Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1849-06-07
For the Freeman.
ti-Phrenology.
Mr.. EDIToR-

4AAS - IA O1C4O6ys
Mr.. EDIToR-
| have read your remarks on the Supernat-
ura, with much interest, but cannot fully sub
scribe to them. You seem to condemn the be-
lief of witchcrah and sorcery as superstition
firmly believe they have existed and may still
exist. Of course am superstitous or you err.
Among the lights which have dispelled the
mists of superstition, in relation to witchcraft,
sorcery, &c. you name Phrenology, as perhaps
one. / am satisfied that you have not attentive
ly examined the merits ofthis pretended science.
regard it as weak imposture, equally at war
with scripture and common sense. What it
claims as its grand principles do not here un.
dertake to dispute. shall be the last 10 deny
that the mind is seated in the brain; fact by
the way, for the discovery of which, we owe no
thanks to Phrenologists. Whether the form Of
the brain has any influence on character, | con-
TESS myself ignorant. However this may be,
Phrenologsts by their absurd theory have proved
themselves to be quite as ignorant as l am.
am not alone in the suspicion that Phrenology ls
among the chosen instruments of infdelity, and
that its doctrines are promulgated under fair pre-
texts, in order gradually and imperceptibly to
weaken the belief of Christianity. Such at least
must be their tendency. How does Phrenoogy
agree with the Christian doctrines OF mans
apostacy and his recovery by redemption! 1t
contradicts both by teaching that man is morally
good or bad by his physical organization. Saul
of Tarsus a tiger in ferocity, the Apostle
Paul was lamb in meekness. The fact that
these two characters successfully existed in the
same individual is brought in question, ratl.o-.
contradcted by the teaching of Phrenology.
The mind of DR.. Comb, the great teacher of
Phrenology, appears to have been chaos of
sense and nonsense, of learning and ignorance.
His work on the Constitution of man is a con.
fused medley of truths absurdities, and unintel.
ligble notions Phrenology as taught by him,
makes the mind of man jargon of instincts or
propensites, each of which has some portion of
the brain for its organ. These propensites are
not adapted in strength to their use and end, but
are stronger or weaker according to the size of
their organs. Of course it is fortunate, if any
organ happens to be made of due size, and I'M
fortunate, if it is too large or too small.
In assigning to each organ its Office, the in-
ventors OF the science seem to have regarded
the names of things rather than their qualities
Of course, in some instances, the same organ
has a great variety of offices under the same
name. In others, different organs have the same
office under different Names For instance,
combativeness is disposition to combat any
thing, no matter what the thing or the disposition.
If fondness for war leads me to combat an en-
envy, this is an act of combativeness. If love
of peace leads me to combat the spirit of war,
this is another act of combativeness. Both these
opposite dispositions, shown by acts of the same
name, belong to the same organ. If hunger
leads me to kill lamb for food, it is an act Of
Destructiyeness. If malice prompts me to burn
down my neighbours dwelling, it is another act
of Destructiveness, belonging to the same or
gan. Should | kill venomous serpent to pre-
vent its biting my children, at least four phreno.
logical faculties would claim the honor of the
act. These are, Philoprogenitiveness Or parent
al affection, which prompts me to the care of my
offspring Cautiousness, which impels ME to re-
move dangers, Destructiveness which leads mo
to destroy noxious objects, and CombatiVeness,
by which oppose an enemy. Individuality"
says Combe, stakes cognisance ofexistence and
simple facts" He farther says: Eventually
takes cognlzance Of occurrences or events."-
Now, as occurrences or events are facts, itseems
that these two faculties perform, or ought to per-
form, essentially the same office. And yet they
are not permitted to perform it, there being half
dozen other faculties ready to take their work,
out of their hands. For illustration, | meet
man. By one or both these faculties ought to
recognize the fact of his existence and of my
meeting him. But neither one nor both give me
any notion of his form, size color, or weight, nor
do they help me to know when or where meet
him; all these several circumstances being re-
cognized by other faculties called Form, Size,
Color, &c.
But though Phrenology has discovered more Or
CANS than it has found work for, there are various
feelings and modes of action which have no Or
gan. For instance there is an organ for parental
affection, but none for flial affection. There is
an organ for desructiveness, why should there
not be one for salUaiiUeness? Is not DISPOSE.
ton to save as worthy of an organ as disposi.
ton to destroya
According to Phrenology as taught by Combe.
the senses of seeing, hearing &c. are intellectu-
al faculties OF course an OK must be an intel
lectual being, and man who loses his sight or
hearing, loses portion of his intellect.
To expose a tenth part Of the senseless alb
surdities of Phrenoogy, would make my article
too long. But some attention is due to Mes