Brief Notices

BRIEF NOTICES God of the Scientists, God of the E:cperiment. By REM-r CHAUVIN. Translated by SALVATOR ATTANASIO. Baltimore: Helicon Press, 1960. Pp. 152, with glossary and bibliography. $8.95. This essay propounds a novel approach to the problem of God developed by a scientist well known for his work in biology and psychology. He relies heavily on clinical and experimental methods to develop a new argument for the existence o.f God that, despite serious limitations from the viewpoint of traditional philosophy, will undoubtely appeal to his fellow scientists. The tone of the book is set in its opening pages. Chauvin holds that " when we speak to scientists we must speak their language," and is confident that in his work " laboratory people will immediately recognize one of their own in certain ways of reasoning, and above all in the importance assigned to experiment and the verification of hypotheses " (p. I) • He is aware that his experimental approach to religion will displease philosophers . Yet he does not intend the book for them, and is in fact derogatory of their role in the intellectual community. He is likewise dissatisfied with traditional theology and the way in which the Church presents Christ's message to the world. One is led to expect that an author so critical of traditional thought will present a brilliant argument in support of God's existence. Yet Chauvin 's exposition is far from this. His writing does not abound in the poetic imagery that makes Teilhard de Chardin's offerings palatable, nor is it a simple matter even to follow the thread of his thought. Reduced to the bare bones, it seems that the argument diffusely spread through the book may be summarized as follows: If God exists, then man can experience Him in a way that vitally aJfects his personal life. But the scientist can perform theotropic experiments for himself and see that God will affect his personal life. Therefore he can experimentally establish for himself the existence of God. The first statement is an hypothesis that Chauvin regards as capable of direct verification. The second statement properly locates the scientist on his own ground, where he can experimentally establish, and thereby verify , the theory implicity formulated. The conclusion then follows from the " lived experience " of the scientist, which generates a conviction believed 456 BRIEF NOTicES 457 to be far superior to that generated by any type of " pure discourse " (pp. 17, 71, 73, 148). As can be seen from this, Chauvin does not believe it possible to demonstrate the existence of God, if one takes " demonstration " in the classical sense. In his opinion, " to place the problem on a purely intellectual plane, to wish to demonstrate God like a theorem, is to preclude any results; to lock oneself in the prison of the 'undecidables' ..." (p. 10). In place of demonstration, he would substitute the notion of experimental verification. Thus he states: " The very idea which guided me in undertaking this essay is that if God exists, it must be possible to verify it (not to prove it) " (p. 11, emphasis his). However acceptable this approach may be to the experimentalist, it will be recognized immediately by the logician as at best a dialectical argument, and at worst the fallacy of affirmatio consequentis. In spite of the logical weakness in Chauvin's argument, he does present considerable historical and psychological data that will interest the scientific mind, and might persuade the latter to investigate religious experience as a means of reaching God. Much of Chauvin's writing is in fact charged with moral persuasiveness. Thus clothing the bare bones of his argument with flesh and blood, he is able to niake out a case with considerable persuasive value for scientists who subscribe to his premisses. Chauvin's book itself may best be characterized as an experiment. If it succeeds, it will bring scientists to a more profound realization of God's existence and His effect on their personal lives. If it does not, it will go far to show that the author's experimental method is not the uniquely scientific way of reaching out towards God. Dominican House of Philosophy, Dover, Maaaachuaetta. w. A. WALLACE...