846 lines
46 KiB
D
846 lines
46 KiB
D
13 page printout
|
||
|
||
Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
|
||
|
||
This disk, its printout, or copies of either
|
||
are to be copied and given away, but NOT sold.
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom, Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
**** ****
|
||
|
||
Pamphlets by Charles Watts, Vol. I.
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
A Reply to R.B. Westbrook, AM., D.D.
|
||
|
||
by Charles Watts
|
||
1894
|
||
|
||
It has been aptly remarked that it does not necessarily
|
||
follow, because an opponent has been replied to, that his arguments
|
||
have been answered. The truth of this statement never appeared to
|
||
me so evident as when I read the comments of Dr. Westbrook (which
|
||
appeared in SECULAR THOUGHT of the 2nd and 9th of December last) on
|
||
my lecture, "Is there a Life Beyond the Grave?" Instead of
|
||
endeavoring to refute my arguments, the doctor contented himself
|
||
with presenting to the reader a conglomeration of meaningless
|
||
phrases, contradictory statements, and reckless assertions. His
|
||
article, moreover, was marred by undignified imputation, more
|
||
indicative of an irritable schoolboy, who had undertaken a task
|
||
which he found himself unable to perform, than of a debater who
|
||
felt conscious of his ability to refute the arguments of his
|
||
opponent. To designate my lecture as "flimsy argument," and to
|
||
suggest that I "cavilled," but without attempting by any ordinary
|
||
reasoning process to prove his statements, was a marked specimen of
|
||
controversial weakness. Dr. Westbrook's elegant (?) remark, "Did he
|
||
(Mr. Watts) not bellow and paw up the dirt, and rush around
|
||
furiously with hay on his horns like a wild bull of Bashan, for an
|
||
hour and a half?" was a proof that in his case "a firm faith in a
|
||
future state" has not had a "salutiry influence." Such vulgar
|
||
imputations may be the result of an "evil spirit;" but it is
|
||
opposed to that material refinement and courtesy which as a rule
|
||
characterize a real gentleman in controversy. The only "dirt" that
|
||
I "pawed up" consisted in exposing the fallacies indulged in by
|
||
those who assume a knowledge which they do not possess. That some
|
||
of the "dirt" fell on Dr. Westbrook is clear from the blemishes
|
||
that disfigure his reply to me.
|
||
|
||
The doctor commences by saying: "I do not accept the ordinary
|
||
distinctions which are made in speaking of man, as consisting of a
|
||
body and soul. The body is not the man, the soul is not the man,
|
||
the mind is not the man; but it requires what is intended by these
|
||
three terms, and much more, to make a man." Now, what is the "much
|
||
more" here referred to? If there is something more in man than
|
||
"body, soul and mind," the doctor should have stated what it is.
|
||
Again, he says: "I make no distinction between the material and
|
||
immaterial, the natural and the supernatural, as I do not know
|
||
where to draw the line." Then, if he makes no distinction and if he
|
||
knows not where to draw the line, why does he mention the
|
||
"supernatural" at all, particularly when he further observes "I can
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
1
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
think of nothing separate from matter"? If he is correct in this
|
||
last assertion, he by his own confession knows nothing of any
|
||
"supernatural," and any "argument," therefore, drawn from such
|
||
meaningless phrases must be "flimsy" indeed.
|
||
|
||
Dr. Westbrook alleges that I admit that the doctrine of future
|
||
life "is beyond the limits of controversy. If he (Mr. Watts) has
|
||
any logical argument that could be used against the theory of a
|
||
future life would he not have produced it?" I have made no such
|
||
admission; on the contrary, my lecture was a proof that, in my
|
||
opinion, the doctrine did come within "the limits of controversy."
|
||
Surely there is a difference between debating a doctrine and
|
||
admitting that what the doctrine represents is capable of
|
||
demonstration. "The fact is," as the doctor observes, "it is easy
|
||
to cavil." As to my producing arguments against the theory of a
|
||
future life, that is precisely what I did in my lecture but whether
|
||
they were "logical" or not the doctor made no effort to show. For
|
||
instance, I pointed out that the term "soul" has never been
|
||
defined; that, if we possess one, it is not known in what part of
|
||
the body it is to be found, or when it enters or when it leaves the
|
||
human frame; that the only "soul" known is the brain of man, and if
|
||
that brain does not properly exercise its functions, the
|
||
manifestations of life will be proportionally impaired. In proof of
|
||
this I referred to persons in lunatic asylums who had diseased
|
||
brains, whose judgment was dethroned, and whose reason had deserted
|
||
them. Had the soul, I asked, in their case lost its power of
|
||
control? If so, what is its value? When a drunkard becomes
|
||
intoxicated and loses all control over himself has his soul lost
|
||
its power? Again, as regards the "soul" leaving the body, I
|
||
enquired if it did so immediately at death, if it goes straight to
|
||
heaven, or hell, without waiting for the judgment day? If it does
|
||
not leave the body, till some time after death, how can a decaying
|
||
body retain the soul? To any one of these questions the doctor did
|
||
not even attempt to give an answer.
