re l ig ion is a work of imaginat ion, and the thes is of oneof h is ear l ies t books was that re l ig ion and poetry are "identical ines sence , " 4 d i f fe r ing on ly mora l ly . Th i s ju dg m en t , how ever , d id no t ca r ryfor h im th e imp l icat ion tha t such f igments ar e ba d. "N o, I sa id to myselfeven as a boy , " he l a te r r ecorded , " they a re good , they a lone a re good ." 5W h a t t h e s e s e e m i n g p a r a d o x e s c o u l d m e a n a n d h o w t h e y c o u l d b ejus t i f ied wi l l be the concern of th is paper , s tar t ing wi th the t ru th whichh e p r o p o s e d t o g o b e y o n d .

T h i s t r u t h w a s a n i c e b l e n d o f t h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e a n d t h e p r a g m a t i ctheor ies . As a card-carrying member of the school of "cr i t ica l real is ts" hebe l ieved i t unavo idab le to as sume, desp i te the power fu l a rguments o fscept ic ism and even of sol ips ism, that there is a coherent object ive real i tyex i s t ing independen t ly o f o f our knowing i t , and tha t , in h i s l anguage ,1 Da n ie l Co r y , San tay ana : Th e La te r Ye ars, (New York , Braz i l le r , 1963) , p . 183 .2 " . . . in resp ec t to po pu l ar re l ig ion tha t th inks o f Go d as the c re a to r o f the wor ld an d

th e d i sp e n se r o f f o r t u n e , m y p h i lo so p h y i s a th e i s t i c ." The Realm of Spiri t , p . 838f. Re f e r e n c e st o Realms of Being a n d i t s c o m p o n e n t wo r k s a r e t o b e t h e o n e - v o lu m e e d i t i o n , N . Y . , Sc r ib n e r ,1 9 4 2 .

3 "A Brief His to ry o f My Opin ions ," in Th e P h i losop h y o f San tay ana , ed . I . Edman (N.Y. :M o d e r n L ib r a r y , 1 9 4 2) , p . 5 . Or ig in a l l y i n G . P . Ad a m s a n d W. P . M o n ta g u e , e d s . ,Contemporary American Philosophy: Personal S ta tements (N.Y. : MacMil lan , 1930) .

4 On the v iew of h is paren ts see "A Br ie f H i s to r y o f M y Op in io n s . " T h e q u o te d se n t e n c eis from Interpre tat ions o f Poetry and Rel ig ion (N.Y. : Scr ibner , 1900) , page v .

5 "A Br ie f His to ry o f My Opin ions ," pp . 5 -6 .


20/60

18 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L E"the s tandard comprehens ive desc r ip t ion ' ' o f th i s r ea l i ty , wou ld be th et r u t h , 6 subs i s ten t even i f no t a t t a inab le . Th is t ru th , th e t ru th , i s thus o ft h e n a t u r e o f c o r r e s p o n d e n c e , c o r r e s p o n d e n c e b e t w e e n t h e d e s c r i p t i o nand the r ea l i ty desc r ibed . Knowledge of the t ru th , however , - and heins is ted on the d is t inct ion is a qu i te d i f f e ren t m at te r . T h o ug h it s idea lan d def in i t ion mi gh t s ti ll b e tha t of copy, it is a t bes t an ap pro xim at io nand not real ly suscept ib le of compar ison with i t s or ig inal , which is notknown immedia te ly bu t on ly be l i eved in . "All h u m a n knowledge of t ru th , "h e w r o t e , "by vir tue of i t s seat and funct ion, must be re la t ive andsubject ively coloured. I t expresses the sensat ions and expecta t ions of aspecif ic animal." 7 "Kno wledg e is no t t ru th , " he ad ded e l sew here "bu t aview or express ion of the t ru th . . . . A lover of paradox might say that tobe par t ly wrong i s a cond i t ion o f be ing par t ly r igh t . " 8 A b s o l u t e t r u t hpresumptively exis ts , but i t s possess ion " is not merely by accident beyondthe r ange o f pa r t i cu la r m inds ; i t i s incompat ib le w i th be ing a l ive , becausei t excludes any par t icular s ta t ion , organ, in teres t , or date of survey." 9

