_Third._ I have placed third in the category of mental systems the

system of emotions or susceptibilities to mental pleasure or pain, as

distinguished from the pleasurable or painful excitation of our nervous

system. No one can doubt that, however powerful may be the influence

upon our mental states of physical pain or physical sensations that

are pleasurable, there is such a thing as mental pain and mental

pleasure, satisfaction or dissatisfaction, wholly unconnected with

and in no way dependent upon our corporeal feelings, present or past.

It is from this susceptibility to mental pain or pleasure that we

come to have the idea of goodness or badness, which is originally a

classification of the qualities of external things as good or bad;

the good being those which affect us pleasurably, and the bad those

which affect us painfully. By our mental organization we are placed

in such correspondence with the material universe, that things apart

from ourselves affect us agreeably or disagreeably; sights, sounds,

odors, and tastes give us pleasure or pain. We are also placed in

correspondence with the spiritual universe, and thereby certain acts,

relations, and traits of character give us pleasure, or the reverse.

In process of time, the youth whose mental systems are in the course

of expansion comes to perceive that his own acts give him pleasure or

pain, and hence he derives the perception of good or bad qualities

in himself. Moral goodness in ourselves--goodness of disposition,

of intention, of volition, of habit--is found to be distinct from

physical and intellectual goodness; and thus the consciousness of moral

goodness becomes the intellectual faculty to which moral commands can

be addressed, with a prospect that the connection between obedience

and happiness will be perceived. This susceptibility to mental pain

or pleasure, from the qualities of external things, from the acts and

dispositions of other persons, and from our own, is one that can inhere

in a mental organization, but it can not possibly inhere in a physical

organism. The physical organism is undoubtedly the means by which the

mental susceptibility to pleasure or pain is reached from the external

universe; but, unless there is a mental organism to feel the pleasure

or the pain, the action of the physical organization is nothing but the

excitation of the nervous system. I, therefore, make a distinct class

among the mental systems, and assign to it the faculty of experiencing

mental pleasure or mental pain as a capacity distinct from the

pleasurable or painful excitation of our nerves.

_Fourth._ In the category of mental systems may be placed those desires

which lead us to wish for and strive to obtain some good or to avoid

some evil. This, surely, is not to be regarded as anything but an

intellectual perception of what is to us a good or an evil. It is a

structural capacity of the soul which, after an experience of that

which we learn to be good for us, or the reverse of good, is always

prompting us to take the steps or to perform the acts which will insure

a repetition of that experience, in the acquisition of further good

or the avoidance of further evil. Its operations may be perverted.

We may, from bad habits or erroneous ideas of good and evil, pursue

objects that are pernicious. But whether we strive for that which is

truly good, or is deceptively regarded as a good, we are perpetually

acting under the impulse of a desire that is implanted in us, and

that operates as a desire whether its objects are worthy or unworthy,

beneficial or injurious, noxious or innoxious to our moral health.

_Fifth_, and lastly, we may classify the affections as one of the

structural systems of our spiritual existence. It is that part of

our natures that makes us like or dislike both persons and things;

and, in regard to the former, it is the capacity for love in its high

distinction from the physical appetite of sexual passion. The range

of its operation is most various and multiform, but throughout all of

its operations it is a spiritual capacity, implanted in us for our

happiness as spiritual beings.

If it is objected that this is an arbitrary classification--that as

an analysis of structural systems in our mental organization it bears

no analogy to the anatomical exploration and classification of the

structural systems of our physical organism--the answer is, that in

regard to the latter we make the examination by the exercise of our

corporeal senses, chiefly by the visual organs, as we do in the case of

all other organized matter. In analyzing the structural organization

of our minds, we are examining a subject that is not laid bare to the

inspection of any of our corporeal organs; the scalpel in the hand

of the dissector can afford us no aid in this investigation, but the

inspection must be carried on by turning the eye of the mind inward

upon itself. This we are mentally constituted to do. While, therefore,

it may be true that the classification which I have made, or which may

have been made by others, of the structural mental systems, is in one

sense arbitrary, and while in any method of describing them they may

run into or overlap one another in a complex organism, it will always

remain true that the mind is capable of such examinations, and that the

analysis, however given, is useful to the comprehension of the mind

as an organized and extended entity. No one can carry on this mental

examination without perceiving that he is examining a something which

has an independent existence and a life of its own, whether he supposes

it to have been evolved out of organized matter, or embraces the idea

of its distinct and special creation by an exercise of the Divine Will.

The two main hypotheses concerning the origin of mind may now be

contrasted. In the long process of development of animal organisms

out of one another there come to be, it is said, higher and higher

degrees of intelligence, as the nervous system becomes more and more

capable of complex impressions, until we arrive at the consummate

physical organization and the supreme intelligence of the human race.

The physical organization is open to our examination, and we find the

human brain divided into cerebral masses, with ganglia of sensory

nerves extending to the external sensory organs. Intelligence is the

faculty of comprehending by previous preparation the combinations of

impressions made on the brain through the sensory nerves. The brain

being an organized register in which the experiences of progenitors

have accumulated a high degree of this faculty, each human infant born

into the world comes into it with a prepared capacity to acquire the

combinations of impressions produced in his individual experience.

Transmitted from generation to generation, this inherited capacity

becomes the means by which each individual manifests and enjoys what

we call intelligence; and the resulting aggregate of all the faculties

thus called into exercise is what we denominate mind. It must be

observed, however, that this theory or explanation of the origin of

mind, rejecting the hypothesis of its special creation as a being

of a spiritual nature, assumes it to be a something which has been

developed out of the growth and improvement of a physical organism.

When you inquire whether the nature of this something is supposed to

be a product of a different substance from matter, although developed

out of matter, you are left without an answer; and when you press the

inquiry whether a spiritual existence can be conceived as having grown

out of the action of a physical organism, you are told that there are

no means of determining what a spiritual existence is, because there

is nothing with which you can compare it so as to ascertain what it

resembles or what it does not resemble. Or if there are some who

accept the evolution theory of the origin of mind, and who think it

possible that a spiritual existence can owe its origin to the action of

matter without any intervention of a creating power purposely giving

existence to a spiritual essence, you have to ask a question to which

you can only get this answer: that it has pleased the Almighty Being

to establish a system by which a spiritual in contradistinction to a

physical existence has been developed in countless ages out of the

action of material substances organized into definite systems and

endowed with the principle of life. Those who assume this hypothesis

must necessarily assume also that the spiritual existence is, after it

has come into being, an existence distinct from the physical organism,

although generated out of it, and then they must encounter the further

inquiry as to the probability of the supposed method of production

resorted to by the Supreme Being.

More than once in the course of our colloquies I have had occasion to

say that, in all our inquiries of this nature, whether in regard to the

origin of our physical organism or that of our mental existence, we

must constantly bear in mind the unbounded capacity of the Creator to

adopt any method of production whatever; that it is just as much within

his power to call things of the most opposite natures into existence

by a single word as it is to establish methods by which they shall be

developed through innumerable ages of what we call time. That the Being

who is supposed to preside over the universe and to hold this unlimited

power is an hypothesis I readily admit; but I affirm that his existence

and attributes are necessary postulates, without which there can be no

reasoning concerning the origin of anything. Whether that Being exists

and possesses the attributes which we impute to him I have all along

said is a matter of which we must be satisfied by independent proofs

before we undertake to investigate his probable methods.

The hypothesis of the origin of mind which I now mean to contrast

with that of the evolutionists may be stated as follows: It is a

rational deduction, from all that we know of our physical organism,

that procreation of new individuals of that organism by the sexual

union of male and female was established as the means of continuing

the species of animal known as man. When or how established is not a

material part of the inquiry that I now make. It may have been that

the division of the sexes came about by a very slow process, or it

may have been by the aboriginal creation of a completed pair, male

and female. However or whenever it came to exist, there came to be

one uniform method of bringing into existence new individuals of a

peculiar and perfectly distinguishable animal type. If we confine our

attention to the physical organism of man, it is perfectly apparent

that when procreation and gestation take place they happen because of

the established law that a new individual of this species of animal

shall be produced by the sexual union of two other individuals, male

and female, and that the new individual shall have the same physical

organism as the parents. A new physical life thus springs out of two

other physical lives by a process the secret of which we can not

detect, although we can trace it through some of its stages so far as

to see that there is a secret process by which two physical organisms

give existence to another physical organism of the same type and having

the same principle of life.

