Martin Eden by Jack London

“Here’s fresh meat for your axe, Kreis,” he said; “a rose-white

youth with the ardor of a lover for Herbert Spencer. Make a

Haeckelite of him – if you can.”

Kreis seemed to wake up and flash like some metallic, magnetic

thing, while Norton looked at Martin sympathetically, with a sweet,

girlish smile, as much as to say that he would be amply protected.

Kreis began directly on Martin, but step by step Norton interfered,

until he and Kreis were off and away in a personal battle. Martin

listened and fain would have rubbed his eyes. It was impossible

that this should be, much less in the labor ghetto south of Market.

The books were alive in these men. They talked with fire and

enthusiasm, the intellectual stimulant stirring them as he had seen

drink and anger stir other men. What he heard was no longer the

philosophy of the dry, printed word, written by half-mythical

demigods like Kant and Spencer. It was living philosophy, with

warm, red blood, incarnated in these two men till its very features

worked with excitement. Now and again other men joined in, and all

followed the discussion with cigarettes going out in their hands

and with alert, intent faces.

Idealism had never attracted Martin, but the exposition it now

received at the hands of Norton was a revelation. The logical

plausibility of it, that made an appeal to his intellect, seemed

missed by Kreis and Hamilton, who sneered at Norton as a

metaphysician, and who, in turn, sneered back at them as

metaphysicians. PHENOMENON and NOUMENON were bandied back and

forth. They charged him with attempting to explain consciousness

by itself. He charged them with word-jugglery, with reasoning from

words to theory instead of from facts to theory. At this they were

aghast. It was the cardinal tenet of their mode of reasoning to

start with facts and to give names to the facts.

When Norton wandered into the intricacies of Kant, Kreis reminded

him that all good little German philosophies when they died went to

Oxford. A little later Norton reminded them of Hamilton’s Law of

Parsimony, the application of which they immediately claimed for

every reasoning process of theirs. And Martin hugged his knees and

exulted in it all. But Norton was no Spencerian, and he, too,

strove for Martin’s philosophic soul, talking as much at him as to

his two opponents.

“You know Berkeley has never been answered,” he said, looking

directly at Martin. “Herbert Spencer came the nearest, which was

not very near. Even the stanchest of Spencer’s followers will not

go farther. I was reading an essay of Saleeby’s the other day, and

the best Saleeby could say was that Herbert Spencer NEARLY

succeeded in answering Berkeley.”

Martin Eden

208

“You know what Hume said?” Hamilton asked. Norton nodded, but

Hamilton gave it for the benefit of the rest. “He said that

Berkeley’s arguments admit of no answer and produce no conviction.”

“In his, Hume’s, mind,” was the reply. “And Hume’s mind was the

same as yours, with this difference: he was wise enough to admit

there was no answering Berkeley.”

Norton was sensitive and excitable, though he never lost his head,

while Kreis and Hamilton were like a pair of cold-blooded savages,

seeking out tender places to prod and poke. As the evening grew

late, Norton, smarting under the repeated charges of being a

metaphysician, clutching his chair to keep from jumping to his

feet, his gray eyes snapping and his girlish face grown harsh and

sure, made a grand attack upon their position.

“All right, you Haeckelites, I may reason like a medicine man, but,

pray, how do you reason? You have nothing to stand on, you

unscientific dogmatists with your positive science which you are

always lugging about into places it has no right to be. Long

before the school of materialistic monism arose, the ground was

removed so that there could be no foundation. Locke was the man,

John Locke. Two hundred years ago – more than that, even in his

‘Essay concerning the Human Understanding,’ he proved the non-

existence of innate ideas. The best of it is that that is

precisely what you claim. To-night, again and again, you have

asserted the non-existence of innate ideas.

“And what does that mean? It means that you can never know

ultimate reality. Your brains are empty when you are born.

Appearances, or phenomena, are all the content your minds can

receive from your five senses. Then noumena, which are not in your

minds when you are born, have no way of getting in – ”

“I deny – ” Kreis started to interrupt.

“You wait till I’m done,” Norton shouted. “You can know only that

much of the play and interplay of force and matter as impinges in

one way or another on our senses. You see, I am willing to admit,

for the sake of the argument, that matter exists; and what I am

about to do is to efface you by your own argument. I can’t do it

any other way, for you are both congenitally unable to understand a

philosophic abstraction.”

“And now, what do you know of matter, according to your own

positive science? You know it only by its phenomena, its

appearances. You are aware only of its changes, or of such changes

in it as cause changes in your consciousness. Positive science

deals only with phenomena, yet you are foolish enough to strive to

be ontologists and to deal with noumena. Yet, by the very

definition of positive science, science is concerned only with

appearances. As somebody has said, phenomenal knowledge cannot

transcend phenomena.”

“You cannot answer Berkeley, even if you have annihilated Kant, and

yet, perforce, you assume that Berkeley is wrong when you affirm

that science proves the non-existence of God, or, as much to the

Martin Eden

209

point, the existence of matter. – You know I granted the reality of

matter only in order to make myself intelligible to your

understanding. Be positive scientists, if you please; but ontology

has no place in positive science, so leave it alone. Spencer is

right in his agnosticism, but if Spencer – ”

But it was time to catch the last ferry-boat for Oakland, and

Brissenden and Martin slipped out, leaving Norton still talking and

Kreis and Hamilton waiting to pounce on him like a pair of hounds

as soon as he finished.

“You have given me a glimpse of fairyland,” Martin said on the

ferry-boat. “It makes life worth while to meet people like that.

My mind is all worked up. I never appreciated idealism before.

Yet I can’t accept it. I know that I shall always be a realist. I

am so made, I guess. But I’d like to have made a reply to Kreis

and Hamilton, and I think I’d have had a word or two for Norton. I

didn’t see that Spencer was damaged any. I’m as excited as a child

on its first visit to the circus. I see I must read up some more.

I’m going to get hold of Saleeby. I still think Spencer is

unassailable, and next time I’m going to take a hand myself.”

But Brissenden, breathing painfully, had dropped off to sleep, his

chin buried in a scarf and resting on his sunken chest, his body

wrapped in the long overcoat and shaking to the vibration of the

propellers.

CHAPTER XXXVII

The first thing Martin did next morning was to go counter both to

Brissenden’s advice and command. “The Shame of the Sun” he wrapped

and mailed to THE ACROPOLIS. He believed he could find magazine

publication for it, and he felt that recognition by the magazines

would commend him to the book-publishing houses. “Ephemera” he

likewise wrapped and mailed to a magazine. Despite Brissenden’s

prejudice against the magazines, which was a pronounced mania with

him, Martin decided that the great poem should see print. He did

not intend, however, to publish it without the other’s permission.

His plan was to get it accepted by one of the high magazines, and,

thus armed, again to wrestle with Brissenden for consent.

Martin began, that morning, a story which he had sketched out a

number of weeks before and which ever since had been worrying him

with its insistent clamor to be created. Apparently it was to be a

rattling sea story, a tale of twentieth-century adventure and

romance, handling real characters, in a real world, under real

conditions. But beneath the swing and go of the story was to be

something else – something that the superficial reader would never

discern and which, on the other hand, would not diminish in any way

the interest and enjoyment for such a reader. It was this, and not

the mere story, that impelled Martin to write it. For that matter,

it was always the great, universal motif that suggested plots to

him. After having found such a motif, he cast about for the

Leave a Reply