T h e m ed ium of th i s pa r t i a l know ledg e is the p ro fus ion o f images ,concep ts , and symbols which under inner and ou te r in f luences a r i s e w i thd r e a m - l i k e spontaneity in each of us and make up our s t r eams o fconsciousne ss . Most of the se v isi ta t ions s imply f li t by , bu t some of the mare a r res ted , combined , and pu t to one o r ano ther o f va r ious uses . 1 0 A she wro te , ve ry ea r ly , o f th i s s t r eam : "Th ose concep t ions which , a f t e rthey have spon taneous ly a r i s en , p rove se rv iceab le in p rac t i ce and capab leof ver i f icat ion in sense , we call ideas of the un de rs t an di ng . .. .U nd er s ta nd in g is an appl ic able f ic tion , a k ind of wit wi th a pract ica luse . " 1 1 Th e Li f e o f Reason , his first mag num opus , was, in his owndescr ip t ion , a summary h i s to ry o f the imag ina t ion and i t s uses . 1 2 a n d ,6 Scept ic ism and An imal Fai th ( L o n d o n : Co n s t a b l e , 1 9 23 ) , p . 2 6 7 .

The Realm of Truth , p . 5 2 6 .8 Ibid., p . 4 6 9 .9 Realms of Being, Pr e f a c e , p a g e xiii.10 T h i s c o n c e p t , i n f lu e n c e d c e r t a in ly b y Ja m e s , r e c u r s t h r o u g h o u t S a n t a y a n a ' s c a r e e r .

E.g. , in Interpre tat ions o f Poetry and Rel ig ion: "perceptions fall into the b ra in . . . as seeds in to afu r rowed f ie ld o r even as sparks in to a keg o f powder . Each image b reeds a hundred more . "(p.2) , an d "San i ty is ma dne ss pu t to go od uses ; wak in g l ife is a d rea m controlled" (p .261) . In"A Br ie f His to ry o f My Opin ions ," p . 19 : "all is a tale told, if not by an idiot , at least by adre am er ; bu t i t i s f a r f rom s ign i fy ing no th ing . Sensa t ions a re rap id d re am s; perc ep t io ns a red r e a m s su s t a in e d a n d d e v e lo p e d a t w il l; s c i en c e s a r e d r e a m s a b s t r a c t e d , c o n t r o l l e d , m e a su r e d ,a n d r e n d e r e d sc r u p ulo u s ly p r o p o r t i o n a l t o t h e i r o c c a s io n s . Kn o w le d g e a c c o r d in g ly a lwa y sremains a par t o f imagina t ion in i t s te rms and in i t s sea t ; ye t by v i r tue o f i t s o r ig in and in ten ti t b e c o m e s a m e m o r i a l a n d a g u id e t o t h e f o r tu n e s o f m a n in n a tu r e . " I n " No r m a l M a d n e ss , "Dialogues in Limbo ( Ne w Yo r k : Sc r ib n e r , 1 9 26 ) , p p . 3 6 - 5 7 . I n Realms of Being, page x: "Poet ic ,cre ativ e, or ig inal fancy is no t a sec ond ary form of sensibil i ty , bu t i ts f irst an d only form ." InThe Idea o f Christ in the Gospels (New York : Scr ib ner , 1946) , p . 7 : Am bien t in f luencess t imula te " the o rgan ism to fuse sca t te red impress ions , to rev ive and transform f o r g o t t e nimag es , to inven t , as in d ream s, scenes tha t jus t i fy r ip en i ng em ot ion s , and to fee l a f f in i t ies o requ iva lence in apparen t ly d ispara te th ings" ; th is p rocess , ca l led " insp i ra t ion" in the making o fp o e t r y a n d sa c r e d t e x t s , " r e m a k e s t h e im a g e o f t h e wo r ld , o r u n m a k e s i t , a c c o r d in g to t h emood of the sou l . "

11 Interpre tat ions o f Poetry and Rel ig ion, p . 5 . I h a v e r e v e r se d t h e o r d e r o f t h e se n t e n c e s .


