But logic can never succeed in harmonizing the findings of science and the insights of religion unless both the scientific and the religious aspects of a personality are truth dominated, sincerely desirous of following the truth wherever it may lead regardless of the conclusions which it may reach.
Close in meaning, found by a language model. A match does not mean the teachings are the same.
As I am going to demonstrate a most philosophical proposition, namely, that religious reasoning is absolute master of the emotions. I would willingly advise you to give the utmost heed to philosophy. For reason is necessary to everyone as a step to science. In addition, it embraces the praise of self-control, the highest virtue. If, then, reasoning appears to hold the mastery over the emotions which stand in the way of temperance, such as gluttony and lust, it surely also and manifestly rules over the affections which are contrary to justice, such as malice, and of those which are hindrances to courage, such as wrath, pain, and fear. Perhaps some may ask, “How is it, then, that reasoning, if it rules the emotions, isn’t also master of forgetfulness and ignorance?” They attempt a ridiculous argument. For reasoning does not rule over its own emotions, but over those that are contrary to justice, courage, temperance, and self-control; and yet over these, so as to withstand, without destroying them.
He being at length burned down to the bones, and about to expire, raised his eyes Godward, and said, “You know, O God, that when I might have been saved, I am slain for the sake of the law by tortures of fire. Be merciful to your people, and be satisfied with the punishment of me on their account. Let my blood be a purification for them, and take my life in exchange for theirs.” Thus speaking, the holy man departed, noble in his torments, and even to the agonies of death resisted in his reasoning for the sake of the law. Confessedly, therefore, religious reasoning is master of the emotions. For had the emotions been superior to reasoning, I would have given them the witness of this mastery. But now, since reasoning conquered the emotions, we befittingly award it the authority of first place. It is only fair that we should allow that the power belongs to reasoning, since it masters external miseries. It would be ridiculous if it weren’t so. I prove that reasoning has not only mastered pains, but that it is also superior to the pleasures, and withstands them.
The argument is exceedingly ridiculous, for reasoning doesn’t appear to rule over its own affections, but over those of the body, in such a way as that any one of you may not be able to root out desire, but reasoning will enable you to avoid being enslaved to it. One may not be able to root out anger from the soul, but it is possible to withstand anger. Any one of you may not be able to eradicate malice, but reasoning has force to work with you to prevent you yielding to malice. For reasoning is not an eradicator, but an antagonist of the emotions.