fullness. Beasts of prey and other enemies to the ascending path of life are to be swept out of the way.?
But is not the brute a part of that Nature, which has been subjected to vanity, which groans and travails in pain and which waits to be redeemed? The answer seems to be that the brute is a mere appendage to man, has no independent value in the creation, is incapable of ethical life or of communion with God, the source of life and so has no guarantee of continuance. Man, on the other hand, is of independent value. But this is to anticipate the argument that follows. It is sufficient here to point out that there is no proof that consciousness is dependent upon the soul?s connection with a physical organism. McLane, Evolution in Religion, 261 ? ?As the body may preserve its form and be, to a degree made to act after the psychic element, is lost by removal of the brain so this psychic element may exist and act according to its nature after the physical element ceases to exist.? Hovey, Bib. Eschatology, 19 ? ?If I am in a house, I can look upon surrounding objects only through its windows but open the door and let me go out of the house, and the windows are no longer of any use to me.? Shaler, Interpretation of Nature, 295 ? ?To perpetuate mind after death is less surprising than to perpetuate or transmit mind here by inheritance.? See also Martineau, Study, 2:332- 337, 363-365.
William James, in his Essay on Human Immortality, argues that thought is not necessarily a productive function of the brain, it may rather, be a permissive or transmissive function. Thought is not made in the brain, so that when the brain perishes the soul dies. The brain is only the organ for the transmission of thought, just as the lens transmits the light, which it does not produce. There is a spiritual world behind and above the material world. Our brains are thin and half-transparent places in the veil through which knowledge comes in. Savage, Life after Death, 289 ? ?You may attach a dynamo for a time to some particular machine. When you have removed the machine, you have not destroyed the dynamo. You may attach it to some other machine and find that you have the old time power. So the soul may not be confined to one body.? These analogies seem to us, to come short of proving personal immortality. They belong to ?psychology without a soul,? and while they illustrate the persistence of some sort of life, they do not render more probable the continuance of my individual consciousness beyond the bounds of death. They are entirely consistent with the pantheistic theory of a remerging of the personal existence in the great whole of which it forms a part. Tennyson, In Memoriam: ?That each, who seems a separate whole Should move his rounds and, fusing all The skirts of self again, should fall Remerging in
<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->
Was this article helpful?