第6章

Nowourauthorsveryproperlyrefusetocommitthemselvestotheopinionthatmindistheproductofmatter，buttheirargumentneverthelessimpliesthatsomesortofmaterialvehicleisnecessaryforthecontinuanceofmindinafuturestateofexistence。Thismaterialvehicletheyseektosupplyinthetheorywhichconnectsbyinvisiblebondsoftransmittedenergytheperishablematerialbodywithitscounterpartintheworldofether。Thematerialismoftheargumentisindeedpartlyveiledbytheterminologyinwhichthiscounterpartiscalleda“spiritualbody，“butinthisnoveluseorabuseofscripturallanguagethereseemstometobeastrangeconfusionofideas。Bearinmindthatthe“invisibleuniverse“intowhichenergyisconstantlypassingissimplytheluminiferousether，whichourauthors，tosuittherequirementsoftheirhypothesis，havegratuitouslyendowedwithacomplexityandvarietyofstructureanalogoustothatofthevisibleworldofmatter。Theirlanguageisnotalwaysquitesopreciseasonecoulddesire，forwhiletheysometimesspeakoftheetheritselfasthe“unseenuniverse，“theysometimesalludetoaprimordialmediumyetsubtlerinconstitutionandpresumablymoreimmaterial。Hereinliestheconfusion。Whyshouldtheluminiferousether，oranyprimordialmediuminwhichitmayhavebeengenerated，beregardedasinanyway“spiritual“？Greatphysicists，likelesstrainedthinkers，aresometimesliabletobeunconsciouslyinfluencedbyoldassociationsofideaswhich，ostensiblyrepudiated，stilllurkundercoverofthewordsweuse。Ifearthattheoldassociationswhichledtheancientstodescribethesoulasabreathorashadow，andwhichaccountfortheetymologiesofsuchwordsas“ghost“and“spirit，“havehadsomethingtodowiththisspiritualizationoftheinterstellarether。SomesharemayalsohavebeencontributedbythePlatonicnotionofthe“grossness“or“bruteness“oftangiblematter，——anotionwhichhassurvivedinChristiantheology，andwhicheducatedmenofthepresentdayhavebynomeansuniversallyoutgrown。Saveforsomesucholdassociationsasthese，whyshoulditbesupposedthatmatterbecomes“spriritualized“asitdiminishesinapparentsubstantiality？Whyshouldmatterbepronouncedrespectableintheinverseratioofitsdensityorponderability？Whyisadiamondanymorechargeablewith“grossness“thanacubiccentimetreofhydrogen？Obviouslysuchfanciesarepurelyofmythologicparentage。Nowtheluminiferousether，uponwhichourauthorsmakesuchextensivedemands，maybephysically“ethereal“enough，inspiteoftheenormouselasticitywhichleadsProfessorJevonstocharacterizeitas“adamantine“； butmostassuredlywehavenottheslightestreasonforspeakingofitas“immaterial“or“spiritual。“Thoughweareunabletoweighitinthebalance，weatleastknowitasatransmitterofundulatorymovements，thesizeandshapeofwhichwecanaccuratelymeasure。Itsforce-relationswithponderablematterarenotonlyuniversallyandincessantlymaintained，buttheyhavethatpreciselyquantitativecharacterwhichimpliesanessentialidentitybetweentheinnermostnaturesofthetwosubstances。Wehaveseenreasonforthinkingitprobablethatetherandordinarymatterarealikecomposedofvortex-ringsinaquasi-frictionlessfluid；butwhateverbethefateofthissubtlehypothesis，wemaybesurethatnotheorywilleverbeentertainedinwhichtheanalysisofethershallrequiredifferentsymbolsfromthatofordinarymatter。Inourauthors’ theory，therefore，theputtingonofimmortalityisinnowisethepassagefromamaterialtoaspiritualstate。Itisthepassagefromonekindofmateriallyconditionedstatetoanother。 Thetheorythusappealsdirectlytoourexperiencesofthebehaviourofmatter；andinderivingsolittlesupportasitdoesfromtheseexperiences，itremainsanessentiallyweakspeculation，whateverwemaythinkofitsingenuity。Forsolongasweareaskedtoacceptconclusionsdrawnfromourexperiencesofthematerialworld，wearejustifiedindemandingsomethingmorethanmereunconditionedpossibility。Werequiresomepositiveevidence，beiteversolittleinamount；andnotheorywhichcannotfurnishsuchpositiveevidenceislikelytocarrytoourmindsmuchpracticalconviction。 ThisiswhatImeantbysayingthatthegreatweaknessofthehypothesisherecriticizedliesinitsmaterialisticcharacter。 