As the new individual animal grows into further development, we find

that along with his animal organism and united with it by a tie which

we can not see, but about which we can reason, there is apparently

present a kind of life that is something more than the life of the

body. The further we carry our investigations of the phenomena which

indicate the existence of this mental life, the more we become

convinced that it is the life of a spiritual organism. As the Creator

had the power to give existence to the corporeal organism, why had he

not an equal power to give existence to a spiritual organism? If he

established the law of sexual union between a male and a female in

order to perpetuate the type of animal to which they belong--the law

which gives existence to a new individual of that animal type every

time that a new conception and a new birth take place--why should he

not have established the collateral law that every time there is a

new birth of an infant there shall come into existence a spiritual

entity which shall be united to the corporeal organism for a time,

thus constituting in that infant a dual existence which makes his

whole individuality during this life? If we suppose that the physical

organism of our double natures was left to be worked out by a very

slow process, by which physical organisms are developed out of one

another--or by which we theoretically suppose them to have been so

developed--why is it necessary to suppose that our spirits or souls

have been developed in the same way or by an analogous method? What

reason have we to believe that the Creator works by the same methods in

the spiritual world, or by methods that are of the same nature as those

which we think we can discover to be his methods in giving existence

to corporeal organisms? The two realms of spirit and matter are so

completely unlike that we are not compelled to believe that the methods

by which creation of organisms of the two kinds are effected by the

Almighty are necessarily or probably the same.

In order to be clearly understood I will now repeat my hypothesis

in a distinct form. I assume the existence of a pair of animals of

the human type, male and female, endowed with the power of producing

new individuals of the same type. In their physical organisms is

established the law of procreation, and in the female counterpart of

that organism is established the concomitant law of conception and

parturition. Thus far provision is made for the production of a new

individual physically organized like the parents. In those parents

there is also established another law, by the operation of which the

same process which results in the production of the new individual

animal organism brings into existence a spiritual organism, which is

united with and becomes the companion of the physical organism so

long as the latter shall continue to live. These laws established

in the first pair and in every succeeding pair continue to operate

through every succeeding generation. Perhaps it will be said that

this attributes the production of a spiritual organism to a physical

process; but, in truth, it does no more than to assert the simultaneous

production of the two existences. It is not necessary to assume that

the fœtus which becomes at birth the human infant is before birth

animated by a soul; for it is not necessary to suppose, nor is it

apparently true, that the physical organism is complete until birth

takes place and the breath of life enters the lungs, thus constituting

a new life other than that of the fœtus or the unborn child, although

the one is a continuation of the other. At whatever point of time the

complete animal organism is in a condition to be observed so that we

can say here is a living child, at that point we begin to perceive a

capacity to receive impressions from the external world without the

connection that has theretofore existed between the unborn child and

the maternal system. This capacity must either be attributed to the

individual experience of the infant, so that without experience of

his own he can not begin to be possessed of a growing intelligence,

or it must be imputed to an innate and implanted power resident in

a spiritual organism that comes into exercise whenever the physical

organism has begun to draw the breath of life.

The evolution hypothesis of the origin of the human mind necessarily

leaves its nature in an indeterminate state that will not satisfy the

requirements of sound reasoning. In one mode of stating and reasoning

upon this hypothesis it is assumed that there is not now and never was

a mental existence that was created in each individual of the race

at his birth; but that at some very remote period in the history of

successive animal organisms there was produced an animal of a highly

developed nervous structure, capable of intelligence by reason of a

superior power of receiving physical impressions and co-ordinating

them into states of consciousness which correspond to the physical

feelings; and to the perpetually recurring series of these states of

consciousness we give the name of mind. This capacity of intelligence

is transmitted from parents to offspring, the experiences of the former

being registered in the brain of the latter; but however complete may

be the inherited nervous structure, and however great the capacity

for intelligence, mind in each individual of the race is evidenced by

nothing but a constant succession and variation of certain states of

feelings produced in the nervous structure.

Against this view we may place what we know from constant observation.

We know that it has been ordained, as a consequence of the sexual union

of two individuals of opposite sex, there shall come into existence a

new individual of the same physical organism as the parents. Of the

interior process by which this product is effected we must remain

ignorant, but about the fact there can be no doubt. That fact is,

that by the union of certain vesicles contributed by each of the

parents there results a new individual organism. We know further

that simultaneously with the complete production of the new physical

organism, there comes into being, and is incorporated with it, an

existence that we are compelled by the phenomena which it manifests to

regard as a non-physical and a spiritual organism. Of the process by

which this distinct existence is effected, we must remain as ignorant

as we are of the process by which the physical organism was made to

result from the sexual union of the parents. But of the fact there can

be no more doubt in the one case than in the other. In every instance

of a new birth of a perfect infant, we know that there results a dual

existence in the same individual; the one manifested by physical, the

other by mental phenomena. To argue that the mental and spiritual

existence grew out of an improved and improving physical organism

in long-past ages, and became an adjunct to that organism after it

had attained a certain development, without any intervention of the

creating power at each new birth of an individual infant, is to limit

the power of the Creator in a realm wherein the subject of his creating

power is essentially unlike the subject with which he deals when he

deals with physical organisms. In all reasoning upon the origin and

nature of the human mind, the boundless power of the Creator must be

assumed. In judging of the probabilities of his methods of action, it

is the safest course to be guided by what we can see takes place at

every new birth of a human infant. The physical organism results from

the operation of a certain law. The mental organism results, it is

alike rational to presume, from the operation of a certain other law.

How either of these laws operates we are not permitted to know, but

we can as safely infer the one as the other, from what is open to our

observation.

I shall now touch briefly upon another argument, the foundation of

which is to be tested by historical facts into the truth of which I

shall not here inquire, because they must, for the purposes for which

I use them, be assumed. The immortality of the human soul is said to

have been proved by a Divine revelation. This great fact is supposed

to be established by evidence of a character quite different from that

which convinces us of the existence and attributes of the Almighty.

But, assuming revelation to be a fact, it has an important bearing

upon the subject of this essay, because the question arises, for what

conceivable reason the Almighty should have made to us a revelation of

our immortality, through the direct testimony of a competent witness,

if we are not spiritual beings. Information of a fact supposes that

there was a person to be informed. Concurrently with the consciousness

which assures us of our personality, we have the assurance of our

immortality certified to us by a messenger expressly authorized to give

us the information. If the mind, or that part of our individuality

which we call the soul, is in its origin and nature nothing but what

the evolution theory supposes, what was there to be informed of

immortality, or of anything else? The possibility and certainty of

an existence after the death of the body is a conviction that must

exercise great influence over the conduct of men in this life. It is

consistent with the whole apparent scheme of the revelation to suppose

that it was made for a twofold purpose: first, to cause men to lead

better lives in this world than they might have led without this

information and conviction; and, secondly, to form them for greater

happiness in another world. The first of these purposes might have

been effectuated by causing men to believe in their own immortality,

notwithstanding the belief might be a delusion because there is no

being capable, in fact, of any existence after the life of the body

is ended. But such a method of action is hardly to be imputed to the

Creator and Supreme Governor of the universe, according to the ideas

of his character which natural religion alone will give us. It is not

in accordance with rational conceptions of his attributes to suppose

that he deludes his rational creatures with assurances or apparent

proofs of something that is not true for the sake of making them act

as if it were true. When we find ourselves running into a hypothesis

of this kind, we may be pretty sure that we are departing from correct

principles of reasoning. In regard to the second of the supposed

purposes for which the revelation of immortality was made--to form

men for greater happiness in another state of existence--it is quite

obvious that the supposed scheme of the revelation is a mere delusion,

if we are not beings capable of a continued spiritual existence after

the death of our bodies. It is therefore a matter of great consequence

to determine what the evolution theory of the origin and nature of the

human mind makes us out to be.

I have never seen any statement of that theory that does not lead to

the conclusion that man is a highly developed animal organism, whose

mental existence is not something created in each individual of the

race, and of a substance and organized structure different from the

physical organism, but whose mental phenomena are merely exhibitions

and effects of occurrences taking place in the physical system, and

assuming the shape of what for distinctness is called thought. In

whatever form this theory has been stated by its most distinguished

professors, it leaves only an interval of degree, and not an interval

of kind, between the mind of man and that which, in some of the other

animals, is supposed to be mind. The evolution doctrine, taken in one

of its aspects, supposes one grand chain of animal organisms, rising

higher and higher in the scale of animal life, but connected together

by ordinary generation, so that they are of one kindred throughout; but

that, as each distinct species grows out of predecessors, by gradual

improvements and increments, forming more and more elaborate organisms,

man is the consummate product of the whole process. But when we ask

at what point or stage in the series of developing animal organisms

the mind of man was produced, or what it was when produced, we get no

satisfactory answer. To the first question, it can only be answered,

as Darwin himself answers, that there must be a definition of man

before we can determine at what time he came to exist. To the second

question, we have answers which differ materially from each other.

