Categories
Catch-All/Student Discussion Questions

God and/or Nature in Tocqueville’s Explanation of the Physical World

Democracy in America was written in 1835, before philosophies such as Marxism, Nihilism, Scientific Materialism, biological determinism/sociobiology, moral relativism, moral subjectivism, began to become prominent influences in shaping people’s worldviews from the mid-late 1800s about to the present. A recent WSJ poll found that only 30% of Gen Z and Millenials describe religion and belief in God as important values, demonstrating just how far most of us are from how Tocqueville would have understood reality. 

*article link WSJ Poll Article

The reading on the Origins of America caught my attention because it demonstrates an “Old World” perspective on how the world came to be. Centuries of scientific materialism have made the idea of divine providence being at work in nature seem almost laughable in the eyes of many modern people. Couple this with the understanding that people 150+ years ago comprehended so little about the physical sciences compared to where we are today and the argument for why a modern man may scoff at an 1800s man’s description of geography and natural history. I believe that this passage is noteworthy because it is a great example of how Toqueville’s discussion of American geography flies in the face of this modern interpretation. 

Tocqueville demonstrates his true understanding of this country’s physical reality by explaining it proficiently and concisely. He, a Frenchman, knows America’s geography better than any American I know personally, even though any of us could be on Google Earth in a matter of seconds and have access to more and better information than Tocqueville could have ever dreamed of. 

Another way he demonstrates his understanding of the natural world is through accurate and informed descriptions of the forces of nature at play. He mentions the “convulsions of the globe” that formed the Mississippi and the effect of frequent flooding on Northeastern soil as it relates to agriculture. There are many other examples of similar analysis throughout the text as well. 

Yet, right after he discusses the Mississippi river, he writes “the valley of the Mississippi is, on the whole, the most magnificent dwelling-place prepared by God for man’s abode.” A phrase like this would stop a secular-modern-materialist person in their tracks. To them, the ideas of the valley of the Mississippi was formed by geological forces, not God. What they would find truly baffling is that Tocqueville’s position is not that they were not formed by natural forces. He fully acknowledges that and understands it as well as anyone with 1800s science can. What I believe to be most confounding to a secular modern thinker is that Tocqueville offers both explanations, that it was formed by natural forces and it was formed by God. He is saying that it was God’s intention for the valley to be this way, and natural forces were the means he used to make it so. 

In the modern secular paradigm, a notion such as this causes countless philosophical problems and is utterly irreconcilable with the secular materialist view of reality. What boggles my mind is that in 1835 when this was written, there was hardly a question about it. And I don’t mean a question about whether God intended the Mississippi valley for the American people or for the native Americans or for some other nationality, I mean no one would question that natural forces are controlled in some part by God to accomplish his ends. 

 To any religious members of the class, maybe this passage did not stand out to you in this way, but for any agnostic or atheist or even polytheists reading this, did this stand out to you like it did to me? Did you find the same problems with it that I did, or find something completely different? If your interested in responding to my post, I’d be happy to discuss this topic more.