Incontrastwiththisweshallpresentlyseethattheassertionofafuturelifewhichisnotmateriallyconditioned，thoughunsupportedbyanyitemofexperiencewhatever，mayneverthelessbeanimpregnableassertion。ButfirstIwouldconcludetheforegoingcriticismbyrulingoutaltogetherthesenseinwhichourauthorsusetheexpression“UnseenUniverse。“Scientificinference，howeverremote，isconnectedbysuchinsensiblegradationswithordinaryperception，thatonemaywellquestiontheproprietyofapplyingtheterm“unseen“tothatwhichispresentedto“themind’seye“asinevitablematterofinference。 Itistruethatwecannotseetheoceanofetherinwhichvisiblematterfloats；buttherearemanyotherinvisiblethingswhichyetwedonotregardaspartofthe“unseenworld。“IdonotseetheairwhichIamnowbreathingwithinthefourwallsofmystudy，yetitsexistenceissufficientlyamatterofsense-perceptionasitfillsmylungsandfansmycheek。Theatomswhichcomposeadropofwaterarenotonlyinvisible，butcannotinanywaybemadetheobjectsofsense-perception；yetbyproperinferencesfromtheirbehaviourwecansinglethemoutformeasurement，sothatSirWilliamThomsoncantellusthatifthedropofwaterweremagnifiedtothesizeoftheearth，theconstituentatomswouldbelargerthanpeas，butnotsolargeasbilliard-balls。Ifwedonotseesuchatomswithoureyes，wehaveoneadequatereasonintheirtinydimensions，thoughtherearefurtherreasonsthanthis。Itwouldbehardtosaywhytheluminiferousethershouldberelegatedtothe“unseenworld“anymorethanthematerialatom。Whateverweknowaspossessingresistanceandextension，whateverwecansubjecttomathematicalprocessesofmeasurement，wealsoconceiveasexistinginsuchshapethat，withappropriateeyesandunderpropervisualconditions，weMIGHTseeit，andwearenotentitledtodrawanylineofdemarcationbetweensuchanobjectofinferenceandotherswhichmaybemadeobjectsofsense-perception。Tosetaparttheetherasconstitutingan“unseenuniverse“isthereforeillegitimateandconfusing。Itintroducesadistinctionwherethereisnone，andobscuresthefactthatbothinvisibleetherandvisiblematterformbutonegranduniverseinwhichthesumofenergyremainsconstant，thoughtheorderofitsdistributionendlesslyvaries。 Verydifferentwouldbethelogicalpositionofatheorywhichshouldassumetheexistenceofan“UnseenWorld“entirelyspiritualinconstitution，andinwhichmaterialconditionslikethoseofthevisibleworldshouldhaveneitherplacenormeaning。 Suchaworldwouldnotconsistofethersorgasesorghosts，butofpurelypsychicalrelationsakintosuchasconstitutethoughtsandfeelingswhenourmindsareleastsolicitedbysense-perceptions。Inthusmarkingoffthe“UnseenWorld“fromtheobjectiveuniverseofwhichwehaveknowledge，ourlineofdemarcationwouldatleastbedrawnintherightplace。Thedistinctionbetweenpsychicalandmaterialphenomenaisadistinctionofadifferentorderfromallotherdistinctionsknowntophilosophy，anditimmeasurablytranscendsallothers。 TheprogressofmoderndiscoveryhasinnorespectweakenedtheforceofDescartes’sremark，thatbetweenthatofwhichthedifferentialattributeisThoughtandthatofwhichthedifferentialattributeisExtension，therecanbenosimilarity，nocommunityofnaturewhatever。BynoscientificcunningofexperimentordeductioncanThoughtbeweighedormeasuredorinanywayassimilatedtosuchthingsasmaybemadetheactualorpossibleobjectsofsense-perception。Moderndiscovery，sofarfrombridgingoverthechasmbetweenMindandMatter，tendsrathertoexhibitthedistinctionbetweenthemasabsolute。Ithas，indeed，beenrenderedhighlyprobablethateveryactofconsciousnessisaccompaniedbyamolecularmotioninthecellsandfibresofthebrain；andmaterialistshavefoundgreatcomfortinthisfact，whiletheologiansandpersonsoflittlefaithhavebeenverymuchfrightenedbyit。Butsincenooneeverpretendedthatthoughtcangoon，undertheconditionsofthepresentlife，withoutabrain，onefindsitratherhardtosympathizeeitherwiththeself-congratulationsofDr。Buchner’sdisciples[8]orwiththeterrorsoftheiropponents。Butwhathasbeenlesscommonlyremarkedisthefactthatwhenthethoughtandthemolecularmovementthusoccursimultaneously，innoscientificsenseisthethoughttheproductofthemolecularmovement。Thesun-derivedenergyofmotionlatentinthefoodweeatisvariouslytransformedwithintheorganism，untilsomeofitappearsasthemotionofthemoleculesofalittleglobuleofnerve-matterinthebrain。