The L'Anse sentinel. (L'Anse, L.S., Mich.) 18??-current, 1899-04-22
IMMORTALITY.
Philosophy VS.. Materiaiism.


confronted the worlds thinkers in |
all ages, and are today, as they must |
always be, subjects of the most pro-
found and abiding interest. From
earliest times science has sought to
elicit from nature some partial res
ponses to these great questions OF
life and destiny. Philosophy has
busted itself with piecing together
such bits Of information as science
has been able to supply in hopes of
arriving at something like salts
factory answer. What, then, has
philosophy to say of the destiny of
the human SCULPTOR we are con-
cerned TO know What is its at
titude upon the great question of
Immortality?
Much has been said in the name of
science aud philosophy that is neith-
er scientific nor philosophical. 1t is
this fact which may account for the
very prevalent notion that what
ever either philosophy or science
would say on such subject must be
necessarily in antagonism with those
promptings Of our nature which
! form the basis of religion. This is
unfortunate. The truth is, philos-
ophy does not in any way disparage
| the belief in a future life, nor does
it inpugn the existence of a spiritual
world. Let US in our humble way
see what the case is as stated for
materialsm, and let US see also what
some of the objections are which
| philosophy may urge against its
| hypothe>es and conclusions.
In the first place it is held by
materialists that matter is the only
real existence. To them, God and
the soul are mere tictions of the i'm
agination. This settles for them the
question of Immortality The soul
does not exist as an entity; it is q
| product of brain action. Emotion,
volition, feeling, thought, they are
functions of the brain. Impair the
brain and they are impaired, Dos
troy the brain and they are destroy
ed. How can they survive the dis
solution OF that which gives them
being?
Such is the central position of
materialism. Can it be assaied? Is
there vulnerable point through
which controversial shaft NAV be
made to pierce? If there is not
then that must settle it once for all
We are compelled to abandon the
idea of an individual immortality.
Materialists have come to the con
clusion that mind is product OF
brain action; what are the premises
from which they can draw such a
conclusion as this? 1t is true that
increased mental activity accom-
panies an increased molecular ac-
tivity in the cells of the brain 1t
is also true that decreased mental
activity accompanies decreased
molecular activity in the cerebral
tissues. In other words the mental
and physiological processes are in.
timately related, which cannot be
gainsQyed, for it is beyond all ques
tion. But while we admit this We
must point out the fact that the
chow of this relation is still alto
: gether unknown. And while the
, raode of this connection may render
it apparently" impossible that the
: one should exist Independent of the
; other, it does not render such q
separate existence absolutely i'm
possible The conclusions at which
materialists have arrived are H.
legitimate, we believe, upon the fact
, that mental activity and molecular
movement in the brain occur thus
simultaneously.
Just here is the vulnerable point
1t is certainly illogical to insist
that because two things occur al
, the same time the one is necessarily
the cause Of the other. No matter
how intimately they may be related
. such conclusion would be empirical.
In no scientific sense can Mind be
regarded as product of the mole
, cular movement. Never has it been
shown in what manner unit of mo-
tion in brain cell can disappear to
reappear as aunt of consciousness,
or in what manner the motion OF
nerve-molecules can produce a
: thought. That of which the differ
) entail attribute is Thought and that
OF which the differential attribute is
ontinued on page four.