First, we have whatever we can extract from such a system of psychology

as Mr. Spencer's, which ignores the capability of the mind to exist

independent of the nervous structure and the brain, because it excludes

the idea of any ego, any me, any person, and makes consciousness to

consist of a connected series of physical feelings, to which there are

corresponding psychical equivalents that he calls mental states. It

would seem to follow, therefore, that when there is no longer remaining

for the individual any nervous structure and any brain, the mental

states, or psychical side of the physical impressions, must cease; or,

in other words, that the only existing ego has come to an end.

On the other hand, I have seen an ingenious hypothesis which it is well

to refer to, because it illustrates the efforts that are often made

to reconcile the doctrines of evolution with a belief in immortality.

This hypothesis by no means ignores the possibility of a spiritual

existence, or the spiritual as distinguished from the material world.

But it assumes that man was produced under the operation of physical

laws; and that after he had become a completed product--the consummate

and finished end of the whole process of evolution--he passed under the

dominion and operation of other and different laws, and is saved from

annihilation by the intervention of a change from the physical to the

spiritual laws of his Creator. Put into a condensed form, this theory

has been thus stated: Having spent countless æons in forming man, by

the slow process of animal evolution, God will not suffer him to fall

back into elemental flames, and be consumed by the further operation of

physical laws, but will transfer him into the dominion of the spiritual

laws that are held in reserve for his salvation.

One of the first questions to be asked, in reference to this

hypothesis, is, Who or what is it that God is supposed to have spent

countless æons in creating by the slow process of animal evolution? If

we contemplate a single specimen of the human race, we find a bodily

organism, endowed with life like that of other animals, and acted upon

by physical laws throughout the whole period of its existence. We

also find present in the same individual a mental existence, which is

certified to us by evidence entirely different from that by which we

obtain a knowledge of the physical organism. As the methods employed

by the Creator in the production of the physical organism, whatever

we may suppose them to have been, were physical laws operating upon

matter, so the methods employed by him in the production of a spiritual

existence must have operated in a domain that was wholly aside from

the physical world. Each of these distinct realms is equally under the

government of an Omnipotent Being; and while we may suppose that in the

one he employed a very slow process, such as the evolution of animal

organisms out of one another is imagined to have been, there is no

conceivable reason why he should not, in the other and very different

realm, have resorted to the direct creation of a spiritual existence,

which can not, in the nature of things, have required to be produced by

the action of physical laws. When, at the birth of each individual of

the human race, the two existences become united, when, in consequence

of the operation of that sexual union of the parents which has been

ordained for the production of a new individual, the physical and the

spiritual existence become incorporated in the one being, the fact that

they remain for a certain time mutually dependent and mutually useful,

co-operating in the purposes of their temporary connection, does not

change their essential nature. The one may be destructible because the

operation of physical laws may dissolve the ligaments that hold it

together; the other may be indestructible, because the operation of

spiritual laws will hold together the spiritual organism that is in its

nature independent of the laws of matter.

I can therefore see no necessary connection between the methods

employed by the Almighty in the production of an animal and the methods

employed by him in the production of a soul. That in the birth of

the individual the two come into existence simultaneously, and are

temporarily united in one and the same being, only proves that the two

existences are contemporaneous in their joint inception. It does not

prove that they are of the same nature, or the same substance, or that

the physical organism is the only ego, or that the psychical existence

is nothing but certain states of the material structure, to whose

aggregate manifestations certain philosophers give the name of mind,

while denying to them personal individuality and the consciousness of a

distinct being.

And now, in bringing this discussion to a close, I will only add that

the great want of this age is the prosecution of inquiry into the

nature of the human mind as an organic structure, regarded as such.

It seems to me that the whole mission of Science is now perverted by

a wrong aim, which is to find out the external to the neglect of the

internal--to make all exploration terminate in the laws of the physical

universe, and go aside from the examination of the spiritual world.

It is no reproach to those who essay the latter inquiry that they

are scoffed at as "the metaphysicians." It matters not what they are

called, so long as they pursue the right path. It is now in regard to

the pursuit of science as it was formerly in regard to the writing of

history. That philosophical French historian, M. Taine, has luminously

marked the change which has come over the methods and objects of

historical studies in the following passage:

"When you consider with your eyes the visible man, what do you look

for? The man invisible. The words which salute your ears, the gestures,

the motions of his head, the clothes he wears, visible acts and deeds

of every kind, are expressions merely; somewhat is revealed beneath

them, and that is a soul--an inner man is concealed beneath the outer

man; the second does not reveal the first; ... all the externals are

but avenues converging toward a center; you enter them simply to reach

that center, and that center is the genuine man--I mean that mass of

faculties and feelings which are the inner man. We have reached a new

world, which is infinite, because every action which we see involves

an infinite association of reasonings, emotions, sensations new and

old, which have served to bring it to light, and which, like great

rocks deep-seated in the ground, find in it their end and their level.

This under-world is a new subject-matter proper to the historian....

This precise and proved interpretation of past sensations has given

to history, in our days, a second birth; hardly anything of the sort

was known to the preceding century. They thought men of every race and

country were all but identical--the Greek, the barbarian, the Hindoo,

the man of the Renaissance, and the man of the eighteenth century--as

if they had all been turned out of a common mold, and all in conformity

to a certain abstract conception which served for the whole human

race. They knew man, but not men; they had not penetrated to the soul;

they had not seen the infinite diversity and complexity of souls; they

did not know that the moral constitution of a people or an age is as

particular and distinct as the physical structure of a family of plants

or an order of animals."[153]

In the same way psychology needs a new birth, like the new birth of

history. If we would know the mind, we must reach the conviction that

there is a mind: and this conviction can be reached only by penetrating

through all the externals, through the physical organism, through the

diversities of race, through the environment of matter, until we have

found the soul. If history, like zoölogy, has found its anatomy, mental

science must, in like manner, be prosecuted as an anatomical study. So

long as we allow the anatomy of zoölogy to be the predominant and only

explanation, the beginning and the end of the mental manifestations,

so long we shall fail to comprehend the nature of man, and to see the

reason for his immortality.

FOOTNOTES:

[139] Corinthians, revised version.

[140] In the "authorized" version the passage is rendered thus: "There

is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body." Sophereus quotes

the late revised version. The meaning is the same. St. Paul assumes

the existence of a natural body, and then asserts that there is

likewise a spiritual body.

[141] I have met, by the kindness of the author, with a little

treatise which contains a great deal of sound mental philosophy, with

which in the main I concur, and to which I am indebted for some very

valuable suggestions. This modest little book is entitled "The Heart

of Man: An Attempt in Mental Anatomy." The author is Mr. P. P. Bishop,

a resident of San Mateo, in Florida. It was printed at Chicago, by

Shepard & Johnson, for the author, in 1883. I know not if it is on

sale. I suppose that Mr. Bishop was led to send me his interesting

treatise by the publication, in the "Manhattan Magazine," at New York,

in 1884, of the substance of the first three chapters of the present

work. I take this opportunity of expressing my high appreciation

of his treatise, and of explaining the meaning of its title. As I

understand him, he uses the term "Heart of Man" as synonymous with

structure of the mind, and not as referring to what is figuratively

called "the human heart." He has explained "Mental Anatomy" as

follows: "The method of investigation, which I have employed in making

my way to the conclusions set forth in this discussion, I call 'The

Anatomical Method,' because it is based on the conception of mind as

an organized being, and aims to discover the structure of that being."

... "At the risk," he adds, "of appearing egotistical, I think it best

to relate an experience." He did not need to deprecate the appearance

of egotism, for his method of investigation, based on his own mental

experience, was the very best that he could have followed. It were to

be wished that we could have more of this kind of self-analysis by

persons competent to make it, and less of theoretical reasoning from

premises more or less arbitrarily assumed.

I have endeavored to make my imaginary philosopher, Sophereus, avoid

the method of reasoning which I thus condemn, and to keep him within

the bounds of experience.

[142] "Extemporaneous," Latin, _ex_, from; and _tempus_, time, at the

same time, or from the same time. Extemporaneous discourse is when the

thought and the expression in which it is clothed occur at the time

it is uttered, or without premeditation of both thought and language.

"Improvisation" means the same thing, but it is specially applied

to the act of making poetry or performing music extemporaneously,

that is, without prevision of what one is to say or sing. Rapid

conversation is of the same nature. So is an instantaneous and

unpremeditated answer to a question.

[143] Webster's Dictionary--"Matter."

[144] "And it shall be as when a hungry man dreameth, and behold, he

eateth: but he awaketh, and his soul is empty; or as when a thirsty

man dreameth, and behold, he drinketh: but he awaketh, and behold, he

is faint, and his soul hath appetite."--ISAIAH.