Inaroughwaywemightthussaythatthechemicalenergyofthefoodindirectlyproducesthemotionoftheselittlenerve-molecules。Butdoesthismotionofnerve-moleculesnowproduceathoughtorstateofconsciousness？ Bynomeans。Itsimplyproducessomeothermotionofnerve-molecules，andthisinturnproducesmotionofcontractionorexpansioninsomemuscle，orbecomestransformedintothechemicalenergyofsomesecretinggland。Atnopointinthewholecircuitdoesaunitofmotiondisappearasmotiontoreappearasaunitofconsciousness。Thephysicalprocessiscompleteinitself，andthethoughtdoesnotenterintoit。Allthatwecansayis，thattheoccurrenceofthethoughtissimultaneouswiththatpartofthephysicalprocesswhichconsistsofamolecularmovementinthebrain。[9]Tobesure，thethoughtisalwaystherewhensummoned，butitstandsoutsidethedynamiccircuit，assomethingutterlyalienfromandincomparablewiththeeventswhichsummonit。Nodoubt，asProfessorTyndallobserves，ifweknewexhaustivelythephysicalstateofthebrain，“thecorrespondingthoughtorfeelingmightbeinferred；or，giventhethoughtorfeeling，thecorrespondingstateofthebrainmightbeinferred。Buthowinferred？Itwouldbeatbottomnotacaseoflogicalinferenceatall，butofempiricalassociation。Youmayreplythatmanyoftheinferencesofscienceareofthischaracter；theinference，forexample，thatanelectriccurrentofagivendirectionwilldeflectamagneticneedleinadefiniteway；butthecasesdifferinthis，thatthepassagefromthecurrenttotheneedle，ifnotdemonstrable，isthinkable，andthatweentertainnodoubtastothefinalmechanicalsolutionoftheproblem。Butthepassagefromthephysicsofthebraintothecorrespondingfactsofconsciousnessisunthinkable。Grantedthatadefinitethoughtandadefinitemolecularactioninthebrainoccursimultaneously；wedonotpossesstheintellectualorgan，norapparentlyanyrudimentoftheorgan，whichwouldenableustopassbyaprocessofreasoningfromtheonetotheother。Theyappeartogether，butwedonotknowwhy。“[10] [8]TheNationoncewittilydescribedthesepeopleas“peoplewhobelievethattheyaregoingtodielikethebeasts，andwhocongratulatethemselvesthattheyaregoingtodielikethebeasts。“ [9]Forafullerexpositionofthispoint，seemyOutlinesofCosmicPhilosophy，Vol。II。pp。436-445。 [10]FragmentsofScience，p。119。 Anunseenworldconsistingofpurelypsychicalorspiritualphenomenawouldaccordinglybedemarcatedbyanabsolutegulffromwhatwecallthematerialuniverse，butwouldnotnecessarilybediscontinuouswiththepsychicalphenomenawhichwefindmanifestedinconnectionwiththeworldofmatter。Thetransferofmatter，orphysicalenergy，oranythingelsethatisquantitativelymeasurable，intosuchanunseenworld，maybesetdownasimpossible，byreasonoftheverydefinitionofsuchaworld。Anyhypothesiswhichshouldassumesuchatransferwouldinvolveacontradictioninterms。Butthehypothesisofasurvivalofpresentpsychicalphenomenainsuchaworld，afterbeingdenudedofmaterialconditions，isnotinitselfabsurdorself-contradictory，thoughitmaybeimpossibletosupportitbyanyargumentsdrawnfromthedomainofhumanexperience。Suchistheshapewhichitseemstomethat，inthepresentstateofphilosophy，thehypothesisofafuturelifemustassume。Wehavenothingtosaytogrossmaterialisticnotionsofghostsandbogies，andspiritsthatupsettablesandwhispertoignorantvulgarwomenthewonderfulinformationthatyouoncehadanauntSusan。Theunseenworldimaginedinourhypothesisisnotconnectedwiththepresentmaterialuniversebyanysuch“invisiblebonds“aswouldallowBaconandAddisontocometoBostonandwritethesilliesttwaddleinthemostungrammaticalEnglishbeforearoomfulofpeoplewhohaveneverlearnedhowtotestwhattheyarepleasedtocallthe“evidenceoftheirsenses。“Ourhypothesisisexpresslyframedsoastoexcludeallintercoursewhateverbetweentheunseenworldofspiritunconditionedbymatterandthepresentworldofspiritconditionedbymatterinwhichallourexperienceshavebeengathered。Thehypothesisbeingframedinsuchaway，thequestionis，Whathasphilosophytosaytoit？Canwe，bysearchingourexperiences，findanyreasonforadoptingsuchanhypothesis？Or，ontheotherhand，supposingwecanfindnosuchreason，wouldthetotalfailureofexperimentalevidencejustifyusinrejectingit？