|
||
|
||
Further quoting from "The Creed of Science," by Professor
|
||
Graham. I showed that science taught that immortality is not and
|
||
cannot be proved, that the chief function of the brain is that
|
||
which is known by the term "mental activity" that nothing is known,
|
||
and nothing can be known of a life beyond the grave, In support of
|
||
my contention I produced the evidence of several scientific men
|
||
concluding with the testimony of the late Professor Tyndell, who
|
||
said: "But to return to the hypothesis of a human soul, offered as
|
||
an explanation or a simplification of a series of obscure
|
||
phenomena. Adequate reflection shows that, instead of introducing
|
||
light into our minds, it increases our darkness. You do not, in
|
||
this case, explain the unknown in terms of the known, which is the
|
||
method of science, but you explain the unknown in terms of the more
|
||
unknown." Now, upon all this Dr. Westbrook was silent in his reply,
|
||
and he coolly asserted that I produced no "logical argument"
|
||
against the theory of a future life. If what I did produce were
|
||
illogical, why did not the doctor endeavor to prove this was so?
|
||
|
||
I am further charged with denying a future life, whereas in my
|
||
lecture I distinctly stated in answer to the question, "If a man
|
||
die shall he live again?" that by its very nature, and by the very
|
||
nature of our mentality, it is utterly impossible to give a
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
2
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
definite opinion pro or con. Referring to Spiritualism, I said that
|
||
I had studied it for five years, and had found nothing in it; not
|
||
that I wished to deny that there might be something but --
|
||
depending on my own reason and judgment, by which I stand or fall
|
||
-- I had found nothing. But, says Dr. Westbrook, "What does this
|
||
prove? Why, that Mr, Watts did not find anything in Spiritualism!
|
||
But does his failure show that nobody else ever succeeded? Does he
|
||
know every thing?" Of course my failure to discover anything in
|
||
Spiritualism only proves what I stated, that I found nothing in it.
|
||
It is not my custom to dogmatize as to what others have seen, or
|
||
thought they have seen. I am reminded that I don't "know
|
||
everything" That is so, and in this particular the doctor and
|
||
myself are on equal terms. I am asked if I can "mention one thing
|
||
which man actually desires, which has not a palpable existence."
|
||
Certainly I can. Men desire universal happiness, justice for all,
|
||
and a fair distribution of wealth, but these conditions have no
|
||
"palpable existence."
|
||
|
||
I repeat that it is impossible to long for that of which
|
||
nothing is known. The doctor takes exception to this, but he gives
|
||
no instance to prove that I am wrong. If, as he says, -- "Life
|
||
beyond the grave is this: a continuation of the present life,
|
||
nothing more, nothing less," then the future is not another life,
|
||
and the doctor has to show how the "continuation of the present
|
||
life" can go on in the absence of the conditions that we know are
|
||
necessary to its manifestations now. We have positive proof that
|
||
the body, including the brain, the heart and the lungs, are
|
||
indispensable to what we term life; let it, therefore, be shown how
|
||
this life can continue when the body and its organs have
|
||
disappeared. The doctor, however, refutes himself, for he says that
|
||
in the next world we shall be "as the angels," and not subject to
|
||
the conditions that govern us here. If this will be so, it will be
|
||
another life after all, inasmuch as existence here is not regulated
|
||
on the "angelic" principle, therefore, continuity ceases.
|
||
|
||
Apart from such "flimsy arguments" as the above, the doctor
|
||
bases his belief in "a life beyond the grave" upon the opinions of
|
||
great men, the alleged universality of the belief and the general
|
||
desire that is supposed to exist for such a life. As these
|
||
objections to the Agnostic position involve probably the strongest
|
||
arguments that can be urged in favor of a future life, I shall
|
||
examine, them one by one.
|
||
|
||
Dr. Westbrook, in his reply, does not content himself by
|
||
modestly asking, "Is there a life beyond the grave?" but he
|
||
positively asserts that there is such an existence, This is a bold
|
||
allegation, to prove the truth of which will require more knowledge
|
||
than the doctor has hitherto given evidence that he possesses. What
|
||
is meant by the term "life"? Our answer is, that we only know of it
|
||
as "functional activity" in organized existence, such as we behold
|
||
in the animal and vegetal kingdoms. The question, however, of a
|
||
future life concerns chiefly man, who possesses an organism and
|
||
functions of various kinds. Before we can accept as true, the
|
||
statement "there is a life beyond the grave," we must have some
|
||
knowledge of the conditions of that supposed existence, and whether
|
||
or not they are suitable to man as we now know him. But up to the
|
||
present we have not met any one who possesses the required
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
3
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
knowledge and, therefore, no information is forthcoming as to the
|
||
nature of a future life. We certainly decline to accept the
|
||
proposition as being self-evident. If, as the doctor alleges, there
|
||
is presumptive in favor of a future life, the most that can be
|
||
reasonably argued is that there may be such a life. Of course we do
|
||
not contend that a visit to the planet Mars would be necessary
|
||
before we could believe that life existed there, but we do assert
|
||
that some kind of communication with the inhabitants would be
|
||
necessary before we could positively allege that life was there. It
|
||
is not unreasonable to demand at least reliable testimony in
|
||
matters beyond our experience. It is one thing to have a mind open
|
||
to conviction, and quite another to meet the man who can convince
|
||
us. When similar evidence is presented in favor of future existence
|
||
to that which obtains for the operation of natural law throughout
|
||
the universe, and when such evidence can be tested by the ordinary
|
||
rules of observation and experiment, the question of a life beyond
|
||
the grave will deserve serious consideration.