[145] Scott's "Antiquary," note v.

[146] If it is objected that I have allowed Sophereus to overstate

the power of the mind to deal better with difficulties after "a good

night's sleep," as we say, than it had dealt with them before, I will

cite the testimony of one of the most prolific of writers and one

of the most self-observing of men, Sir Walter Scott, whose greatest

success was achieved in the field of poetical and prose fiction. This

is a department in which inventive genius is the main reliance, and

is put to its greatest tasks. In that part of Scott's "Diary" which

covers the year 1826--the period when he was writing "Woodstock"--he

says:

"The half-hour between waking and rising has all my life proved

propitious to any task which was exercising my invention. When I got

over any knotty difficulty in a story, or have had in former times

to fill up a passage in a poem, it was always when I first opened my

eyes that the desired ideas thronged upon me. This is so much the

case that I am in the habit of relying upon it and saying to myself

when I am at a loss, 'Never mind, we shall have it at seven o'clock

to-morrow morning.' If I have forgot a circumstance, a name, or a copy

of verses, it is the same thing.... This morning I had some new ideas

respecting 'Woodstock' which will make the story better." (Lockhart's

"Life of Scott," vol. viii, chap. lxviii.)

This, it is true, was the experience of a man of extraordinary genius,

whose facility of invention was as marvelous as the ease and rapidity

with which he wrote. But his experience was a very common one. It has

been shared by persons of much more humble faculties. I am sure that

persons in my own profession, who have been engaged in pursuits very

different from those of the poet or the novelist, will, from their

own experience, confirm what is assumed by Sophereus as a well-known

mental phenomenon. I could describe in detail many instances in which

I have gone through with the same fruition of new ideas, resulting

from the acquisitions obtained during sleep, or following from the

benefits of sleep. For example, when having to do with a complex state

of facts, needing orderly arrangement and analysis, it has repeatedly

happened to me to rise in the morning after a night of undisturbed

sleep, with the whole of an entangled skein unraveled, whereas before

retiring to rest the mass of facts lay in some confusion in the mind.

In like manner the mind can often deal with a legal question of a

new and difficult character. The rule that ought to be applied to a

particular case has to be extracted from many precedents, and perhaps

none of them exactly cover the case in hand. On such occasions, if

one refrains from pushing the study of his subject while awake to the

severest analysis, and postpones the effort until the next morning,

the experience of Sir Walter is very likely to be repeated. "It was

always," he says, "when I first opened my eyes that the desired ideas

thronged upon me." I am persuaded, therefore, that although in the

study of any subject omission to master all its elements and details,

when alone one can accumulate them, is not to be recommended, there is

undoubtedly much to be gained by relieving the mind from the continued

effort, and allowing some hours of sleep to intervene, during which

the mind can act independently of all the bodily organs.

The question is, then, as above suggested, whether there come to us

during sleep acquisitions of new ideas with or without a simultaneous

consciousness that we are thinking of the subject, or whether the

new ideas follow from the benefits of sleep as a state of absolute

rest and inactivity of the brain, and of the intellectual faculties,

so that when we awake both the brain and the mental powers are in

greater vigor. The expression used by Scott in describing his own

experience is that as soon as he awoke the desired ideas _thronged_

upon him. This might happen upon the hypothesis that the desired ideas

came because the brain and the mental powers, refreshed by sleep,

were in greater vigor. But I incline to believe that his meaning was

the reverse of this. At all events, it seems to me that the true

explanation of the phenomenon is that during sound and undisturbed

sleep of the body, including the brain, we do unconsciously think of

the subject on which our waking thoughts had been previously employed;

that in these states there are acquisitions of new ideas which we

bring with us out of the state in which they were acquired, or, as Sir

Walter expressed it, which _throng_ upon us as soon as we open our

eyes. While, therefore, it may be said that this hypothesis assumes

the existence of the mind as a spiritual or intellectual entity

capable of action as a thinking being without any action of the bodily

organs, the question is, on the other hand, whether the phenomena

here considered have not a very strong tendency to prove that the

mind is such a substantive and independent existence. When it is

remembered how common is the experience here referred to, how various

the phenomena are, how they are manifested on all kinds of subjects,

in regard to lines of conduct, and to everything about which we are

perplexed, and when we add these peculiar phenomena to the other

evidence which tends to establish the same belief in the existence

of the mind as something entirely apart from all its physical

environment, it seems to me that the argument becomes very strong,

and that I have not made my imaginary philosopher press it beyond its

legitimate bounds.

[147] Do him every honor.

[148] By some commentators, this hint, given with female subtilty, is

explained to mean that their copy-hold, or lease, by which Banquo and

his son hold their lives, is not eternal. The more probable meaning is

that, if they are cut off, nature will produce no more copies of their

race. But in either meaning the hint that she gave was the same, and

it included both Banquo and his son.

[149] When the unknowable power ceases to pulsate through our physical

organism, this "mental state" ceases--nothing survives--continuity is

ended.

[150] "Principles of Psychology," i, § 208, pp. 465-471.

[151] I have allowed Sophereus to follow in the main the writer to

whom I have already referred in the note on page 471--Mr. Bishop, of

Florida.

[152] Bishop.

[153] Introduction to Taine's "History of English Literature,"

translated by H. Van Laun. New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1885.

GLOSSARY

OF

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL TERMS USED IN THIS WORK.

[The following definitions marked with an asterisk are borrowed from

the glossary annexed to Darwin's "Origin of Species." The remainder of

the definitions are taken from Webster's Dictionary.]

=*Aberrant.= Forms or groups of animals or plants which deviate in

important characters from their nearest allies, so as not to be easily

included in the same group with them, are said to be aberrant.

=*Abnormal.= Contrary to the general rule.

=*Aborted.= An organ is said to be aborted when its development has

been arrested at a very early stage.

=Aërate= (Zoöl.). To subject to the influence of the air by the

natural organs of respiration; to arterialize; especially used of

animals not having lungs.

=Agnostic= (_a._). Professing ignorance; involving no dogmatic

assertion; leaving a question or problem still in doubt; pertaining to

or involving agnosticism.

=Agnostic= (_n._). One who professes ignorance, or refrains from

dogmatic assertion; one who supports agnosticism, neither affirming

nor denying the existence of a personal Deity.

=Agnosticism.= That doctrine which, professing ignorance, neither

asserts nor denies; specifically, in theology, the doctrine that the

existence of a personal Deity can be neither asserted nor denied,

neither proved nor disproved, because of the necessary limits of the

human mind (as sometimes charged upon _Hamilton_ and _Mansel_), or

because of the insufficiency of the evidence furnished by psychical

and physical data, to warrant a positive conclusion (as taught by the

school of _Herbert Spencer_); opposed alike to dogmatic skepticism and

to dogmatic theism.

=Allantois=, =Allantoid=. A thin membrane, situated between the

chorion and amnion, and forming one of the membranes which invest the

fœtus.

=*Analogy.= That resemblance of structures which depends upon

similarity of function, as in the wings of insects and birds. Such

structures are said to be _analogous_, and to be _analogues_ of each

other.

=Anthropomorphism.= The representation of the Deity under a human

form, or with human attributes.

=*Articulata.= A great division of the animal kingdom, characterized

generally by having the surface of the body divided into rings, called

segments, a greater or less number of which are furnished with jointed

legs (such as insects, crustaceans, and centipeds).

=Articulation= (Anat.). The joining or juncture of the bones of a

skeleton.

=Ascidians.= A class of acephalous mollusks, having often a leathery

exterior.

=Biology.= The science of life; that part of physiology which treats

of life in general, or of the different forces of life.

=Brain.= The upper part of the head. 1. (Anat.) The whitish, soft mass

which constitutes the anterior or cephalic extremity of the nervous

system in man and other vertebrates, occupying the upper cavity of

the skull; and (_b_) the anterior or cephalic ganglion in insects and

other invertebrates.

2. The organ or seat of intellect; hence, the understanding.

3. The affections; fancy; imagination.

=*Branchiæ.= Gills, or organs for respiration in water.

=*Branchial.= Pertaining to gills or branchiæ.

=*Canidæ.= The dog family, including the dog, wolf, fox, jackal, etc.

=Cell.= A minute, inclosed space or sac, filled with fluid, making

up the cellular tissue of plants, and of many parts of animals, and

originating the parts by their growth and reproduction; the constituent

element of all plants and animals (though not universal for all parts

of such structure), much as a crystalline molecule is the element of a

crystal. In the simplest plants and animals (as the _infusoria_), one

single cell constitutes the complete individual, such species being

called _unicellular_ plants or animals.

