ministrant to the noblest or to the
most humble purposes, which does not work its appointed effect in the
complex recesses of the mind, and that the mind, as the crowning
achievement of organization, and the consummation and outcome of all its
energies, really comprehends the bodily life."--MAWDESLEY, Body and Mind.

"It is an indisputable truth that what we call the material world is only
known to us under the forms of the ideal world, and, as Descartes tells
us, our knowledge of the soul is more intimate and certain than our
knowledge of the body."--HUXLEY.

INTRODUCTION.

S 1.

Many philosophers have asserted that the body is, as it were, the
prison-house of the spirit, holding it only too firmly to what is
earthly, and checking its so-called flight towards perfection. On the
other hand, it has been held by another philosophic school that knowledge
and virtue are not so much an end as a means towards happiness, and that
the whole perfection of man culminates in the amelioration of his body.

Both opinions [1], methinks, are one-sided. The latter system has
almost entirely disappeared from our schemes of ethics and philosophy,
and is, I am inclined to think, not seldom cast out with over-fanatical
zeal--(nothing assuredly is so dangerous to truth as when one-sided
opinions meet with one-sided opponents). The former system has on the
whole been more patiently endured, since it has the greatest capacity for
warming the heart towards virtue, and has already justified its value in
the case of truly great souls. Who is there that does not admire the
strength of mind of a Cato, the lofty virtue of a Brutus and Aurelius,
the equanimity of an Epictetus and a Seneca? But, in spite of all this,
the system in question is nothing more than a beautiful aberration of the
understanding, a real extreme, which in its wild enthusiasm underrates
one part of our human nature, and desires to raise us into the order of
ideal beings without at the same time relieving us of our humanity,--a
system which runs directly contrary to all that we historically know or
philosophically can explain either of the evolution of the single man or
of that of the entirer race, and can in no way be reconciled with the
limitations of our human soul. It is therefore here, as ever, the wisest
plan to hold the balance between the two opinions, and thus reach with
greater certainty the middle line of truth. But, inasmuch as a mistake
has very often bee