|
||
|
||
The doctor's proposition, although put in the positive form,
|
||
is really an assumption, based on the fact of the continuity of
|
||
life on our globe. But what is understood by such continuity?
|
||
Simply a succession of animated forms of existence, beings who
|
||
continue to possess the attributes of life, in whom the living
|
||
principle appears in a series of individual representations. But a
|
||
life beyond the grave involves much more than this; it assumes a
|
||
continuity of life in the same individual, a condition of which we
|
||
know nothing. Man exists generation after generation, but every
|
||
succeeding one is new. Life on this globe ceases in the individual
|
||
man when his organism becomes disintegrated and when its functions
|
||
are unable to continue their operations. Death is a condition the
|
||
very opposite to that of life; both therefore cannot be conceived
|
||
as being one, as the doctor's contention requires. A living dead
|
||
man is a contradiction, for it is a self-evident fact that if man
|
||
always lived he Would never die. Death occurs every moment, but we
|
||
have no instance of the perpetual continuation of one living
|
||
individual. A body in action must be present, somewhere, but. when
|
||
it has disappeared in the grave and gone to ashes, it is no longer
|
||
in organized body. In other words, a body must act where it is, or
|
||
where it is not. It cannot act where it is, in the grave, for there
|
||
its functions have ceased; it cannot act elsewhere because it is
|
||
not there to act; This appears as self-evident as that the whole is
|
||
greater than the part. The denial, that a future state has been
|
||
proved is held to be the converse of the proposition that there is
|
||
one, and therefore it is equally unphilosophical and presumptuous.
|
||
People fail to discriminate between the thing itself and what is
|
||
said about it, although there is a manifest difference between the
|
||
two cases. What we deny is the validity of the evidence, the
|
||
conclusiveness of the reasons given in support of the theory of a
|
||
future life.
|
||
|
||
The doctor relies much upon what great men have said and
|
||
written on the subject. Of course the opinions of eminent men are
|
||
entitled to respect, but they are also open to dispute, inasmuch as
|
||
all men are fallible. Great men have entertained the most erroneous
|
||
and childish ideas. We must not confound Newton and the apple with
|
||
Newton and the Bible, nor Faraday the chemist with Faraday the
|
||
Muggletonian. Our estimate of great men is based upon what they do
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
4
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
or what, they prove. When they defend the abominations of slavery
|
||
and witchcraft, or when they give their support to miracles and
|
||
orthodox doctrines, because they are sanctioned by the Bible, we
|
||
change our estimate of them. Great men have held mistaken views
|
||
about creation, the laws of motion, and the possessible
|
||
disappearance of all existing things, but that is no reason why the
|
||
humblest of their fellow men should endorse their mistakes.
|
||
Professor Wallace's views on development may be, accepted, if the
|
||
facts he submits prove his case, and so also may his other views be
|
||
accepted for the same reason. But in our opinion his contentions in
|
||
reference to a future life cannot be proved by candid investigation
|
||
and sound reasoning.
|
||
|
||
The alleged universality of opinion is quoted by Dr. Westbrook
|
||
as a proof of the reality of a future life. The fact is the belief
|
||
in all kinds of error has been general in all ages and in all
|
||
nations. Because the multitude once believed in the moving sun, in
|
||
the stationary earth and in the existence of angels and devils, it
|
||
is no conclusive proof to us that their belief was correct. Have we
|
||
then the audacity to reject the verdict of ages, and to declare
|
||
that the majority of men have been mistaken? On certain matters we
|
||
do so most decidedly, for the reason that nothing is clearer to-day
|
||
than that our forefathers were wrong upon many things which were
|
||
objects of "universal belief." The notion that the stars were drawn
|
||
by the gods or guided by spirits, has had to give way before the
|
||
discoveries of attraction and gravitation, and the creation theory
|
||
is refuted by the facts of evolution. Those who base their faith in
|
||
a future life on the common beliefs are like the man who is said to
|
||
have built his house upon the sand. The flood of science will sweep
|
||
all false beliefs away, as surely as the morning sun disperses the
|
||
vapors of the night.
|
||
|
||
The doctor fires off his syllogistic cannon and he supposes
|
||
that we are fatally wounded. But it is not so, for we would remind
|
||
the doctor that the value of a syllogism depends mostly upon the
|
||
first premiss. For instance, take the following: "The future will
|
||
be a continuance of the present, the present is manifest and
|
||
undisputable, therefore, so is the future." Now if the first
|
||
premiss were proved, the conclusion may follow, but as it is only
|
||
an assumption, based on general belief and on great men's opinions,
|
||
the conclusion is also of the same nature, and is a part of the
|
||
assumption. Dr. Westbrook ought to know that the greatest absurdity
|
||
might be made to appear feasible to the uneducated mind by the
|
||
syllogistic mode of pleading. For instance, "Nothing is better than
|
||
heaven, a chop is better than nothing, therefore a chop is better
|
||
than heaven."