=Cephalopod= (Fr. _céphalopode_, from Gr., head and foot). (Zoöl.) An

animal of the sub-kingdom _Mollusca_, characterized by a distinct head,

surrounded by a circle of long arms or tentacles, which they use for

crawling and for seizing objects. See MOLLUSK.

=*Cetacea.= An order of Mammalia, including the whales, dolphins, etc.,

having the form of the body fish-like, the skin naked, and only the

fore-limbs developed.

=Chaos.= 1. An empty, infinite space; a yawning chasm.

2. The rude, confused state, or unorganized condition, of matter

before the creation of the universe.

=Consciousness.= 1. The knowledge of sensations and mental operations,

or of what passes in one's own mind; the act of the mind which makes

known an internal object.

2. Immediate knowledge of any object whatever.

=*Crustaceans.= A class of articulated animals having the skin of the

body generally more or less hardened by the deposition of calcareous

matter, breathing by means of gills. (_Examples_, crab, lobster,

shrimp, etc.)

=Dynamically.= In accordance with the principles of dynamics or moving

forces.

=*Embryo.= The young animal undergoing development within the egg or

womb.

=*Embryology.= The study of the development of the embryo.

=Ethics.= The science of human duty; the body of rules of duty drawn

from this science; a particular system of principles and rules

concerning duty, whether true or false; rules of practice in respect to

a single class of human actions; as political or social ethics.

=*Fauna.= The totality of the animals naturally inhabiting a certain

country or region, or which have lived during a given geological period.

=Fetichism=, =Feticism=. One of the lowest and grossest forms of

superstition, consisting in the worship of some material object, as a

stone, a tree, or an animal, often casually selected; practiced among

tribes of lowest mental endowment, as certain races of negroes.

=*Flora.= The totality of the plants growing naturally in a country or

during a given geological period.

=*Fœtal.= Of or belonging to the fœtus, or embryo in course of

development.

=Fœtus=, same as =Fetus=. The young of viviparous animals in the womb,

and of oviparous animals in the egg, after it is perfectly formed,

before which time it is called _embryo_.

=*Ganoid Fishes.= Fishes covered with peculiar enameled bony scales.

Most of them are extinct.

=Genus= (Science). An assemblage of species possessing certain

characters in common, by which they are distinguished from all others.

It is subordinate to _tribe_ and _sub-tribe_; hence, a single species

having distinctive characters that seem of more than specific value may

constitute a genus.

=*Germinal Vesicle.= A minute vesicle in the eggs of animals, from

which the development of the embryo proceeds.

=Gravitation= (Physics). That species of attraction or force by

which all bodies or particles of matter in the universe tend toward

each other; called also _attraction of gravitation_, _universal

gravitation_, and _universal gravity_.

=Gravity= (Physics). The tendency of a mass of matter toward a center

of attraction; especially the tendency of a body toward the center of

the earth, terrestrial gravitation.

=Gyrus=, pl. =Gyri= (Anat.). A convolution of the brain.

=*Habitat.= The locality in which a plant or animal naturally lives.

=Heredity.= The transmission of the physical and psychical qualities of

parents to their offspring; the biological law by which living beings

tend to repeat themselves in their descendants.

=Homologous.= Having the same relative proportion, position, value, or

structure; especially--(_a_) (Geom.) Corresponding in relative position

and proportion. (_b_) (Alg.) Having the same relative proportion or

value, as the two antecedents or the two consequents of a proportion.

(_c_) (Chem.) Being of the same chemical type or series; differing

by a multiple or arithmetical ratio in certain constituents, while

the physical qualities are wholly analogous, with small relative

differences, as if corresponding to a series of parallels; as, the

species in the group of alcohols are said to be _homologous_. (_d_)

(Zoöl.) Being of the same typical structure; having like relations to

a fundamental type of structure; as, those bones in the hand of man

and the fore-foot of a horse are _homologous_ that correspond in their

structural relations--that is, in their relations to the type-structure

of the fore-limb in vertebrates.

=Homology.= That relation between parts which results from their

development from corresponding embryonic parts, either in different

animals, as in the case of the arm of a man, the fore-leg of a

quadruped, and the wing of a bird; or in the same individual, as in the

case of the fore and hind legs in quadrupeds, and the segments or rings

and their appendages of which the body of a worm, a centiped, etc., is

composed. The latter is called _serial homology_. The parts which stand

in such a relation to each other are said to be _homologous_, and one

such part or organ is called the _homologue_ of the other. In different

plants the parts of the flower are homologous, and in general these

parts are regarded as homologous with leaves.

=Hypothesis.= 1. A supposition; a proposition or principle which

is supposed or taken for granted, in order to draw a conclusion or

inference for proof of the point in question; something not proved, but

assumed for the purpose of argument.

2. A system or theory imagined or assumed to account for known facts

or phenomena.

=Imago.= The perfect (generally winged) reproductive state of an insect.

=Implacenta= (_n._). A mammal having no placenta. (_a._) Without a

placenta, as certain marsupial animals.

=Insectivorous.= Feeding on insects.

=Instinct= (_n._). Inward impulse; unconscious, involuntary, or

unreasoning prompting to action; a disposition to any mode of action,

whether bodily or spiritual, without a distinct apprehension of the end

or object which Nature has designed should be accomplished thereby;

specifically, the natural, unreasoning impulse in an animal, by which

it is guided to the performance of any action, without thought of

improvement in the method.

=Invertebrata=, or =Invertebrate Animals=. Those animals which do not

possess a backbone or spinal column.

=Isomeric= (from Gr., equal and part). (Chem.) Having the quality of

isomerism; as _isomeric_ compounds.

=Isomerism= (Chem.). An identity of elements and of atomic proportions

with a difference in the amount combined in the compound molecule, and

of its essential qualities; as in the case of the physically unlike

compounds of carbon and hydrogen, consisting one of one part of each,

another of two parts of each, and a third of four of each.

=Kangaroo.= A ruminating marsupial animal of the genus _Macropus_,

found in Australia and the neighboring islands.

=Larva= (plural =Larvæ=). The first condition of an insect at its

issuing from the egg, when it is usually in the form of a grub,

caterpillar, or maggot.

=Lemuridæ.= A group of four-handed animals, distinct from the monkeys,

and approaching the insectivorous quadrupeds in some of their

characters and habits. Its members have the nostrils curved or twisted,

and a claw instead of a nail upon the first finger of the hind hands.

=Lepidosiren.= An eel-shaped animal covered with rounded scales, having

four rod-like members, and breathing water like a fish. It is found in

ponds and rivers of intertropical Africa and South America. By some it

is regarded as a fish, and by others as a batrachian.

=Mammal.= Belonging to the breast; from _mamma_, the breast or pap. An

animal of the highest class of vertebrates, characterized by the female

suckling its young.

=Mammalia.= The highest class of animals, including the ordinary hairy

quadrupeds, the whales, and man, and characterized by the production of

living young, which are nourished after birth by milk from the teats

(_mammæ_, _mammary glands_) of the mother. A striking difference in

embryonic development has led to the division of this class into two

great groups: in one of these, when the embryo has attained a certain

stage, a vascular connection, called the _placenta_, is formed between

the embryo and the mother; in the other this is wanting, and the

young are produced in a very incomplete state. The former, including

the greater part of the class, are called _placental mammals_; the

latter, or _aplacental mammals_, include the marsupials and monotremes

(_ornithorhynchus_).

=Marsupials.= An order of Mammalia in which the young are born in a

very incomplete state of development, and carried by the mother, while

sucking, in a ventral pouch (_marsupium_), such as the kangaroos,

opossums, etc. (see MAMMALIA).

=Molecule.= A mass; one of the invisible particles supposed to

constitute matter of any kind.

=Mollusk.= An invertebrate animal, having a soft, fleshy body (whence

the name), which is inarticulate, and not radiate internally.

=Monkey.= See SIMIA.

=Monogamy.= A marriage to one wife only, or the state of such as are

restricted to a single wife, or may not marry again after the death of

a first wife.

=Monotheism.= The doctrine or belief that there is but one God.

=Morphology.= The law of form or structure independent of function.

=Nascent.= Commencing development.

=Nexus.= Connection; tie.

=Nictitating Membrane.= A semi-transparent membrane, which can be drawn

across the eye in birds and reptiles, either to moderate the effects of

a strong light or to sweep particles of dust, etc., from the surface of

the eye.

=Noumenon= (Metaph.). The of itself unknown and unknowable rational

object, or _thing in itself_, which is distinguished from the

_phenomenon_ in which it occurs to apprehension, and by which it is

interpreted and understood; so used in the philosophy of Kant and his

followers.

