III. Does Science throw any light on our problem? There may not be
any absolute scientific proof of a life beyond; but Science has no
demonstrative evidence against it. At least it leaves the question
open. Some go so far as to say that the results of modern scientific
research, when fairly viewed, are favourable to the reception of the
belief in immortality. A great modern physicist says: "The death of
the body does not convey any assurance of the soul's death. Every
physical analogy is against such a superficial notion in nature. We
never see things beginning or coming to an end. Change is what we see,
not origin or termination. Death is a change, indeed; a sort of
emigration, a wrenching away from the old familiar scenes, a solemn,
portentous fact. But it is not annihilation."
Dangers have seemed to threaten the doctrine of personal immortality
from the standpoint of the physiologist and the evolutionist; but these
dangers have not proved fatal. The physiologist has demonstrated the
close connection between the brain and the soul. It was an easy,
though improper, conclusion to assert that "the brain secretes thought
as the liver secretes bile." But the psychologist speedily pointed out
that the physiologist had gone beyond his province. He had proved only
that thought is a function of the brain. Functions may be productive
or transmissive. Light as a function of the electric circuit
represents a _productive_ function; music as a function of the organ
illustrates a _transmissive_ function. The music is not _in_ the organ
but in the organist. The organ transmits it. So, the brain is but the
organ of the soul.
The evolutionist has made men think in immensities and has given prime
importance to the idea of development. But a creature like man who is
alleged to be the product of ages of development is surely not going to
be extinguished at the tomb. Darwin himself wrote: "It is an
intolerable thought that men and all other sentient beings are doomed
to complete annihilation after such long-continued slow progress."
What candles, then, does Science light up for us?
1.--The conservation of energy and the indestructibility of matter
imply that the natural forces of the world are not annihilated, however
much they may be transformed. May we not hope that the peculiar form
of force known as personality, the highest force in the world, will not
be destroyed by the experience of death?
2.--Unfit organisms perish; fit survive. Many beliefs which once
formed part of the spiritual life of man have perished in the lapse of
time, but no belief has shown greater vitality and power to resist the
disintegrating influences of changing environment than belief in the
soul's immortality.
If this belief has survived when quickened by the most awful imaginable
strain of the Great War may we not conclude that it is one of those
beliefs fit to live, one of those beliefs which the Creator desires to
live and grow?
3.--Whenever we find a faculty, we discover in environment something to
which this faculty corresponds. Progress is possible only by the
constant adaptation of faculty to environment. This is true of the
animal world. Is it not also true of man? In man are found faculties
peculiar to himself. There is a longing for immortality, an expanding
conviction of it. Does this internal condition correspond to reality?
Yes, else delusion falls on man alone. For, as a distinguished
scientist (Sir J. Burdon Sanderson) has said, "there is no known
instance of the development of a capacity without the existence of a
corresponding satisfaction."
4.--If there is one increasing purpose through the ages, if there is
development from lower to higher, from simple to complex, it is
impossible to bound our vision with the grave. If personality has been
attained, it is incredible that the gain of painful ages will be thrown
away. "_Now_ are we the Sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what
we shall be." The "forward-looking" habit has not been acquired for
naught.
So far is Science from giving demonstrative evidence against
immortality that it actually presents some considerations in its
favour. The reasonableness and the beneficence of creation protest
against the extinction of men by death.