Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1877-07-15
SUNDAY READING.

Harrlsons paper In the Nineteenth Century
for June on The Soul and Future Life. Mr..
Harrison, be it known, is Posltivlst-a fol-
lower of M. August Comte. In one part of
this paper we find the distinguished writer
reminding us of the smples in human obser-
vation-some of the primary facts relating to
mans fearful and wonderful structure
"Man" says he I" is one, however compound
Fire his conscience, and he bushes. Check
his circulation and he thinks mildly, or thinks
not at all Impair his secretions, and moral
sense is dulled, discolored or depraved; his
aspirations flag, his hope, love, faith reel
Impair them still more and he becomes a
brute. A cup of drink degrades his moral
nature below that of swine. Again, vio-
lent emotion of pity or horror makes him
vomit A lancet will restore him from delir
ium to clear thought. Excess of thought will
waste his sinews Excess of muscular exer-
else will deaden thought An emotion will
double the strength of his muscles. And at
last the prick of a needle or grain of min
eral viii in an instant lay to rest forever his
body and it's unity and all the spontaneous
activities of intelligence, feeling and action,
with which that compound organism was
charged" And now as to what this most in
teresting writer thinks of the soul-evidently
thinking of it somewhat more incisively than
Malevolio did who contented himself with a
significant head shake when asked what he
thought of the Pythagorean Theory and the
simple reply, 81 think well of the Soul >"
We quote as follows
The consensus of the human faculties,
which We call the Soul, comprises all sides of
human nature according to one homogeneous
theory. But the intultional methods ask us
to insert into the midst of this harmonious
system of parts, as an underlying explanation
Of it, an indescribable entity and to this by
pothesis, since the days of Descartes Tor pos
sibly of Aquinas), the good old word Soul has
been usually restricted How and when this |
entity ever got into the organism, how it |
abides in it, what are its relations to it, how |
1t acts on 1t, why and when it goes out of it |
sll is mystery We ask for some evidence of |
the existence of any such entity; the answer |
IS, we must imagine it In order to explain the |
organism. We ask what are its methods, its |
laws, its afhnities we are told that it simply |
has none, or none movable. We ask for
some description of it, of its course of devel-
opment, for some single fact about it, state
able in terms of the rest of our knowledge
the reply is-mystery, absence of everything
stateable or cognisable, line of poetry, or
an e. aculation 1t has no place, no matter,
no modes, neither evolution nor decay it is
without body, parts, or passions: spiritual
essence, lncommensurable, Incompatible, in
describable Yet with all this, it is we are
told, an entity, the most real and perfect of
all entities short of the divine. If we ask
why we are to assume the existence of some
thing of which we have certainly no direct
evidence, and which is so wrapped in mystery
that for practical purposes it becomes a non
entity, are told that we need to conceive
it, because a mere organism cannot act as we I
see the human organism act. Why not? They ,
say there must be principle within as the
cause of this life. But what do we gain by
supposing principle?' The principle only
adds fresh difficulty. Why should 'prin-
ciple,' or an entity, be more capable of pos
sessing these marvellous human powers than I
the human organism Besides, we shall have
to imagine principle to explain not only i,
why man can feel affection, but also why
dog can feel affection.
And yet this questioner has a philosophy =
Chat of his master Comte) which lifts man q
above mere physical machine. While deny
ing the necessity for any indwelling imma-
terial entity" or 'Soul in order to account
for the emotions and aspirations of man, he n
lets us know by the following Just what he
does mean When the Pslamist says De-
liver my soul from death, Heal my soul L
or | have sinned, ETC., he means by soul al
what We mean,-the conscious unity of our IL
being, eliminating in its religious emotions =,
md until We can find some English word that T
better expresses this idea, we shall continue h,
o use the phraseology of David" This con- fo
'eys an idea of what he thinks about Soul. III
We infer that he denies it Immortality. He W
Ices not say SO; but the inference is nevita- al
lie. We content ourself with the following al
hort extract: tn
The philosophy which treats man as man ma
IMPLY attirms that man loves, thinks acts, I'll
OF that the ganglia or the sinuses, or any pI
ryan of man, loves and thinks and acts. The We
loughts, aspirations, and impulses are not p u
,cretions, and the science which teaches us sil
bout secretions will not teach us much about WI
lem; our thoughts, aspirations, and impul- III
8 are faculties of a man. Now, as a man sn'
lplies body, so We say these also imply I'll Clil
'dy. And to talk to us about bodyless OF
ling thinking and loving is simply to talk TN q
'out the thoughts and feelings of Nothing. tnt
Concerning a painful surgical operation
hich was recently performed on an old and