=Opossum.= An animal of several species of marsupial quadrupeds of the

genus _Didelphys_. The common species of the United States is the _D.

Virginiana_. Another species, common in Texas and California, is _D.

Californica_, and other species are found in South America.

=Organism.= An organized being, whether plant or animal.

=Ovule.= An egg. (Bot.) The rudimentary state of a seed. It consists

essentially of a nucleus developed directly from the placenta.

=Parasite.= An animal or plant living upon or in, and at the expense

of, another organism.

=Pelvis.= The bony arch to which the hind-limbs of vertebrate animals

are articulated.

=Placentalia=, =Placentata=, or =Placental Mammals=. See MAMMALIA.

=Protozoa.= The lowest great division of the Animal Kingdom. These

animals are composed of a gelatinous material, and show scarcely any

trace of distinct organs. The infusoria, foraminifera, and sponges,

with some other forms, belong to this division.

=Phenomenon.= 1. An appearance; anything visible; whatever is

presented to the eye; whatever, in matter or spirit, is apparent

to, or is apprehended by, observation, as distinguished from its

ground, substance, or unknown constitution; as _phenomena_ of heat or

electricity; phenomena of imagination or memory.

2. Sometimes a remarkable or unusual appearance whose cause is not

immediately obvious.

=Plexus.= Any net-work of vessels, nerves, or fibers.

=Polygamy.= A plurality of wives or husbands at the same time, or the

having of such plurality; usually the condition of a man having more

than one wife.

=Polytheism.= The doctrine of a plurality of gods or invisible beings

superior to man, and having an agency in the government of the world.

=Proteine= (_n._ Lat., _proteinum_, from Gr., _first_--to be the

first--the first place, chief rank, because it occupies the first

place in relation to the albuminous principles). (Chem.) A substance

claimed by Mulder to be obtained as a distinct substance from albumen,

fibrine, or caseine, and considered by him to be the basis of animal

tissue and of some substances of vegetable origin.

The theory of proteine can not be maintained.--_Gregory._

The theory of Mulder is doubted and denied by many chemists, and also

the existence of _proteine_ as a distinct substance.

=Psychology.= A discourse or treatise on the human soul; the science of

the human soul; specifically, the systematic or scientific knowledge of

the powers and functions of the human soul, so far as they are known by

consciousness.

=Quadrumane.= An animal having four feet that correspond to the hands

of a man, as a monkey.

=Race.= 1. The descendants of a common ancestor; a family, tribe,

people, or nation, believed or presumed to belong to the same stock; a

lineage; a breed.

2. A root.

=Retina.= The delicate inner coat of the eye, formed by nervous

filaments spreading from the optic nerve, and serving for the

perception of the impressions produced by light.

=Rotifer= (_n._ Lat. _rotifer_, from Lat. _rota_, a wheel, and _ferro_,

to bear. Fr. _rotifère_). (Zoöl.) One of a group of microscopic

crustaceans, having no limbs, and moving by means of rows of cilia

about the head or the anterior extremity.

=Rudiment= (Nat. Hist.). An imperfect organ, or one which is never

fully formed.

=Sacral.= Belonging to the sacrum, or the bone composed usually of two

or more united vertebræ to which the sides of the pelvis in vertebrate

animals are attached.

=Sacrum.= The bone which forms the posterior part of the pelvis. It is

triangular in form.

=Secularize.= To convert from spiritual to secular or common use; as to

secularize a church, or church property.

=Segments.= The transverse rings of which the body of an articulate

animal or annelid is composed.

=Simia= (plural =Simiadæ=) (Lat., an ape, from _simus_, flat-nosed,

snub-nosed). (Zoöl.) A Linnæan genus of animals, including the ape,

monkey, and the like; a general name of the various tribes of monkeys.

=Species= (Nat. Hist.). A permanent class of existing things or beings,

associated according to attributes or properties which are determined

by scientific observation.

=Spinal Cord.= The central portion of the nervous system in the

vertebrata, which descends from the brain through the arches of the

vertebræ, and gives off nearly all the nerves to the various organs of

the body.

=Statical.= To stand. 1. Pertaining to bodies at rest, or in

equilibrium.

2. Resting; acting by mere weight without motion; as _statical_

pressure.

=Sulcus.= A fissure of the brain, separating two convolutions, or

_gyri_.

=Teleology= (Fr., _téléologie_, from Gr., the end or issue, and

discourse). The science or doctrine of the final causes of things; the

philosophical consideration of final causes in general.

=Variety= (Nat. Hist., Bot., and Zoöl.). Any form or condition of

structure under a species which differs in its characteristics from

those typical to the species, as in color, shape, size, and the like,

and which is capable either of perpetuating itself for a period, or of

being perpetuated by artificial means; also, any of the various forms

under a species meeting the conditions mentioned. A form characterized

by an abnormity of structure, or any difference from the type that is

not capable of being perpetuated through two or more generations, is

not called a variety.

=Vascular.= Containing blood-vessels.

=Vertebrata=; or =Vertebrate Animals=. The highest division of the

animal kingdom, so called from the presence in most cases of a

back-bone composed of numerous joints or _vertebræ_, which constitutes

the center of the skeleton, and at the same time supports and protects

the central parts of the nervous system.

=Vesicle.= A bladder-like vessel; a membranous cavity; a cyst; a cell;

especially (_a_) (Bot.) a small bladder-like body in the substance of a

vegetable, or upon the surface of a leaf.--_Gray._ (_b_) (Med.) A small

orbicular elevation of the cuticle containing lymph, and succeeded by

a scurf or laminated scab; also, any small cavity or sac in the human

body; as the umbilical vesicle.

=Vortices= (_verto_, to turn). 1. A whirling or circular motion of any

fluid, usually of water, forming a kind of cavity in the center of

the circle, and in some instances drawing in water or absorbing other

things; a whirlpool.

2. A whirling of the air; a whirlwind.

3. (_Cartesian system._) A supposed collection of particles of very

subtile matter, endowed with a rapid rotary motion around an axis.

By means of these _vortices_ Descartes attempted to account for the

formation of the universe.

INDEX.

Advocacy, maxim of, 132.

Affections, structural system of, 532.

Agnosticism, as defined by Huxley, 274.

Allantois, the, office of, 236 _et seq._, 245.

Almagest. See PTOLEMAIC SYSTEM.

Amphibians in the Darwinian pedigree of man, 71, 96, 98.

Amphioxus. See LANCELET.

Amputation before or after birth, 129, 130.

Anatomy, modern, great advance of, 40, 41.

Plato's knowledge of, 38.

Anatomy of the mind, 470.

Animals, origin of, according to Plato, 57 _et seq._

origin of, according to Darwin, 60 _et seq._

Anthropomorphic attributes not necessary to the conception of God, 293

_et seq._

Anthropomorphism, meaning, 293.

Antichthon, or counter-earth, invented by the Pythagoreans, 36.

Apes, varieties of, 71.

anthropomorphous, 100.

Apparitions, facts communicated by, 486-488.

Aquatic worm, 94.

Areas, effect of change of, 248.

Articulata, likeness of structure in, 205 _et seq._

Ascidians, larvæ of, 94.

Assassination, once employed with impunity, 165.

Associative faculty, what it is, 528.

Athenian, the, compared with a savage, 73, 74.

Authority, as affecting belief, 3.

ecclesiastic and scientific, 22, 23.

in science, 21.

Automatic machines, analysis of, 505.

Baboons, how different from monkeys, 71, _note_.

Belief, foundations of, 1-3.

antiquity of, how to be regarded, 132 _et seq._

grounds of, 274-277.

Birds, origin of, according to Plato, 57.

sexual selection among, 67, _note_.

Bishop, P. P., "The Heart of Man," 471, _note_.

Blood, similarity in the composition of, 122.

great change in, 122.

Body, natural and spiritual, 468.

Brain of men and apes compared, 191.

human, 518.

office of, 196.

Breaks in the organic chain, 103-106.

Buffon, accepted Mosaic account of creation, 368, 369.

Causation, ultimate, 386.

Cell, hypothesis of the single, 371, _note_.

Chaos, Plato's conception of, 45.

Classification, how it supports evolution, 200, 203.

Common stock, hypothesis of descent from, 209.

Composition, what occurs in, 473, 474.

Comte, Auguste, one of his suggestions, 387, 388.

Conduct, Spencer's view of, 427 _et seq._

Consciousness, what it is, 470, 471, 503.

Constitutions, political, supposed growth of, 168.

Conversations invented during sleep, 480, 481.

Conversion of organs, 67.

Copernicus, system of, 32.

Creation, special, contrasted with evolution, 1 _et seq._

absolute, unknown to the Greeks, 45.

influence of the belief in, 164, 165.

man's power of, 144.