21/60

B E Y O N D T R U T H 19much la te r , in tha t l i t t l e mas te rp iece , "A Brief His tory of My Opinions ,"he c l inched the mat te r fo r us in these words :

He re was a sort of pragmatism . .. . T he h uma n mind is a faculty of dreamingawake, and its dreams are kept relevant ... by the external control exercisedover them by Punishment, when the accompanying conduct brings ruin, or byAgreement, when it brings prosperity.13J o h n Dewey's comment was tha t th i s was too p ragmat ic fo r h im . 1 4

T h e ^knowledge of t ru th " as thu s d i s t ingu ished f rom t ru th p ro pe r maybe said to go "beyond" it in the sense of being in a measure the creat ionand expres s ion o f i t s knower r a ther than mere ly an impos i t ion upon h im ,an d th i s t r an sce nd en ce i s even fu r the r e x te nda b le as we mov e beyon dt ru th even in the p ragmat ic s ense . For the "knowledge" o f t ru th thusconce iv ed , as the w ord "p ragm at ic" sugges ts , is on ly an ins t rumen ta l i ty ,only a prel iminary to a supposed f ru i t ion "beyond," and pale bycom par i so n wi th tha t f ru i t ion on the s cale o f hu m an va lue . T h e r ea lg lo ry r ed ou nd s to the ho pe d fo r r esu l t . "Happ ines s in th e t ru th , "San tayana wro te in one o f those wry domes t ic images to which he was sopa r t ia l , "is l ike hap pine ss in m ar r ia ge , f ru i tfu l , las t ing , an d ironical . Youcou ld n o t ha ve chosen b e t t e r , ye t th i s is no t wh a t you d re am t of."1512 "A Br ie f His to ry o f My Opin ions ," p . 5 .13 Ibid., pp . 13-1414 In Dewey ' s re jo inder to h is c r i t ics in Th e P h i losop h y o f Joh n De we y , e d . P a u l A r t h u r

Sc h i lp p ( T h e L ib r a r y o f L iv in g Ph i lo so p h e r s , No r th we s t e r n Un iv e r s i t y P r e ss , 1 9 3 9 ), p . 5 26 .Dewey ' s spec i f ic words were "a k in d o f a r b i t r a r y p r a g m a t i sm f r o m wh ic h I shrink." Re le v a n tc o m m e n t s b y Sa n ta y a n a o n t h i s p a r a g r a p h a n d th e l a s t a r e t h e f o l l o win g ;( 1 ) L im i t i n g h i s p r a g m a t i sm : "If an ' idea ' is useful , i t is useful , not true." (The Realm of

Truth , p . 4 4 8 )(2) Su pp or t ing h is p rag ma t ism : " t ru t h a t the in te l l ig ib le leve l wh ere it a r i ses , me ans no t

sensib le fac t bu t va l id idea t ion , ver i f ied hypothesis , and inev i tab le , s tab le in ference ."( R e ason in Common Se nse , Ne w Yo r k : Sc r ib n e r , 1 9 22 , p . 20 1 )

