The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1908-09-27
Friendly criticism by q splrituailst.

Az IA ASDAhoh vi ihs oON-cHs III
letter OF Professor Goodwin Smith In tn.
Sun OF September 20 Is so full Of truth that
no part Of IL should be disturbed by ortiz
cism. but you will pardon 0 few antmad-
versions upon II by way OF trying to
strengthen II rather than denying Il,
though what I have to say viii appear to
be criticism. I refer to three points In It.
The FIRST relates to his statements about
the belief In immortality; this second, those
about the freedom OF tho will: and the third,
about the relation Of conscience to the be-
lief In immortality.
I say nothing OF the statement thai the
belief In immortality has become untenable,
as Mr.. Smith Ia q little eauivoca, here. His
denial may apply to Bishop Buffers doc
trine Of It's .indiscernibility." and even II
this may. not be the reference q man has a
right to his opinion on this matter, though
Is u~ntsna6is instead Of being anproved
opens the way fol-. dispute. IL Mr., Smith
had said improved he would have been on
have had less opportunity to reply. "'u'a
The more eauivocal assertion In this con-
~nection is his statement that man 10 one,
suppose man is one and that evolution
the belief in . future lifsi Why mix up
a% SssusSSSs 2, sfSaa' sSs after xasa a %sy 81 h. "a
regardless OF the truth or falsity OF evoiu-
ton? When Herbert Spencer was asked
ton had on his attitude toward 1 immof exGiev
he replied that the belief remained exactly
where 4 was and was not denied by evoiG-
s ssrdlns ~ Z. s sna RI n f i%piiss ahs sFR &c ola n rot
know, not That he knew II was false.
Again MT; smith says: .imagins!ion cannot
apparitions are always corporal" Does not
the SECOND sentence contradict the 1rstf
In making apPsTitions Or "splrits.. ceIpo-
may b wrong. but they Imagine them as Z
able 10 that sense even though the evidence
ing 3 disembodied soul. Whether my
imssination K right 10 forming such a
wrong IN its act and we may be false In
iis survival, but II Is Soneeiyable that q
and to make Il ecnosiVsbSie in ~ the h@P psrfanes;
Of most people 10 e, open the imagination
to But She tS RsS's ssaIn. W What II IL it cannot be pict-
Is Imagination the test Of truth OF reaiityi
TS many " people %SD eat !, y not SO, In physical
and an electron. He represents IL syma
bolieally. but does not pretend that his
ssn pietare t tSs sndais. tRs se of light, a Of S Ssss
and OF magnetism. He admits that they
are wholly. unpictprable and yet maintains
soul
on the matter Of free win Mr.. Smith
ton betw cen motive" and will" MANY
freedomists would make no distinction at
all and SO would carry, their contention
This may be WIRING. but Il handIcaps Mr.
Smith TO ,eoncede tacitly as much as he
In ali his. correspondence with THE Sum
Mr.. Smith has always laid great stress on
the fact, or at least apparent fact, or con-
ual life. He here makes his final stand
on n position which has been prominent
since Kant, but this Is virtually to admit
man cannot. attest a future iife. They
may not, but IL seems to many. and I think
rightly. that conscience. In not more an evil
CqnAoienps 10 20 more spiritrsl than knowl.
eds and fssans. asd The appeal tots 70