The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-04-21

reason, IL was IN accordance Win Ia1Gn.
It will be seen that this theory assumed
as a matter of course that animals
have no soul; and this, too, is the preva-
lent opinion at the present day, so far
as the idea of a soul is held to include
the attribute of Immortality. AS soon
as the Darwinian doctrine of the physi-
cal evolution of man from lower ami
NAL forms became firmly established,
it was inevitable that the principle of
that doctrine should be applied to his
mental development. The controversy
on this point is still at an early stage;
but the evolutionist view is concisely
expressed by DR.. Romanes, who asserts
that the minds of animals must be
placed in the same category as the
mind of man; and again that for the
evolutionist There must be a psyche
logical no less than a physiological con-
tinuity throughout the length and
breadth of the animal kingdom" Evi-
IDENTIFY, therefore, the question of ami
NAL immortality acquires a new and
important interest from the fact that
it is inseparably interviewer with the
question of the Immortality of man.. If
we accept the Immortality of the hui
man soul, and also accept it's evolu-
tional origin, how al we deny the sur
vival in some form or another of animal
minds? If mind and body perish to-
gether there is nothing more to be said.
But if we regard mind as something
more than a temporary property of the
bodily organism, we cannot in thesame
breath affirm and deny it's evolution.
We cannot legitimately declare that
mans mind has been evolved from a
series of lower animal minds, but that
the necessary continuity of the evolu-
tional process is broken at every joint
by the extinction of each member of
the series at the death of the animal to
which it has belonged. Clearly, there
fore, on this view, animal minds must
survive the physical death of the ami
NAL, and undergo a further evolutional
development. So far from this subject
being forbidden to science, it seem to
me that science is bound to justify her
latest doctrines by investigating it.
Evolutionists almost unanimously pro-
claim the continuity of mental as well
as physical evolution. But while the
physical evolution of man through the
lower animals, from some still lower
form of life, is studiOusly investigated
and freely discussed, on the subject of
mans mental evolution the authorities
give us little but vague g~eneralities.
In those evOlutiOnists who believe that
mind, even in it's highest known forms,
is only a property of specialized matter,
this silence is legitimate. For them
the mind of man and animal alike is a
product of physical growth, and
perishes with physical death. But
those who believe in the survival Of
the mental. part of man r surely
bound to reconcile their exclusion of
animal minds from a survival after
death with their doctrine that mans
mental evolution, no less than his
physical evolution, is a continuous
ascent through lower animal forms.
The spirit of ancient theology which
regarded the universe as existings solely
for the benefit of the earth, and the
earth as existing solely for the benefit
of man, is not yet dead, but turks in
many dark corners of the human mind,
like the Kobolds which are supposed to
haunt the recesses Of the German
home. It was this anthropocentric
habit of thought which inspired the
furious opposition to Darwin's theory
that mans physical ancestry must be
sought in the lower animals. Science
in this matter has proved too strong
for prejudice, and Darwlnism has won
a general acceptance, at which its
opponents may murmur, but which
they cannot deny. The battle, how
ever, is not yet over, and the next
struggle will rage round the intellectual
ancestry of nan There is every reason
to be confident about the issue, but it
is idle to suppose that the fight will not
be severe. The repugnance to admit
ting an animal origin of mans mental
equipment will befully as strong as the
repugnance evinced to admitting a
similar origin of his bodily structure.
And venture to think that it is chiefly
this repugnance which has driven a
man of such brilliant attainments as
Mr.. Wallace into so impotent a theory
of the human soul. But, be this as it
may, it is clear that before the issue
can be decided, the question of animal