|
||
|
||
It is commonly held that any conception formed by man must
|
||
have a corresponding reality somewhere. Yet the conception which
|
||
was formed as to the origin of things has been shown by modern
|
||
researches to be absolutely groundless in reality, Modern
|
||
investigation has exploded the old theories of the genesis of
|
||
things. Men have had to unlearn much that the dame schools taught
|
||
and that the Sunday-school endorsed. Take the illustration of the
|
||
general conception of the dragon. We may be able to trace the idea
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
5
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
to some extinct animal but that does not prove the existence of the
|
||
dragon or attest the truth of the belief that such an animal ever
|
||
existed. If an artist paints a picture of the Devil it is perfectly
|
||
certain that his Satanic Majesty never sat for the portrait.
|
||
|
||
Perhaps the strongest element in the argument for a future
|
||
life is derived from what is called the desires of mankind. These,
|
||
it is said, must be accounted for, which we think can easily be
|
||
done. We submit that the instinctive love of life found in man is
|
||
sufficient to explain the desire for its continuation. No doubt
|
||
there is some connection between desires and their realization in
|
||
reference to things that are attainable, for the very desire may be
|
||
a factor in the sum of the causes that enable us to realize our
|
||
ideal. But the mere fact of having the desire is no evidence that
|
||
its realization will follow. A desire for food and comfort is very
|
||
general, but many are destitute of both. The longing that all
|
||
members of the human family should be equally well off is
|
||
extensive, but such an enviable state of things does not exist. We
|
||
must not, in reasoning, take refuge in incongruities. Those who
|
||
argue that without an endless future, this life is not worth
|
||
having, must regard the present existence as being exceedingly
|
||
defective. Why, then, should its continuation be desired? And yet
|
||
the doctor argues for a prolongation of such a life. If it is said
|
||
that in another world there will be a change for the better, we
|
||
ask, where is the proof that any improvement will take place? It is
|
||
another instance that the wish is father to the thought. Endless
|
||
existence and interminable motion may be laws of thought which it
|
||
is impossible to banish from our minds, although we are unable to
|
||
conceive of an infinite past, which is involved in the statement.
|
||
But it is otherwise with the forms of existence that possess life,
|
||
these can be conceived of as coming to an end. Intense heat or
|
||
intense cold may terminate all living things in a brief space of
|
||
time. The truth is that it is only dreamers who contend that any
|
||
part of the compound being called man will
|
||
|
||
"flourish in immorial youth,
|
||
Unhurt amidst the war of elements,
|
||
The wrecks of matter, and the crash of worlds."
|
||
|
||
Many persons who do not admit that Secularism is the best
|
||
philosophy of existence, acknowledge that its principles are
|
||
excellent so far as this life is concerned; but they assert that
|
||
those principles are insufficient to sustain its believers in the
|
||
hour of death. With a view of showing that this position is not a
|
||
sound one, and that it misrepresents the Secular views as to death,
|
||
we purpose answering the following three queries, which are
|
||
frequently put by our opponents.
|
||
|
||
1. What are the Secular views in reference to death?
|
||
|
||
2. Is there sufficient reason to justify the Agnostic attitude
|
||
as to a future life?
|
||
|
||
3. Is the Secular position a safe one?
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
6
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
In the first place, what are the Secular views as to death?
|
||
They are these. That there is not sufficient evidence to justify
|
||
the assertion that there is, or that there is not, a life beyond
|
||
the grave. Many centuries ago, an oriental sage is said to have
|
||
asked, "If a man die, Shall he live again? Although many
|
||
generations have passed away since the supposed query was
|
||
submitted, no definite or satisfactory answer has been given. It is
|
||
a problem to the solution of which the philosopher has devoted his
|
||
wisdom, the poet has dedicated his poetry, and the scientist has
|
||
directed his attention, and yet the problem remains unsolved.
|
||
Secularists, therefore, agree with Thomas Carlyle when he said:
|
||
What went before, and what will follow me, I regard as two
|
||
impenetrable curtains which hang down at the two extremities of
|
||
human life, and which no man has drawn aside." The Secularists
|
||
adopt, in reference to a future life, the Agnostic position, and
|
||
they refuse to dogmatize, either pro or con., upon a matter in
|
||
reference to which, with the present limited knowledge in the
|
||
world, it is impossible to KNOW anything. Mr. Hugh O. Pentecost
|
||
thus puts the case; "The Freethinker looks at death just as it is,
|
||
so far as we know anything about it -- the end of life. He does not
|
||
hope, nor expect to live after death. He admits that he may, just
|
||
as there may be a planet in which water runs up-hill. He therefore
|
||
maps out his life with absolutely no reference to alleged heavens
|
||
or hells, or to any kind of spirit world. He goes through this
|
||
world seeking his own welfare and knowing, from the open book of
|
||
history and his own experience, that he can promote his own welfare
|
||
only by promoting the welfare of every other man, woman and child
|
||
in the world; knowing that he cannot be as happy as he might while
|
||
anyone else is miserable. He knows that death is as natural as
|
||
birth. He knows that, as we were unconscious of our birth, we will
|
||
be unconscious of our death. He knows that, if death puts a final
|
||
end to him as a person, as science seems to prove, it cannot be an
|
||
evil. He suffered nothing before he was; he will suffer nothing if
|
||
he ceases to be. He will not even know that he is dead."
