FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94  
95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   >>  
him, he is left perfectly free either to regard the world as an object alone, or to regard the world as also an eject[12]. FOOTNOTES: [Footnote 9: If we imagine the visible sidereal system compressed within the limits of a human skull, so that all its movements which we now recognize as molar should become molecular, the complexity of such movement would probably be as great as that which takes place in a human brain. Yet to this must be added all the molecular movements which are now going on in the sidereal system, visible and invisible.] [Footnote 10: _Principles of Psychology_, vol. i. pp. 159-61; _Essays_, vol. iii. pp. 246-9; and _First Principles_, p. 26.] [Footnote 11: It is, however, the belief of all religious persons that even this distinction does not hold. If they are right in their belief, the distinction would then become one as to the mode of converse. In this case what is called communion with the Supreme Mind must be supposed to be a communion _sui generis_: the converse of mind with mind is here _direct_, or does not require to be translated into the language of mechanical signs: it is subjective, not ejective. Still, even here we must believe that the physical aspect accompanies the psychical, although not necessarily observed. An act of prayer, for example, is, on its physical aspect, an act of cerebration: so is the answer (supposing it genuine), in as far as the worshipper is concerned. Thus prayer and its answer (according to Monism) resemble all the other processes of Nature in presenting an objective side of strictly physical causation. Nor is it possible that the case could be otherwise, if _all_ mental processes consist in physical process, and vice versa. It is obvious that this consideration has important bearings on the question as to the physical efficacy of prayer. From a monistic point of view both those who affirm and those who deny such efficacy are equally in the right, and equally in the wrong; they are merely quarrelling upon different sides of the same shield. For, according to Monism, if the theologians are right in supposing that the Supreme Mind is the hearer of prayer in any case, they are also right in supposing that the Mind must necessarily be able to grant what is called physical answers, seeing that in order to grant _any_ answer (even of the most apparently spiritual kind) some physical change must be produced, if it be only in the brain of the petitioner. On the
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94  
95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   >>  



Top keywords:

physical

 
prayer
 

answer

 

supposing

 

Footnote

 

equally

 
belief
 
efficacy
 

distinction

 
Principles

Monism

 

called

 

aspect

 

Supreme

 

converse

 

processes

 

necessarily

 

communion

 
movements
 

visible


molecular

 

regard

 

sidereal

 

system

 
process
 

important

 
obvious
 

bearings

 

consideration

 
question

Nature

 

presenting

 

resemble

 

object

 

objective

 

mental

 
strictly
 

causation

 

consist

 

answers


hearer

 

apparently

 

spiritual

 

petitioner

 
produced
 
change
 

theologians

 

perfectly

 
affirm
 

concerned