( 3 ) Su p p o r t i v e o f c o p y th e o r y : "What renders knowledge t rue i s f ide l i ty to the ob jec t ; bu tin the conduct and fancy o f an an imal th is f ide l i ty can be on ly rough , summary ,d r a m a t i c . . . " (Realms of Being p. xii) . "This re la t iv i ty does no t imply tha t there i s noabso lu te t ru th . . . . I f v iews can be m or e o r less cor r ec t , and per hap s com plem enta ry toon e ano the r , i t i s beca use they re fer t o the same system of na tu r e , the completedescr ip t ion o f which , cover ing the whole past and the whole fu tu re , would be thea b s o l u t e t r u t h . " (Ibid., p . xv) . "The e x p e r i e n c e wh ic h m a k e s e v e n th e e m p i r i c i s t a wa k eto the be ing o f t ru th . .. i s th e exp er ie nce o f o th er peop le ly ing . W he n I am fa lse lyaccused . . . I r ebe l aga inst tha t con t rad ic t ion to my ev iden t se l f -knowledge . . . . There i s ,I t h e n se e c l e a r ly , a c o m p r e h e n s iv e s t a n d a r d d e sc r ip t i o n for every fac t , which thosewh o r e p o r t i t a s i t h a p p e n e d r e p e a t i n p a r t , wh e r e a s o n t h e c o n t r a r y l i a r s c o n t r a d i c t i ti n so m e p a r t i c u l a r . .. . T h e s t a n d a r d c o m p r e h e n s iv e d e sc r ip t i o n o f a n y f a ct wh ic hne i th er I nor any ma n can ever whol ly repea t , is the t ru th ab ou t i t . " (Scept ic ism andAnimal Fai th , p . 26 6 )

(4 ) Con cess ions to co m m on usag e : "Dra ma t ic my th . .. in tha t a t leas t i t r esp ond s to th efac ts re f lec t ive ly , has en tered the a rena o f t ru th . " (The Realm of Truth , p . 4 7 1 ) ." In te gr i ty , . . . th e c lear a l leg iance o f a t ra nsp are n t sou l to i ts rad ica l wi l l, wi th ou t be in gt r u e t o a n y th in g e x t e r n a l , m a k e s a m a n ' s c h o i c e s t r u e t o himself." (Ibid., p . 4 7 5 )

( 5) T h e P r e f a c e o f The Realm of Truth i n c lu d e s n in e e x t e n d e d p a ssa g e s o n t h e su b j e c tq u o te d f r o m th e a u th o r ' s p r e v io u s wo r k s .


22/60

2 0 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L E"More deep ly than wi th the t r u t h , * h e a d d e d , "spirit is concerned withconce iv ing , l ov ing , o r ha t ing wha t migh t have been t rue . " 1 6 A n d a g a i n :"merely be ing t rue does no t make th ings wor th knowing" ; they ach ievesuch wor th on ly by "invigorating a n d e n t e r t a i n i n g t h e m i n d . " 1 7 Finally ,cons ide r the fo l lowing warm d e c l a r a t i o n , e labo ra t ing the sugges t ion o fi n v i g o r a t i o n a n d e n t e r t a i n m e n t :

Facts for a living creature are only instruments; his play-life is his true life.On his working days, when he is attentive to matter, he is only his ownservant, preparing the feast. He becomes his own master in his holidays andin his sportive passions. Am ong these must be counted literature andphilosophy, and so much of love, religion, and patriotism as is not an effort tosurvive materially.18T h u s , "beyond t ru th" - no t fac t bu t v is ion .

The c r i t e r ion he re , desp i t e the inc lu s ion of grave ca tegor ies l ikephi lo soph y and pa t r io t i s m , is c lear ly aes th e t ic p leasu re , no t du ty a n dreca l l s t he concep t ion o f va lue a s app rec ia t ion wh ich was p r e sen ted a t t hebeginning of h is f i r s t book , Th e Sense o f Beau t y (1896) , as well as^ also intha t p lace , h is impl ic i t e leva t ion of aes the t ic above mora l va lue as in t r ins icr a t h e r t h a n m e r e l y i n s t r u m e n t a l . 1 9 Whateve r i t s t echn ica l s t and ing , t h i sax io logy is c lose to the he ar t o f San taya na ' s perso nal ph i losop hy and th ebasis o f the ob jec t ion of many of h is more earnest Am er ica n c r it i c s -P res iden t E l io t , f o r example tha t in be ing a t bo t tom aesthe t ic h is wayof th ink ing and l iv ing was id le and indulgent . 2 0 Instead of a soldier inthe war s o f p rog ress , he was the de ta che d spec ta to r and d rea m er . Th i sde tachmen t was the po in t o f tha t ea r ly "change o f hea r t " wh ich hedesc r ibed memorab ly in the open ing o f the t h i rd vo lume o f h i sa u t o b i o g r a p h y 2 1 and qu i te unforge tab ly in the fo l lowing ref lec t ion on thet ragedies o f Wor ld War I and the pess imis t ic lesson tha t they droveh o m e :