|
||
|
||
The Secularist accepts this Freethought view of death. He is
|
||
not sufficiently dogmatic to assert there is an existence beyond
|
||
the present one, neither is he presumptuous enough to say there is
|
||
not. Knowing only of one existence, Secularists content themselves
|
||
therewith, feeling assured that the best credentials to secure any
|
||
possible immortality is the wisest and most intellectual use of
|
||
the life we now have. They further allege that, to the man who is
|
||
sincere and true to his conscience through life, "hereafter" has no
|
||
terrors. The man who has lived well has made the best preparation
|
||
to die well, and he will find that the principles which supported
|
||
him in health can sustain him in sickness. When the last grand
|
||
scene arrives, the Secularist, having done his duty, lies down
|
||
quietly to rest, and sleeps the long sleep from which, so far as we
|
||
know, there is no waking. What has he to fear? He knows that death
|
||
is the consequence of life, that nothing possesses immortality. The
|
||
plant that blooms in the garden, the bird that flutters in the
|
||
summer sun, the bee that flies from flower to flower, and the lower
|
||
animals of every kind, all pass into a state of unconsciousness
|
||
when their part is played and their work is done. Why should man be
|
||
an exception to the universal law? His body is built up on the same
|
||
principle as that of everything else that breathes, and his mental
|
||
faculties differ in degree, but not in character, from theirs. He
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
7
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
is subject to the same law as the rest of existence, and to repine
|
||
at death is as absurd as it would be to weep because he did not
|
||
live in some other planet or at some other time. Nature is
|
||
imperative in her decrees, and must be obeyed. Death is the common
|
||
lot of all. The atoms of matter of which one organism is made up
|
||
are required for the construction of another, so they must be given
|
||
up for that purpose, and to repine at it argues an ill-tutored
|
||
mind. The work is done, and if it has been done well there is
|
||
nothing to fear, either in this or any other life. Such are the
|
||
views of Secularists as to death, and, holding such views, they can
|
||
die without fear, as they have lived without hypocrisy.
|
||
|
||
Now as to the second query -- Is there sufficient reason to
|
||
justify this Agnostic position? It must be understood that this
|
||
position not only admits the "don't know," but it goes further, and
|
||
alleges that as we are at present constituted, we cannot know of
|
||
anything beyond the present life. Moreover, be it observed, our
|
||
position is still more comprehensive than this; for we contend that
|
||
the facts of existence do not substantiate the positive statement
|
||
that there is a life beyond the grave. Professor Graham, in his
|
||
"Creeds of Science," in giving a summary of modern scientific
|
||
opinion on this subject, observes: "And now what is the scientific
|
||
doctrine of the great theme of immortality? Is there any hope for
|
||
man? In one word, No. For any such hope, if men must continue to
|
||
indulge in it after hearing the scientific arguments, they must go
|
||
elsewhere -- to the theologian, the metaphysician, the mystic, the
|
||
poet. These men, habitually dwelling in their several spheres of
|
||
illusion and unreality, may find suggestions of the phantasy, which
|
||
they persuade themselves are arguments in favor of a future life;
|
||
the man of science, for his part, and the positive thinker,
|
||
building on science, consider no proposition more certain than that
|
||
the soul is mortal as well as the body which supported it, and of
|
||
which it was merely the final flower and product. ... Our modern
|
||
physiologist has ascertained that thought is but a function of the
|
||
brain and nerves. Why should it not perish with these? ... Way
|
||
should it not collapse with the general break-up of the machinery?
|
||
Why should it not cease when no longer supported by the various
|
||
physical energies whose transformations within the bodily machine
|
||
alone made its existence possible? ... But science, for her part,
|
||
finds no grounds for the beliefs of theology or metaphysics in a
|
||
future life -- beliefs, moreover, which she regards as little
|
||
comforting at the best. ... Science, we think, has made out the
|
||
dependence of our mind and present consciousness on bodily
|
||
conditions, so far as to justify the conclusion that the
|
||
dissolution of the body carries with it the dissolution of our
|
||
present consciousness and memory, which are reared on the bodily
|
||
basis. At least, it raises apprehension in the highest degree that
|
||
this will be the case. Again, Science -- partly by what Darwin has
|
||
established, partly by other evidence only recently accessible,
|
||
respecting the low state of the primitive man -- has brought the
|
||
human species into the general circle of the animal kingdom in a
|
||
sense for more deep and essential than was formerly dreamed of; and
|
||
she has thereby deepened the belief, though without producing
|
||
absolute conviction, that the arguments proving a possible future
|
||
life for man hold likewise for the lower animals; so that if man be
|
||
judged immortal, they should be also, and if they be mortal, so
|
||
also is man. Thirdly, Science has called attention to the fact that
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
8
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
there is something like a general law discoverable in the history
|
||
of Species, that they all have their term of years, though the term
|
||
is usually a long one, and that probably, therefore, the human
|
||
Species itself, as well is all other existing Species, will
|
||
disappear, giving place to wholly different, though derivative
|
||
types of life. And all these things taken together undoubtedly tend
|
||
strongly to produce the conviction that death closes the career of
|
||
the existing individual." In support of the conclusions here
|
||
arrived at, Professor J.P. Lesley says Science cannot possibly
|
||
either teach or deny immortality." professor Lester F. Ward
|
||
observes that, "So far as science can speak on the subject,
|
||
consciousness persists as long as the organized brain, and no
|
||
longer." And Professor E.S. Morse writes I have never yet seen
|
||
anything in the discoveries of science which would in the slightest
|
||
degree support or strengthen a belief in immorality."
