Autumn 1942 • Vol. IV No. 3 Editor's NotesOctober 1, 1942 |

Mr. Russell and Mr. Schorer

"A myth is a large, controlling image which gives philosophical meaning to the facts of ordinary life," says Mr. Schorer. And then: "Without such images, experience is chaotic and fragmentary, merely phenomenal.” But we ought to read this critically, and especially in the light of the thought of Mr. Russell who is standing by. Mr. Schorer’s essay and Mr. Russell’s have been juxtaposed, though they came to us independently; they both bear on the controversy over naturalism. Mr. Russell considers that ordinary "theistic” constructions—which would be the myths of Mr. Schorer’s parlance— are of less than no value either philosophically or practically. But writers of opposing schools ought to learn from each other. It would be interesting if it should occur to Mr. Schorer to adapt to his own purposes some of the dialectical toughness and objectivity of Mr. Russell naturalizing; and to Mr. Russell to look very hard to see if there is really no philosophic ground firm enou

Already have an account? Login

Join KR for even more to read.

Register for a free account to read five free pieces a month from our current issue and digital archive.
Register for Free and Read This Piece



Or become a subscriber today and get complete, immediate access to our digital archives at every subscription level.

Read More

Subscribe

Your free registration with Kenyon review incudes access to exclusive content, early access to program registration, and more.

Donate

With your support, we’ll continue 
to cultivate talent and publish extraordinary literature from diverse voices around the world.