Un der these circumstances, what is the part of wisdom? T o dream with oneeye open; to be detached from the world without hostility to it; to welcomefugitive beauties and pity fugitive sufferings without forgetting for a momenthow fugitive they are; and not to lay up treasures, except in heaven. 2215 The Realm of Truth , p . 5 4 0 .16 The Real o f Spiri t , p . 8 0 5 .17 The Realm of Truth , p . 44118 The Realm of Being, p a g e x i .19 See p p . 1 8 a n d 2 3 .20 E.g . , Char les Wil l iam El io t : "The wi th d r a wn , c o n te m p la t i v e m a n wh o t a k e s n o p a r t i nthe everyday work o f the ins t i tu t ion , o r o f the wor ld , seems to me a person o f very uncer ta in

va lue . H e does no t d ig d i tches , o r lay b r icks , o r wr i te schoo l-books, h is p ro du ct i s no t o f theord i nary usefu l , tho ug h hum ble , k ind . W hat wi ll i t be? I t may be somet h ing o f the h ig hestu t i l i ty ; bu t , on the o ther hand , i t may be someth ing fu t i le , o r even harmfu l because unnatura la n d u n t im e ly . " G . W. Ho w g a te , S a n t a y a n a (Ph i lade lp h ia , U. o f Pa . Press , 1938) , pp . 4 2- 3 .

21 My Host t h e Word (New York : Scr ib ner , 1953) , pp . 1-15.Sol i loquies in England (New York : Scr ib ner , 1922 ) , pp . . 96-7 . T h e who le essay, "W ar


23/60

B E Y O N D T R U T H 21H is way, h o w e v e r , as is e v i d e n t in t h e s e w o r d s , was not a s impleh e d o n i s m . His E p i c u r e a n i s m had its ataraxia. T h u s , w h e n he exp la ined tohis good f r iend and fe l low foo tba l l roo ter , Bi l ly Phelps , tha t he couldd i spense wi th Phe lp s ' s k ind of fa i th because he had "the E p i c u r e a ncontentment," he added qu ick ly tha t t h i s "was not far r e m o v e d f r o masce t i c i sm ."2 3 It was also not far r emoved f rom re l ig ion , as we shalld i s c o v e r t h r o u g h a c loser look at his "realm of spir i t ."

A s one of the fou r " r ea lms of b e i n g " , the r ea lm of spir i t is inSan tayana ' s sy s t em the r e a l m of a w a r e n e s s . 2 4 W h e n he was firstb e g i n n i n g to deve lop th i s new p h a s e of his ph i lo sophy , as early as 1 9 1 1 ,he spoke of the r e a l m of sp i r i t as the r e a l m of "consc iousness ,"2 5 and int h e o p e n i n g c h a p t e r of the v o l u m e w h i c h was f ina l ly devoted to it he saidt h a t " o t h e r n a m e s for sp i r i t are consc iousness , a t t en t ion , f ee l ing , t hough t ,o r any w o r d t h a t m a r k s the t o t a l i nner d i f f e r ence be tween be ing awake orasleep , a l ive or d e a d . " 2 6 He d i s t ingu i shed sp i r i t f r om wha t he called the"psyche , " wh ich , wi th Ar i s to t e l i an r emin i scences , he def ined as "the self-m a i n t a i n i n g and r e p r o d u c i n g p a t t e r n or s t r u c t u r e or an o r g a n i s m ,c o n c e i v e d as a p o w e r . "2 7 The supposed o r ig in of spirit* in the evo lu t ionof the p s y c h e he desc r ibes in t h e s e t e r m s :

spirit ... arises at a specially energetic phase in the life of the psyche, namely,when the range of adjustment and control begins to extend beyond the body;for so long as life remains purely vegetative it seems to be unconscious ... .W e may then say that spirit arises whenever Will in one place finds itprofitable to mark, trace, and even imitatively to share the movement of Willelsewhere. By so doing a psyche anticipates attack and defense, putting forthtelepathic feelers, as it were, indefinitely far into space and time.28This con jec tu ra l h i s to ry , wh ich is m o r e an expos i to ry dev ice than asc ien t i f ic conclusion , serves to define the dis t inc t ive vocat ion of spir i t andt o sugges t its e n t a n g l e m e n t :