|
||
|
||
It is alleged that the "soul" is the "thinking principle." If
|
||
this be so, wherein is man's superiority over the lower animals so
|
||
far as immortality is concerned? Herbert Spencer, Dr. W.B.
|
||
Carpenter, and many other eminent writers, have contended that the
|
||
reasoning powers in man differ only in degree from those in the
|
||
general animal kingdom. In other words, if the above allegation be
|
||
correct, the lower animals, as they possess the "thinking
|
||
principle," have "souls," and will live forever. Indeed, Bishop
|
||
Butler granted this, for he assures us "that there is no true
|
||
analogy in all nature which would lead us to think that death will
|
||
prove the destruction of a living creation." Moreover, we read in
|
||
the Bible: "For that which befalleth the sons of man befalleth the
|
||
beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth
|
||
the other; yea, they have all one breath: so that a man hath no
|
||
pre-eminence above a beast: for all is vanity." Besides, the
|
||
thinking principle, so far as we know, depends upon a mental
|
||
organization for its manifestation: is it, therefore, not
|
||
reasonable to conclude that when the organization is destroyed the
|
||
principle will no longer exist? When the cause is gone the effect
|
||
must cease.
|
||
|
||
Those persons who dogmatically assert that there is a future
|
||
life, erroneously, confound something they call a "soul" with the
|
||
mind and they then assert that the mind is a distinct, entity. Now
|
||
as Dr. Wigan observes The mind every anatomist knows to be a set of
|
||
functions of the brain, differing only in number and degree from
|
||
the intellect of animals. Of the mind we know much, but of the soul
|
||
we know nothing. Can the mind, then, be a thing per se, distinct
|
||
and separate from the body? No more than the motion can exist
|
||
independent of the watch, and all the arguments of theologians and
|
||
metaphysicians on this subject are founded on the confusion of
|
||
terms." It is said that a future life is proved by the fact that
|
||
development has been always taking place in the organic kingdom.
|
||
First came animals low in the scale, then of higher and higher
|
||
type, and so on up to man. Why, then, it is asked, may not man pass
|
||
at death into a still higher condition? Now the merest tyro in
|
||
logic can recognize that there is no analogy whatever in the two
|
||
cases. The higher animals are not the lower in another stage, but
|
||
an improvement upon them, a new individuality. The only argument
|
||
that could logically be drawn from the development theory on this
|
||
point is that after man beings of a still higher order might make
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
9
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
their appearance, but then they would no more be individual men of
|
||
a previous age than we are the Iguanodons of the "age of reptiles."
|
||
Besides, all the changes that we know of in the organic kingdom
|
||
have taken place upon the earth, whereas the condition which
|
||
believers in a future life contend for is to be in some far-off
|
||
land of shadows occupied by what is termed disembodied spirits."
|
||
The case of the caterpillar is frequently, given as an illustration
|
||
of changes from a lower to a higher state of existence. But the
|
||
caterpillar becomes transformed into the butterfly before our eyes;
|
||
we can see it in both conditions, and can observe the process of
|
||
change going on. The butterfly is an improvement upon the
|
||
caterpillar in point of organization, but in every other respect
|
||
they are both similar. Both are material, and each is liable to
|
||
destruction and decay, The spirit, however, that is supposed to be
|
||
evolved from the human form at death, is said to be immaterial and
|
||
immortal, and, therefore, totally unlike that material organization
|
||
from which it has escaped. The change is not observed, the body
|
||
dies and the elements of which it was composed pass into other
|
||
forms -- this is all that we see and all that we know. Beyond this
|
||
everything is mere conjecture and vague speculation.
|
||
|
||
As to how the belief in a future life originated, the
|
||
statement of Professor Graham is a pertinent explanation. He says
|
||
A strange and extravagant fancy that arose one day in the breast of
|
||
one more aspiring than the rest, became soon afterwards a wish; the
|
||
wish became a fixed idea that drew around itself vain and spurious
|
||
arguments in its favor; and at length the fancy, the wish, the
|
||
idea, was erected into an established doctrine of belief. Such, in
|
||
sum, is the natural history of the famous dogma of a future life.
|
||
Not by any means, however, was it a primitive and universal belief
|
||
of all nations. Arising probably at first with the Egyptians, it
|
||
was only after a long time taken up by the Jews, then, or possibly
|
||
earlier. by the Greeks, with whom, however, the life held out, thin
|
||
and unsubstantial even at best, was far from being desirable. It
|
||
was only in the Christian and Mohammedan religions that the notion
|
||
of a future and an eternal life was fully developed, and that the
|
||
doctrine was erected into a central and an essential article of
|
||
belief.