Mosaic account of, 23.

poetical, 140, 141.

what it is, 136 _et seq._, 139, 140, 223.

Creator, the, postulate of, 115.

honoring or dishonoring the, not the question, 160 _et seq._

method of, 207.

Creator, methods of, in the two realms of spirit and matter, 537.

power of, boundless, 224, 232, 535.

Crosses not permissible between distinct species, 372.

Darwin, Charles, his theory of evolution, 7.

bearing of his theory on man's immortality, 12, 13.

candor and accuracy of, 101.

difference of, from Spencer, 43, 225.

his pedigree of man, 70-72, 87.

his view of human dignity, 10.

on primeval man, 375.

on the belief in God, 60, 61.

rejects an aboriginal pair, 406.

tabulated form of his pedigree of man, 93.

Dekad, the perfect number of the Pythagoreans, 35.

Delirium, explanation of, 499, 500.

Demiurgus, the, constructor of Plato's Kosmos, 46.

Descartes, his theory of vortices, 33.

Descent, must be unbroken, 211.

Design, when hypothesis of, necessary, 214.

Desires, mental system of, 532.

Domestic animals, breeding of, 89.

Distribution in space, how it affects evolution, 203, 247.

in time, 251.

Dreams, phenomena of, 479-490.

Earth. See SOLAR SYSTEM.

Economy of Nature, meaning of, 116, 126.

Elements, the four, in the Platonic Kosmos, 45, 46.

Eliphaz and Zophar. See JOB.

Embryonic development, resemblances in, 111, 120.

Embryology, cautions respecting, 241.

how it supports evolution, 229.

Emotions, system of, 530-532.

Energy. See POWER, CAUSATION.

Evidence, rules of circumstantial, 14-17.

applicable to scientific investigation, 17, 18.

missing links in chain of, 18-20.

process of, 67, 68.

Evil, rational explanation of, 148 _et seq._

Evolution, assumptions in the theory of, 18-20.

general reasons for, 102.

law of, limited, 210.

of man, 373.

principle of, 377.

process reversed, 252-256.

Experts, true office of, 21, 22.

Extemporaneous speaking, what is, 474.

Eye, the, formation of, 68-70, 83, 84.

Faunas of different areas, 247.

Fetichism. See SPENCER.

Fishes, origin of, according to Plato, 58.

most lowly organized, 95.

shell, the lowest form of, 58.

Fœtus, growth of the, 234 _et seq._

Galen, mistakes of, in anatomy, 39, 40.

how he differed from Plato, 39.

Galileo, confirms and rectifies Kepler's laws, 32.

Papal condemnation of, 20, 21, _note_.

Ganoids, description of, 96.

Genealogical trees of no value in zoölogy, 202, _note_.

General laws and special creations, 127, 128.

Germ, ante-fœtal, how formed, 234.

Gladiatorial shows, part of Roman civilization, 164.

God, existence of, how proved, 11, 12.

a necessary postulate, 402.

a personal, denied by Spencer, 433.

consciousness of, how to be lost, according to Spencer, 285 _et seq._

existence and attributes of, how deduced, 300 _et seq._

his dealing with Abraham, 425.

probable methods of, 63, 64, 82-85, 102.

unlike Plato's Demiurgus, 85.

Gods, the, origin of, among the Greeks, 50.

genesis of, according to Plato, 46, 48-50, _note_.

office of, in the formation of Plato's Kosmos, 49.

Gravitation, law of, how deduced, 20.

Greek philosophy, account of, 24 _et seq._

encounters monotheism at Alexandria, 287.

how hampered by the mythology, 138.

schools of, before Plato, 28.

Grote, his Plato cited and followed, 27-40, 287, 288, 290.

Harvey discovers the circulation of the blood, 40.

Heat, origin of, 386, 387.

Hebrews receive divine commands, 418.

Heredity, law of, limited, 225.

Homologous organs, meaning of, 97.

See SWIM-BLADDER AND LUNG.

meaning of, 215, _note_.

Human life, peculiar sacredness of, 164-166.

Huxley, Professor, on the brain of man and apes, 192.

Huxley, Professor, quoted, 121.

Ideal persons, are creations, 140, 141.

Ideal plan, objection to, 114, 118.

Ideas in Plato's system, coeval with primordial matter, 45, 46.

how acquired, 506-508.

Idiocy, absolute, probably does not exist, 526.

what it is, 526-528.

Idiot. See IDIOCY.

Immortality, what is proof of, 41, 540.

belief in, 61, 62.

fanciful explanation of, 543.

Improvisation, what is, 474.

Infinite goodness consistent with the existence of suffering, 156.

Instinct, genesis of, according to Plato, 60.

genesis of, according to Darwin, _ib._

Intellectual faculties, system of, 525.

Interbreeding. See SPECIES.

Introspective faculty, power of the, 529.

Intuitive faculty, office of, 525, 526.

Invention in mechanics, 475.

Invention is creation, 142.

Job and his friends, 25 _et seq._

Kangaroos, structure of, 98.

Kepler, his laws of the planetary motions, 32.

Knowledge not limited to scientific demonstration, 392.

of ourselves, 520, 521.

Kosmos, the. See PLATO.

Lancelet, visual organ of the, 68.

Languages, origin of, 168, 397, 398.

Lemuridæ in the Darwinian pedigree of man, 71.

characteristics of, 99.

Logic, abuse of, 136 _et seq._

right use of, 220.

use and misuse of its forms, 145.

Lung in vertebrates, supposed homologue with a swim-bladder, 67.

conversion of, from swim-bladder, 97.

Macaulay, Lord, his depreciation of natural theology, 24 _et seq._

Macbeth, Lady, her sleep-walking analyzed, 491-499.

Man, dignity of, how to be treated, 9, 10.

bodily structure of, 109.

common ancestor of, and the apes, 71, 100.

constructive faculty of, 346.

immortality of, 12, 13.

liability to certain diseases, 110.

moral accountability of, 9, 10.

origin of, 348.

pedigree of, according to Darwin, 70-72.

rank of, in scale of being, 101.

Marriage, scientific view of, 381.

Marsupials in the Darwinian pedigree of man, 71.

ancient, 98.

Matter, primordial, according to Plato, 45.

Matter and spirit contrasted, 477.

Medium, effect of change of, 248, 249.

Mind, origin of, 8, 9.

a created being, 407 _et seq._

a spiritual creation, 401-404.

contrasted theories of, 533 _et seq._

evolution origin of the, 538.

evolution theory of origin of, 394 _et seq._

is an organism, 476.

of animals below man, 80, 81.

origin and nature of, 467-546.

origin of, according to Darwin, 78.

origin of, according to Plato, 79, 80.

structure of, 502.

substance of, 509.

systems of, 523 _et seq._

the human, placed under certain laws, 389, 390.

Miracles, meaning of, 129.

Miraculous interposition not necessary, 163.

Modern civilization, what it owes to belief in special creation,

164-166.

Monkeys, two great stems of, 71.

Catarrhine, or Old-World, 100.

Monotheism, its influence on philosophy, 138.

origin of, 342.

Monotremata, division of the mammalian series, 98.

Moral injunctions, sacred origin of, 418.

Moral injunctions, Spencer's denial of, 427 _et seq._, 433.

Moral law, capacity of human beings to receive, 420.

scientific view of the, 420 _et seq._

Moral purposes in the phenomena of nature, 387, 388.

Moral sense, origin of, 86.

Morphology, how it supports evolution, 202.

Mosaic account of creation, rationality of, 366 _et seq._

Murder, punishment of, moral foundation for, 166.

"Music of the spheres," origin of the phrase, 37.

Nascent organs, meaning of, 111, 112.

"Natural," meaning of, 214.

Natural theology, progress of, from Thales to Plato and Aristotle, 28,

29.

importance of, 43.

Nervous organization, Spencer's view of, 409 _et seq._

Newton, Sir Isaac, discovers the law of universal gravitation, 33.

deduces a personal God from nature, 331, _note_.

his General Scholium, 332.

Noumenon, an invented word, 269.

Number. See DEKAD, and PYTHAGORAS.

Opossums, structure of, 98.

Orthodoxy, Plato's idea of, as suggested in his "Republic," 296, 297.

Oviparous animals, 98.

Pairs, of animals, opposite views of, 405.

Pairs, assumed existence of, 537.

Parasites, how to be viewed, 151 _et seq._

Pattern of structure, argument concerning, 204.

Pedigree, rule for tracing, 185-187.

Pedigree of man, Darwinian, 70 _et seq._

Phenomenon and noumenon, 268.

Philolaus as quoted by Grote, 35.

