The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1894-12-01

OC 81 uOW w VIC hHOW tudt IL udo al y
physical conditions? Not knowing
what are the physical conditions of
intelligence he supposes conditions,
and goes to work to build up scien-
tific man without spiritual nature,
the attribute of will or the power of
rational, free, and voluntary action.
He builds this wonderful man upon
supposition the foundation of which
is his confessed ignorance. The mo-
tive for this creative effort is the ne
cessity of having physical hypothe-
sis by which to explain conscious
ness, thought and voli,ion, without
rational and free spirit.
But suppose he knew that consci-
BUSINESS had physical conditions, and
also knew what they were, that would
not reveal to us the cause of consci-
BUSINESS, but only the conditions
under.which the cause operated.
A spiritual cause of consciousness
could operate under physical condi-
tions, and work with material instru-
ment, SO physical conditions will not
obviate the necessity for spiritual
cause.
The argument he makes in his
work on "Body and Will" for the diff
ference between physical and mental
phenomena while the substance in
which they are grounded is the same,
based upon our different sensations
of matter, is not sound. The two
cases are not analogous,-they are en-
tirely unlike.
The different forms of physical en-
ergy are all known through the
senses. = But the energy of mind and
will is not known through sense con-
sciousness at all. We have no sensa-
tions of thought and volition. With
the different forms of matter the sub
stance is material, and the organs by
which we cognize them are material.
But we do not cognize the mental
and voluntary faculties of man by
the use of any material organ; for the
reason, evidently, that they are not
material. Our knowledge of matter
is gained by the conscious use of o, r
senses and in no other way.
We are, however, unconscious of the
use of any material organ, instrument,
or sense in self-consciousness. In
our knowledge of the personal Ego
we are not conscious of matter or of
body a. all. We are only conscious
of our bodies through our sensations,
and but for our senses we would not
know we were possessed of physical
organism. Matter and mind. are SO
unlike that they are not and can not
be known in the same way.
The author of Body and Will"
says in reply to the argument for ex-
istence of mind as distinct from mat
ter, based upon the unlikeness of
the two classes of phenomena: "As
it is through selfconsciousness that
we know the energy which we call
will, and as it is through sense con-
sciousness we know the SO, called
physical forces, it is plain we have
no right to expect them to be alike"
But why not expect them to be alike
if they are alike? If the energy of
will is physical energy. and thus like
all other forms of physical energy,
why do we do not know it by sense
consciousness as we know all other
forms of matter? The fact that it is
known in different way shows that
it is different thing. If it was ma
terial we could cognize it through the
senses as we do all other forms of
matter. The fact that it is unknown
to the senses, and is not the condition
of any form of sensation, shows it is
not material. AS it is known only
and directly to consciousness it is
evidently spiritual in nature.
There is no proof of the claim made
by some physiological psychologists,
that the physical motion of the ner-
vous organism is the efficient cause
of all thought, reason, emotion, voli-
ton and action. No evidence has
been or can be presented, that love
and hate, joy and sorrow, faith and
doubt, hope and fear, virtue and vice
are but the different directions in
which the atoms move in brain SUBJ
stance. There is no scientific evil
dence that all thought is preceded
by and has its origin in the molecular
action of the brain.
We have no consciousness, sensa-
tion, experience or observation of any
such action. Such a doctrine is not
verified science, but metaphysical
speculation on a subject that science
has not, and by the inductive method
never can, investigate.
The unity of nature is not uniform
;fu II ic not IN no found in ono cnh