|
||
|
||
We now come to the third query -- Is the Secular position a
|
||
safe one? Our answer is, Yes; for by making the best of this life,
|
||
physically, morally, and intellectually, we are pursuing the wisest
|
||
course, whatever the issues in reference to a future life may be.
|
||
If there should be another life, the Secularist must share it with
|
||
his opponent. Our opinions do not affect the reality in the
|
||
slightest degree. If we are to sleep forever, we shall so sleep
|
||
despite the belief in immortality: and if we are to live for ever,
|
||
we shall so live despite the belief that possibly, death ends all.
|
||
It must also be remembered that if man possesses a soul, that soul
|
||
will be the better through being in a body that has been properly
|
||
trained; and if there is to be a future life, that life will be the
|
||
better if the higher duties of the present one have been fully and
|
||
honestly performed Secularists are, therefore, safe so far,
|
||
inasmuch as they recognize it to be their first duty to cultivate
|
||
a healthy body, and to endeavor to make the best, in its highest
|
||
sense, of the present existence. Now, in reference to the
|
||
supposition that we may be punished in case we are wrong. Our
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
10
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
position is, that if there be a just God, before whom we are to
|
||
appear to be judged, he will never punish those to whom he has not
|
||
vouchsafed the faculty of seeing beyond the grave because they
|
||
honestly avowed that their mental vision was limited to this side
|
||
of the tomb. Thus the Secularists feel quite safe as regards any
|
||
futurity that may be worth having. If the present be the only life,
|
||
then it will be all the more valuable if we give it our undivided
|
||
attention. If, on the other hand, there is to be another life,
|
||
then, in that case, we have won the right to its advantage, through
|
||
having been faithful to our convictions, just to our fellows, and
|
||
in having striven to leave the world purer and nobler than we found
|
||
it. As to the feeling of consolation, which is said to be derived
|
||
from the belief in a future life, we are safe upon this point also.
|
||
For if there be a life, beyond the grave, we have the conviction
|
||
that our Secular conduct on earth will entitle us to the
|
||
realization of its fullest pleasure. Moreover, this conviction is
|
||
not marred by the belief that the majority of the human race will
|
||
be condemned to a fate "which humanity cannot conceive without
|
||
terror, nor contemplate without dismay."
|
||
|
||
Finally, Secularism asserts that, if we are to have an
|
||
immortality it ought to be one in which we can mingle with the
|
||
purest of the earth, for the anticipation of it would fill our
|
||
minds with delight and would afford us the assurance that in
|
||
quitting this stage of life it would only be an exchange for one,
|
||
purer and loftier. But, pleasing as this ideal may be, consolatory
|
||
as it would undoubtedly prove, it is useless to forget that our
|
||
present knowledge teaches us that such hopes are only poetical,
|
||
such anticipations only imaginary. We therefore sternly face the
|
||
truth, and as some of us cannot believe in a future life, we seek
|
||
to realize the worth of this one by striving to correct its many
|
||
errors. And in so doing we are achieving the safest of all rewards
|
||
-- the consciousness that while here on earth we are working with
|
||
sincerity and fidelity to secure that heaven of humanity, the
|
||
comfort, happiness and welfare of the human race.
|
||
|
||
Through the lack of careful study, many errors obtain and
|
||
strange misconceptions exist as to what the terms "matter" and
|
||
"spirit" signify. We desire, therefore, to endeavor to explain what
|
||
they really mean, and how far, and in what they have any relation
|
||
to human conduct. For instance, are they both existences of which
|
||
we have any knowledge? and if so, do they exist separately, or are
|
||
they in any way related? When we affirm an existence, we mean an
|
||
entity, that is something that can be recognized by the senses.
|
||
Whatever we are incapable of recognizing, is to us non-existent. If
|
||
attributes only are affirmed, they must belong to some entities,
|
||
without which they are to us inconceivable; for in the absence of
|
||
entities we can have no conception of attributes. Our entire
|
||
knowledge consists of entities and their properties, qualities or
|
||
attributes, these latter being the marks by which we distinguish
|
||
one thing from another. It may be said that this position affirms
|
||
that we cannot form a conception of anything apart from matter and
|
||
force. It certainly does affirm this, which is precisely what we
|
||
insist upon, for whatever the nature of the subject thought of may
|
||
be, we cannot entertain any proposition unless the terms employed
|
||
are capable of being defined and understood.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
11
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
We wish to emphasize this particular point, because every
|
||
conception of our minds implies not only a form of thought, but an
|
||
idea of the something thought of. When we formulate a thought, it
|
||
may be said that we at the same time define it, that is, we lay
|
||
down a boundary, for to think of a thing is to limit it. If a man
|
||
owns an estate it must be separated in some manner from all other
|
||
estates, or he would be unable to identify his own from that of
|
||
others. This consideration lies at the foundation of all clear
|
||
reasoning, and however elementary it may appear to superior minds,
|
||
it cannot be dispensed with when we are forming a judgment
|
||
concerning any proposition as to alleged existences in the
|
||
universe. If "there are many things in heaven and earth than are
|
||
dreamt of in your philosophy they will never be apprehended in any
|
||
other way than by the one here indicated. If we giant that matter
|
||
and spirit are only symbols, as some people contend they are, we
|
||
see no necessity in using both terms. If, as it is affirmed, spirit
|
||
is separate from an entity, or its attribute or function, and yet
|
||
exercises an influence over any or all of the three, it must follow
|
||
that this spirit must be some force that can operate without any
|
||
medium connecting things that have no affinity or relation to each
|
||
other. This is equivalent to saying that we can transmit a message
|
||
to America, not only without a cable, but without any conductor at
|
||
all. To postulate spirit as the unknown is ignorance of what that
|
||
cause is. But we submit that these assumptions amount to a clear
|
||
contradiction, because they imply that after we have eliminated
|
||
from the totally of existence, all entities, and their attributes
|
||
and functions, there yet remains spirit. To think of something
|
||
apart from everything is beyond our power, and to think of spirit
|
||
in relation to anything, is to make it an entity or an attribute.