Philosophy, modern and ancient compared, 24 _et seq._

Physicians in Plato's time, 40.

Placental mammals, 99.

Plato, period of, 28, _note_.

as given in "Timæus," 298.

his Demiurgus, 287, 288.

his genealogy of the gods, 298, _note_.

his Kosmos and Darwin's hypothesis compared, 44-86.

his origin of religious beliefs as given in "Republic," 296.

his triplicity of souls, 39.

his view of rudiments, 74, 75.

originality of, 289, 290.

Polytheism, origin of, 342.

Power, distinct from substance, 226, 233, _note_; 339 _et seq._

an attribute of mind, 386.

of nature, limited, 343-345.

Primitive beliefs, not necessarily wrong, 132 _et seq._

"Principle" of construction, 106, 107.

Probability, force of, in reasoning, 7.

Psychology, needs a new birth, 546.

Ptolemaic system, description of, 31.

Pyramids, why referable to mind, 390, 391.

Pythagoras, school of, 34 _et seq._

Quadrumana, in the Darwinian pedigree of man, 71.

and other mammals, 99.

Races, what are, 372.

Raphael, created images, 143.

Religion, what is, 11, 12.

natural, 23.

when in conflict with science, 11-13, 399.

Religious consciousness, Spencer's origin of, 284.

Reproduction, two grand systems of, 107, 108.

Reproductive process, parallel in the, 110.

Reptiles, Plato's origin of, 58.

Resurrection, St. Paul's doctrine of the, 468.

Revelation, how treated in this work, 23.

purpose of, 540.

Roman civilization, lacked belief in creation, 164.

law, slavery under, 165.

Rudiments, Plato's view of, 74, 75.

instances of, 111-114, 124, 125.

Sacrum, analysis of the human, 215.

structure of the female, 220.

Savages, beliefs of, 60, 61.

Science, domain of, 391, 392.

present tendency of, 352.

tendencies of, 127.

values of, 291.

when in conflict with religion, meaning of, 11, 12.

wrong aims of, 545.

Scott, Sir Walter, his reliance on thoughts obtained during sleep,

490, _note_.

Secularization of morals discussed, 434 _et seq._

Segments. See ARTICULATA; VERTEBRATES.

Selection, natural, 65, 72, 89.

limitations to, 91.

office of, 72.

sexual, 66, 72, 89.

Senses, the corporeal, 503.

Sexes, origin of, in Plato's Kosmos, 55.

in Nature, 221, 354 _et seq._, 378.

Sexual love, in men and brutes, 379.

moral and social phenomena of, 382.

Sexual union, operation of, 234 _et seq._

Sexual unions, purpose of, 384, 385.

Shakespeare, created imaginary persons, 140, 141.

Simiadæ, general term for monkeys, 99.

Simonides, poetical theologies of, 24 _et seq._

Sixteenth century, intellectual habits in the, 21.

Sin, how to be viewed, 148, _note_.

Slavery, under the Roman law, 165.

Sleep, phenomena of, 479 _et seq._

better thoughts during, 489.

Society, phenomena of, 334 _et seq._

Solar system, how viewed by the Greeks, 31 _et seq._

origin of, 168, 172, 301.

Somnambulism, phenomena of, 491.

Soul, meaning of, 478.

Souls, of men, genesis of, in Plato's Kosmos, 51, 76, 77.

transmigration of, 78.

triplicity of, 51, 76, 77.

Space, illimitable, concepts of, 260 _et seq._

Species, finality of, 157 _et seq._

meaning of, 372 _et seq._

Spencer, Herbert, his theory of animal evolution, 7, 8.

answers to his objections, 145 _et seq._

attacks "the current creed," 434.

creation is something made out of nothing, 136.

creation incapable of being conceived, 136.

creation not supported by any proof, 135.

his agnosticism examined, 257 _et seq._

his argument from parasites, 151 _et seq._

his denial of the possibility of knowing mind, 508.

his doctrine of evolution, 131.

his ethical system, 427 _et seq._

his ghost-theory, 284 _et seq._

his origin of man, 348-351, 357.

his psychological system, 408 _et seq._

his psychology criticised, 470, 504.

his theory of mind, 510-516.

his theory of the moral sense, 418, 423.

his treatment of the divine attributes, 293.

his "unknown cause," 163, 166.

how his theory differs from Darwin's, 225.

on the evolution of mind, 64.

on the evolution of animals, 179.

on universal law of evolution, 167.

special creations presumptively absurd, 132 _et seq._

St. Paul, his doctrine of the resurrection, 468.

Struggle for existence, meaning of, 88.

Substance, distinct from power, 233.

of mind, 469.

Substitution and suppression of organs, 236 _et seq._

"Supernatural," meaning of, 214.

"Survival of the fittest," meaning of, 65, 66.

Swim-bladder, supposed homologue of a lung, 67.

conversion of, 96.

Taine, M., his views of the objects of history, 545.

Telescope, formation of the, 68-70.

Thales, philosophy of, 24, 27, 28.

period of, 28, _note_.

Theology, the current, not to be considered, 145.

Time, beginning of, in Plato's Kosmos, 48.

conception of endless, 262 _et seq._

Transmigration, from animal to animal, 54-59.

Typical plan, concealed in the ante-fœtal germ, 238.

Uniformity. See PATTERN.

Varieties, what are, 372.

Vertebral column, analysis of, 215.

Voltaire, saying of, 25.

Von Baer, his embryologic law, 229.

Vortices. See DESCARTES.

Women, origin of, in Plato's Kosmos, 55.

THE END.

BY GEORGE TICKNOR CURTIS.

=LIFE OF DANIEL WEBSTER.= By GEORGE TICKNOR CURTIS. Illustrated with

Steel Portrait and Woodcuts. Two vols., 8vo. Cloth, $4.00; sheep,

$6.00; half morocco, $10.00.

A most valuable and important contribution to the history of American

parties and politics, and to the best class of our literature. It is a

model biography of a most gifted man, wherein the intermingling of the

statesman and lawyer with the husband, father, and friend, is painted

so that we feel the reality of the picture.

"We believe the present work to be a most valuable and

important contribution to the history of American parties and

politics."--_London Saturday Review._

"Of Mr. Curtis's labor we wish to record our opinion, in addition

to what we have already said, that, in the writing of this book,

he has made a most valuable contribution to the best class of our

literature."--_New York Tribune._

"This 'Life of Webster' is a monument to both subject and author, and

one that will stand well the wear of time."--_Boston Post._

"Mr. Curtis, it will be remembered, was one of the literary executors

named by Mr. Webster, in his will, to do this work; and owing to the

death of two of the others, Mr. Everett and President Felton, and the

advanced age of Mr. Ticknor, Mr. Curtis has prepared the biography

himself, and it has passed under Mr. Ticknor's revision. We believe

the work will satisfy the wishes of Mr. Webster's most devoted

friends."--_Boston Journal._

=THE LAST YEARS OF DANIEL WEBSTER.= A MONOGRAPH. By GEORGE TICKNOR

CURTIS. 8vo. Paper, 50 cents.

"Laying aside, so far as I may be able, the partiality of a friend and

biographer, I shall subject to the scrutiny of reason and good sense

the accusation that, in Mr. Webster's later years, for the sake of

attaining the Presidency, by bidding for the political support of the

Southern States, he renounced the principles which he had professed

all his life on the subject of slavery."--_The Author._

=McCLELLAN'S LAST SERVICE TO THE REPUBLIC=, together with a Tribute to

his Memory. By GEORGE TICKNOR CURTIS. With a Map showing the Position

of the Union and Confederate Forces on the Night of November 7, 1862.

12mo. Paper, 30 cents.

"Every statement of a fact, contained in these pages, which was not

founded on General McClellan's official report of his campaigns, or

derived from some other public source, was given to me by the General

in the spring of 1880, and was written down by me at the time. At my

request he superintended the preparation of the map which shows his

position and that of the Confederate troops on the 7th and 8th of

November, 1862, and compared it with the military maps issued by the

Government after the close of the civil war."--_From the Author's

Prefatory Note._

New York: D. APPLETON & CO., 1, 3, & 5 Bond Street.

* * * * *

Transcriber's note:

Obvious typographical errors have been silently corrected. Variations

in spelling, punctuation, accents and hyphenation remain as in the

original.

In Chapter 12, Page 526, the sentence: "This is a power that

can belong to and inhere in a spiritual organism alone. We must,

therefore, recognize in the infant this original implanted endowment,

the capacity to be mentally convinced of realities; and while, in

order to the first exercise of this capacity there must be a physical

organism which will conduct the sensory impressions to the brain ..."

Has been amended to read "... in order to meet the first exercise of this

capacity ..."