This sensibility to the not-self arises entirely in the self s service. Th ose far-reaching senses are not speculative in their Will, but defensive or aggressive;and the mechanism that generates and supports them necessarily subservesthe welfare of the body ... . Yet meantime, by that useful trick of exactShr ines ," f rom which th is passage is t a k e n , b e g in n in g , "What d o e s the cross signify?" isr e l e v a n t to the presen t d iscuss ion , espec ia l ly these two passages when taken in c o n ju n c t io n :"The k n o wle d g e t h a t e x i s t e n c e ca n manifes t but c a n n o t r e t a in the good reconci les us at o n c eto l iving and to d y i n g . T h a t , I t h i n k , is the wisdom of the c r o ss . " " T h e r e is no c u r e for b i r tha n d d e a th sa v e to enjoy the i n t e r v a l . " (pp. 94, 97)

23 L e t t e r to P h e l p s , Feb. 16, 1936. The Let ters of George S a n t a y a n a , ed. Danie l Cory (NewYo r k : Sc r ib n e r , 1 9 5 5 ) , p. 305.24 Th e p r e s e n t paragraph and the n e x t one are taken f rom an ear l ie r a r t ic le of m i n e ,

"Lucifer and The Last Puri tan," American Li terature , X X X I I I , No. 1 (March, 1961), pp. 1-19.25 Letters, p. 104 .26 The Realm of Spirit, p. 572.27 Ibid., p. 569.28 Ibid., pp. 6 0 8 - 9 .


24/60

2 2 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L Eadaptation and imitative sympathy, the psyche has automatically generatedspiritual sympathy and true intelligence, without in the least requiring thesegifts or profiting by them.29

"In t h i s way , l i ke an igno ran t g i r l , t he p syche has become a mo the rwi thou t coun t ing the cos t e i the r to he r se l f o r to he r mi r acu lous ch i ld . " 3 0Two po in t s in th i s concep t ion mus t be g iven spec ia l emphas i s . Thef i r s t i s tha t though sp i r i t a r i ses in the serv ice of the body and cont inues inth is serv ice , i t i s i t se l f con templa t ive and d is in teres ted and s tandstherefore in i t s idea l aspect for imp ar t ia l i ty . L ike pu re sc ience or an idea lin te l l igence serv ice , i t s funct ion i s to know, wi thout anxie ty as tocon seq uen ces . Sa n taya na expla ins i ts s ta tus an d d is t inc t ion in th is way:

"The difference between the l i fe of the spir i t and that of the f lesh is i tselfa sp i r i tua l d i f fe rence: the two are no t to be d iv ided mater ia l ly or in the i roccas ions an d them es so m uch a s in th e qua l i ty o f the i r a t t en t io n : th eone i s anx ie ty , inqui ry , des i re , and fear ; the other is intui t ivepossess ion ." 3 1 T h e second po in t t o be no ted i s t ha t t h e same idea l o fimpar t ia l i ty which fo l lows f rom the cognitive function of spir i t isre inforced and g iven an addi t ional d imension by sp i r i t ' s t r ick ofsym path e t ic p ro jec t ion . O u t o f th is usefu l ta len t fo r pu t t in g i tse lf ino thers ' p laces a r i ses the idea l o f char i ty , which Santayana ear ly def ined int e rm s o f ima g ina t ion ( "cha r ity i s no th in g bu t a rad ica l and imag ina t iveju s t i ce" ) 3 2 and which he unders tood in the c lass ica l Chr is t ian sense no tsimply of pi ty for suffer in g b u t love of a go od w hich is unive rsal ly lon ge dfor bu t p i t i fu l ly perver ted and f r u s t r a t e d .3 3 The way of l i fe in whicht hese two po in t s a g r e e , together wi th the asce t ic ism which th is l i fe en ta i l s ,i s p r es en te d in th e fo l lowing te rm s in The Realm of Spiri t :