|
||
|
||
Matter may be defined as "that which occupies space and is
|
||
recognized by the senses." But what is spirit? If it can be
|
||
recognized it must be material, and if it cannot be recognized it
|
||
is to us as nothing. We are aware that spirit that spirit has been
|
||
defined as "refined matter," but in that case it would be material.
|
||
We can, therefore, only act consistently when we accept the
|
||
decision of the human intellect as applied to every proposition
|
||
submitted to us. We Cannot, if we act wisely, repudiate its
|
||
authority in judging of the highest conception of things. This is
|
||
our standard of appeal upon all matters material, or so-called
|
||
spiritual. We accept what appears true, after the most rigorous
|
||
criticism, and we reject every error immediately it is discovered.
|
||
For instance, we regard two truths as being established so far as
|
||
our present knowledge extends -- the indestructibility of matter,
|
||
and the invariable order of nature. By nature we mean all that is,
|
||
because, so far as is known, it has no limit in space or time. The
|
||
term spirit is not included in this definition, for the reason that
|
||
we have no conception of what it is. If it exist, its claims to
|
||
belief can only be established by one method, that of observation
|
||
and experiment. Should its claims be thus successfully proved,
|
||
Spiritualism will then cease to be distinguished from Materialism,
|
||
inasmuch as it will then be within our conception of the
|
||
established order of things. We fail to see how there can be two
|
||
different kinds of truth in the sense of there being one that we
|
||
can apprehend by our understanding, and another that we cannot. We
|
||
are aware that theologians assert that there are two kind of truth,
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
12
|
||
|
||
IS THERE A LIFE BEYOND THE GRAVE?
|
||
|
||
one within the reach of reason, and the other above it but we
|
||
cannot believe this theory, as no sufficient reason has been given
|
||
to justify us in accepting such a proposition. In reference to such
|
||
preposterous claims, we ask the following pertitient questions --
|
||
If there is a truth above or beyond the reason of man to
|
||
comprehend, how can it become known? Of course our inability to
|
||
understand such a truth does not prove its non-existence, but it
|
||
disposes of our relation to it; and consequently it is no truth to
|
||
us.
|
||
|
||
In science it is the practice to explain things in
|
||
materialistic terms and to adopt spiritualistic phrases is in our
|
||
opinion not only of no advantage, but it tends to the confusion of
|
||
ideas and leads many minds into the region of obscurity. We see no
|
||
justification for ceasing to speak of matter as a form of thought
|
||
and of thought as a property of matter, so ling as our object is to
|
||
indicate what we think and feel. The main point that we are anxious
|
||
to insist upon is that no unknown power or powers should be
|
||
appealed to for the purpose of explaining the facts of existence
|
||
when we are cognizant of forces that are sufficient to achieve the
|
||
object. Moreover, an unknown power can only be of practical service
|
||
to us if its manifestations admit of verification, which those of
|
||
spiritualism do not. We therefore rely upon truths that are
|
||
demonstrated by material processes, for they give potency and
|
||
dignity to nature; that nature, be it observed, that may be termed
|
||
the mother of all. From her bosom we derive the sustenance of life,
|
||
the panacea for woes and wrongs, and the solace for misery and
|
||
despair that too frequently crush the hopes of man and rob humanity
|
||
of its highest glory and its noblest service.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
**** ****
|
||
|
||
Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
The Bank of Wisdom is a collection of the most thoughtful,
|
||
scholarly and factual books. These computer books are reprints of
|
||
suppressed books and will cover American and world history; the
|
||
Biographies and writings of famous persons, and especially of our
|
||
nations Founding Fathers. They will include philosophy and
|
||
religion. all these subjects, and more, will be made available to
|
||
the public in electronic form, easily copied and distributed, so
|
||
that America can again become what its Founders intended --
|
||
|
||
The Free Market-Place of Ideas.
|
||
|
||
The Bank of Wisdom is always looking for more of these old,
|
||
hidden, suppressed and forgotten books that contain needed facts
|
||
and information for today. If you have such books, magazines,
|
||
newspapers, pamphlets, etc. please contact us, we need to give them
|
||
back to America. If you have such books please send us a list that
|
||
includes Title, Author, publication date, condition and price.
|
||
|
||
**** ****
|
||
|
||
|
||
Bank of Wisdom
|
||
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
|
||
13
|
||
|