, 1877-09-30
Is the Soul Immortal2--Prof. Hux-
ley Joins in the Discus
sion.
a Materialistic Criticism Of
the Positivist Notion Of
Immortality.
The Camp citing of the Sew
enth-Day Adventists at
Lansing, Mich.
Truth Must Emerge from the Con
fiict Between Science and
Religion.


General Notes-Pious Smiles-Personals
Services To-Day.
Is TIE SOUL IMMORTAL?
PROF. Hu11Ef's CRITICISM OF Pos1IlvlsT's )
VIEWS.
sin1eeuth Century.
Mr.. narTison's striking discourse on the soul
and future life has certain resemblance to the
famous essay CHI the snakes Of Ireland. For its
purport is to show that there is no soul, nor any
future life in the ordinary sense Of the terms.
With death the personal activity OF which the
soul is the popular hypostasis is put into COM
mission among posteri1y, and the future life is
III Immortality by deputy.
Neither in these views nor in the arguments
By which they are supported is there much nov
: elty. But that which appears both novel and
interesting to me is the authors evidently sin
cere and heartfelt conviction that his powerful
advocacy of soulcss spirituality and mortal i'm
mortality is consistent With the intellectual
s;orn and moral reprobation which he freely
pours forth upon the Il ''irrational and debaslng
physcian'' ~ OF Materialism and Natcrialists,
and with the wrath with which he visits what
he Is pleased to call the Intrusion Of physical
science, especially Of biology, into the domain
Of social phenomena.
Listen to the storm.
We certainly do reject. as earnestly - any school
can that which is most fairly called hfateriaIlsm
and We will second every word Of those VINO cry
out that civilization is in danger il the workings OF
the human spirit are to become questions Of physi-
oloyy. and Ii death IS the end Of it is tue
end o; sparrow. We not only assent 70 such pro-
tests. but we see very pressing need for making
1hen 1t l. corruptinc doctrine to open brain
ana to It'll thai devotion is definite molecular
change in this and that convolutiou Of cray pulp.
,3<S.n$ &c Era$- 1f ala hn
passes after short space like the beasts tha.
perish. And all doctrines. more or less. do tend
moral phenomena. winch deny man spiritual in
addition TO moral nature, which limit his moral
life 10 the spun Of his bodily ORGANISM and which
have no place Tor religion y IN the prouer senee
OF the word.
Now, Mr.. Harrison can hardly think it worth
while to attack imaginary opponents, so that I
a1,1 led to believe that there must bc somebody
vino holds the 'scorrupting doctrine :" q that
devotion is definite molecular change in this
and that couvolution Of gray pu]p.'' Neverthe-
less, my conviction is shaken by a passage which
occurs at .. GIT: 4sNo rational thinker now
prrtcnds that imagination Is simply the vibra-
zion Of a particular fiber" II no rational
thinker prctcnds this Of imagination, why
should auy pretend it OF devotion? And ret l
cannot bring myself to thing that all Mr.. Har-
rison's passionate rhetoric is hurled a: irration-
~
the sof: influences OF the time and due medical
= treatment of their S'gray pulp" III Co1ney
Hatch ur elsewhere.
Oh the other hand, Mr.. Harrison cannot pos
silly lie attacking those who hold that the feel
ing of devotion is the concomitant or even the
consequent Of 3 molecular change III the brain
Tor hc tells us, in language the cxplictness OF
which leaves nothing SO tc desired, that ito
positive methods every fact Of thinking reveals
itself as having functional relation with mole
cular change. Every tact OF will ur OF feeling
is III similar relation with kindred molecular
fa:tS,'
Ou mature consideration, I feel shut up to
one of two alternative hypothcses Either the
sscurruptiug doctriue' to which Mr.. Harrison
refers il held by no rational thinkcr-ln which
Ease surely neither he nor need trouble our
selves about it-or tho phrase, s.dcvoton is
y definite molecular change in this and.tllat con
yoluton Of gray pulp,' means that devotion
has a functional relation with such molecular
change: in which case, it is Mr.. Harrison's own
"corrupting doctrine"
am 10. helped out Of the difficulty have
thus Gandidly stated when ! try to get At the
1n-auin. OF an,ther hard saying OF Mr.. Harri-
sons, Which follows alter the sscorrupting doc-
trnc ~ paragraph: land all doctrine, more or
less, do lend to this tcorruptinG doctrinel.
which offer physical theories as explaining
moral phenomenal
Nevertheless, on pp. 63G-7, Mr. Harrison
SAYS, with great force and tolerable accuracy:
Man Is onc, however compound. Fire ht con-
science, and hc bushes. Check his circulation,
and ne thinks wildly not at all Impair his Sc
crctons, and moral sense is dulled. discolorrd,
depraved; his aspirations dag. his hone love,
faith reel Impair thcm ft,ll more and he be.
nature below that Of swine, Agan. violent
emotion Of pitt CT horror makes him 'omlt
1ansst H, will restore MN from oc,r,am n 70 clear
Excess Of muscular exercise will dcadcn thought
An emotlon will double The strength Of bis
muscles. Ana. at last, the prick Of needle OF 4
grain Of mineral will in an instant lay rest for
ever his body and it, unity, and all the spontaneous
activities OF intelligence feeling. and action with
which that compound organism was charged.
These arc the obvious and ancient observations
about the human organism But modern phlloso-
Ely and science have carried these hints into COM
rete explanations. Ey Il vast accumulation OF
proof, positive thought at last has estab}ishcd a
thought or Of feeling and some corporeaf phenom
cna.
I CRY, with shMock:
'Tis very true o wiee and upright judge.
But, if the establishment Of the correspond
encc between physical phenomena, on the one
side and mural and intellectual phenomena IN
the other, is properly to be called an 1fsdnation
tct a!unc a cons1tt;t ez7>ianatiou) VI the human
ORGANISM, surely tr. Harrison's teachings come
dangerously near that tender oi physlca!
theories in explanation OF moral phenomena
which ile warns us leads straight 10 cUrTuptlon
But perhaps l have 12lsintcrpreteu Alr. ttar-
rison. Fur i few lines further on we are told.
with due ita!ic emphasis, that no man eau d-
pain yoition by purely anatomical study
should have thought that Mr. Harrison might
have gone MUCH further Than this No man
ever explained any physiological fact oy purely
anatomical study. Digestion cannot be SO ex-
ul;lir1c nur 7csi,irati.:u, nor reflex action. 1t
would have been as relevant to affirm taat voll-
tion could not bc explained by measuring an arc
of the meridian.
risun's biological studies have not proceeded so
far as to enable him to discriminate between
the province Of anatomy and that OF paysi-