[spirit] has chosen what in its own eyes is the better part, intelligence,symp athy, universality. It has there by chosen for all oth ers that which the irnature, in each case, demands; but for itself spirit has chosen renunciation,not to be preached to others who cannot love it but to be practised inwardlyin its own solitude. T he first thing that spirit must renounce, if it wouldbegin to be free, is any claim to dom ination . Its kingdom is not of this world;and the other world, where its will is done, is not a second cosmos, anotherphysical environment, but this very emancipation and dominion of spirit overitself, which raises it above care even for its own existence. Suffering is notthereby abolished, either in the world or in the spirit, so long as the spiritlives in any world; but suffering is accepted and spiritually overcome by beingunderstood, and by being preferred to the easy injustice of sharing only one

29 Ibid., p . 6 1 3 .30 Ibid., p . 6 1 7 .31 Platonism an d the Spiri tual Li fe , H a r p e r Torchbooks Edi t ion (New York , 1957) , p . 2 6 0 .32 Reason in Rel ig ion, p . 2 2 1 .33 "It was th is spec tac le tha t moved God , in the person o f h is Son , to a new Chr is t ian love

for the wor ld , which is ca l led char i ty : . .. love o f some th in g missed , o f some th ing defe a ted an dunexpressed , to which th is e r r ing wor ld was inward ly addressed , and fo r the lack of which i thor r ib ly and perpe tua l ly su f fe red ." (The Idea o f Christ in the Gospels, p . 21 5 ) . Fo r e x t e n d e ddiscussions of chari ty , see The Realm of Spiri t , p p . 7 8 2- 9 7 a n d Reason in Rel ig ion, C h . X I I .


25/60

B E Y O N D T R U T H 2 3craving, to be satisfied with one sweet.34

This r e l a t ionsh ip o f bondage and de l ive rance was to San tayana no ton ly an ingen ious ph i lo soph ica l concep t and someth ing o f a pe r sona lconfess ion ; i t was a lso the essence of t rue Chr is t ian i ty . In the words ofthe t i t l e o f a book wh ich he had no t ye t wr i t t en , bu t was abou t to , "theidea of Ch r is t in th e Gos pels ." T hi s , fu r the r , was an idea wh ich , tho ug hno t a lways in so deve loped a fo rm, he had ce leb ra t ed th roughou t h i sca re e r . T h us , a s ea r ly a s In terpreta t ions o f Poetry and Rel igion in 1900 heh a d a r g u e d t h a t "Christian doct r ine" as compared wi th i t s ear ly r iva ls was"alone justified" because i t was "the f e l t coun te rpa r t o f pe r sona le x p e r i e n c e . " 3 5 And now, near ly f i f ty years la te r , in explor ing the thea t reof th is very exper ience , the rea lm of sp i r i t , he was led d i rec t ly by i t st ragedy to the f igure of Chr is t as , in h is phrase , the "supreme i n s t ance" 3 6of sp i r i t ' s suf fer ing and l ibera t ion , and to the wr i t ing of ten pages whicha re the ge rm o f the l a t e r book . The sub t i t l e o f The Idea o f Christ in theGospels is God-in-Man, and i ts con ten t i on , a s we have ju s t seen in the m or eabs t r ac t t e rms o f The Realm of Spirit , was tha t th is mystery der ived i t ss ign if i cance an d g rea tne ss f rom i ts exp ress ion o f an " in -bo rn p r ed ic am en tof the sp i r i t . " 3 7 The miss ion of sp i r i t was to love and unders tand a l lth ings , bu t i t was inca rna ted in a wor ld and organism in whichdiscr iminat ion and choice , se lec t ion and re jec t ion , love and fear , were ofth e essence . N o r wer e th is ana lysis an d the c la im of i t s un iversa l re l ig iou ss ign i f icance m ere ly ing enio us apolo get ics . No th ing is m or e fami l ia r to anyreade r o f the da i ly pape r s than the con f l i c t be tween the idea l o f peaceand love on the one hand and the ac tua l i t ies o f possess ion and surv iva l onthe o the r . The Pass ion i s ou r s .

