Note 35 — MATTER AND MIND.

To those who may wish to pursue this subject further, I recommend a perusal of an essay on "Materialistic Physiology," in the Journal of Psychological Medicine for April, 1877. In this article, the writer, Dr. Winn, seems to share my views as to the paramount importance of boldly facing this matter, when he says:—

"The unphilosophical and extravagant dogma, that matter can think, is now so loudly and confidently asserted, and so widely spread by a numerous class of medical men and physiologists, both in this country and abroad, that the time has arrived when a doctrine so fallacious, and so fraught with danger to the best interests of society, should be fairly and carefully scrutinised. It is not by mere assertion, or the use of obscure and pedantic language, that such a theory can be established; and if it can be shown that the arguments on which it is based are shallow and speculative, words can scarcely be found too strong to censure the recklessness and folly of those who promulgate views so subversive of all morality and religion.

"The physicists have utterly failed to establish their position. They were asked to prove by inductive reasoning the truth of their theory, that the universe is the mere outcome of molecular force, and their defence has been clearly proved to be of the most evasive and inconclusive character.

"The doctrines of the modern school of materialistic physiology are permeating all classes of society, and it is these doctrines, based on the assumption that mind is a mere function of the brain—an assumption that, if true, would reduce man to the level of the beasts that perish—that we are offered as a substitute for the belief in the immateriality of the mind."

The essay from which the above quotations are taken is full of sound and logical reasoning, and the writer's position is not supported by mere theoretical statements, but by arguments drawn from well-accredited facts in anatomy and physiology.