¶5 Concerning ‘reality’, we are led to mention another fact, which risks passing unnoticed by many, but which is very worthy of remark as a sign of the state of mind of which we are speaking: it is that this name, in current usage, is reserved exclusively for sensible reality alone.1 Since language is the expression of the mentality of a people and an epoch, one must conclude from this that, for those who speak thus, everything that does not fall under the senses is ‘unreal’, that is to say illusory or even quite simply non-existent;2 it may be that they are not clearly conscious of this, but this negative conviction is none the less at the bottom of themselves, and if they affirm the contrary, one can be sure, although they do not realise it, that this affirmation corresponds in them only to something much more exterior, if indeed it is not purely verbal.3 If one is tempted to believe that we exaggerate, one has only to try to see for example to what the supposed religious convictions of many people are reduced:4 a few notions learned by heart, in a wholly school-like and mechanical fashion, which they have not assimilated at all, to which they have never even reflected in the least, but which they keep in their memory and repeat on occasion because they form part of a certain formalism, of a conventional attitude which is all that they can understand under the name of religion. We have already spoken above of this ‘minimisation’ of religion,5 of which the ‘verbalism’ in question represents one of the last degrees;6 it is this that explains why so-called ‘believers’, in respect of practical materialism, yield in nothing to ‘unbelievers’7; we shall return to this again, but, beforehand, we must finish with the considerations that concern the materialist character of modern science, for this is a question that demands to be envisaged from different aspects.
←
→

Summary

Guénon observes that in common usage the term ‘reality’ is reserved exclusively for sensible reality, implying that for modern people whatever does not fall under the senses is considered unreal or non-existent, even if they are not clearly conscious of this conviction. He suggests that if one doubts this, one need only examine the supposed religious convictions of many people, which consist of mechanical, unreflective notions learned by heart and repeated as part of a conventional formalism rather than genuine belief. This ‘minimisation’ of religion, of which verbalism is a last degree, explains why so-called believers are in no way less practically materialist than unbelievers. He notes that he will return to this point, but first must complete his considerations on the materialist character of modern science.

General notes

  1. « réalité » exclusivement réservée à la réalité sensible — Rendered as ‘“reality” reserved exclusively for sensible reality’. Guénon underlines a fundamental semantic shift: in modern common language, the word ‘reality’ by default designates only material and sensible reality. An idea, a feeling, a dream, a belief are called ‘unreal’ or ‘imaginary’ if they have no physical counterpart. This linguistic presupposition betrays an unconscious materialism. ↩︎
  2. « irréel » comme synonyme d’illusoire ou inexistant — Rendered as ‘“unreal” as synonymous with illusory or non-existent’. Guénon shows the logical consequence of the exclusive use of the word ‘reality’ for the sensible: everything non-sensible (thought, consciousness, soul, metaphysical principles, God) is implicitly relegated to the rank of illusion or non-being. This is a negation through language rather than through argumentation. ↩︎
  3. affirmation verbale contredisant la conviction réelle — Rendered as ‘verbal affirmation contradicting the real conviction’. Guénon introduces an important psychological distinction: what people say they believe (for example ‘God exists’, ‘the soul is immortal’) can contradict their real conviction, which expresses itself in their actions and spontaneous language. The verbal affirmation is often only social conformism or a habit without lived content. ↩︎
  4. convictions religieuses réduites à du formalisme verbal — Rendered as ‘religious convictions reduced to verbal formalism’. Guénon gives a concrete example: the religion of most moderns is reduced to a few formulas learned by heart, repeated mechanically, without any interior understanding or real influence on conduct. It is a ‘religion of memory’, not a lived religion. ↩︎
  5. « minimisation » de la religion — Rendered as ‘“minimisation” of religion’. Guénon refers to a phenomenon already evoked: the reduction of religion to a set of exterior practices, verbal formulas and moral rules, emptied of all deep spiritual and intellectual dimension. Religion then becomes a mere cultural or social ‘label’. ↩︎
  6. « verbalisme » comme dernier degré de la minimisation de la religion — Rendered as ‘verbalism as the last degree of the minimisation of religion’. Verbalism (the confusion of words with things, taking the utterance of a formula for real understanding) is the ultimate stage of religious degradation: one ‘believes’ because one can recite a creed, not because one adheres interiorly to its truth. ↩︎
  7. « croyants » aussi matérialistes que les « incroyants » en pratique — Rendered as ‘“believers” as materialist as “unbelievers” in practice’. Guénon affirms that practical materialism (orientation of life towards material concerns) is as widespread among those who call themselves believers as among declared atheists. Verbal belief has no transformative effect on real life. ↩︎