T h i s " su p rem e in s t ance , " th i s do c t r in e "a lone ju s t i fi ed" com es to u s ,how ever , a s m y th r a t he r th an theo logy a spec if ic m y th , i ndeed , t heC h r i s t i a n e p i c . 3 8 - and the ques t ion thus a r i se s , how does one who a s aph i lo sop he r i s com m i t t ed t o mo re l i t e r a l m ode s o f tho ug h t dea l wi th it?A n im po r ta n t p r e l im ina ry f ac t a s f a r as San taya na is con ce rn ed i s t ha t hed id no t wish to d ispense wi th the myth , e i ther to d ismiss i t as on ly am a n n e r o f s p e a k i n g o r t o t r a n s f o r m i t i n t o s o m e t h i n g m o r e c o m f o r t i n g ,as was so common in the Un i t a r i an wor ld in wh ich he had g rown up .The d i senchan ted , a sce t i c , unwor ld ly emphas i s o f the Gospe l s and o f ea r lyChr i s t i an l i f e , t he message o f sa lva t ion th rough r enunc ia t ion , was , hebe l i eved , t h e t r u e on e an d no t to be exp la ined away . Sc r ip tu r e , he34 The Realm of Spiri t, p . 64 3 . So me of th e d i f ficu lt ies o f San tayana ' s ep iphe nom enal i sm

a p p e a r h e r e , a s , i n d e e d , i n a n u m b e r o f p l a c e s i n t h i s p a p e r . T h e im p o te n c e o f sp i r i t i n t h i sthe ory o f mi nd i s d i f ficu lt to main ta in an d tend s to be b rok en by wo rds like "chosen* in thisa n d o t h e r s t a t e m e n t s .

35 p p . 9 5 , 1 0 5 .36 The Realm of Spiri t, p . 7 5 7 .37 p . 1 9 .38 T h e c la s si c s t a t e m e n t i s Ch a p te r VI , "The Chr is t ian Ep ic ," in Reason in Rel ig ion, b u t a

wo r th y p r e d e c e sso r is Ch a p t e r I V , "The Po e t r y o f Ch r i s t i a n Do g m a ," i n Interpre tat ions o f Poetryand Rel ig ion.


26/60

2 4 O V E R H E A R D I N S E V I L L Eu r g e d , i n The Idea of Chris t in the Gospels should be taken l i tera l ly a t thesame t ime that i t i s recognized to be fab le . T h e o r t h o d o x i n t e r p r e t a t i o nof Ch r is t iani ty is th e soun d on e, but i t is po etr y and n ot fact. Co nce ptsl ike tha t o f Crea t ion , fo r example , a re admi t t ed ly no t sound phys ics o rhis tory , but they are t rue to the l i fe of the spir i t and therefore not to bea b a n d o n e d b u t t o b e i n t e r p r e t e d . A s ec o n d i m p o r t a n t p r e l i m i n a r y is h i sp red i lec t ion fo r teleological e x p l a n a t i o n . T h o r o u g h n a t u r a l is t t h a t h ewas, he cou ld eas i ly have agreed tha t the p roces s o f myth-making (o r o fmetaphys ic -m aking) is an ins tance o f wha t Jo h n Dewey rega rde d as thegreates t of phi losophical fa l lacies , " the convers ion of eventual funct ionsi n t o a n t e c e d e n t e x i s t e n c e . " 3 9 However , Ar t i s to te l i an tha t he a l so was, h ewould ha ve wished v igorous ly to deny (as would Dewey , fo r tha t m at te r )tha t an teceden t ex i s tences o r causes a re the on ly o r

Documents

Overheard in Seville.5.1987