Do the dead still live? or the testimony of science respecting a future life

Front matter

“4

Per St are ee oer) Bay rob dad eee ne aes si wie 7 erye rreeemeny ret ee ; Pes ph al bites a} (dpe ears po Paling chase ete Ee ¢

ake Meteora

Foreword

THE distinctive purpose and other special features of this book are explained in the opening chapter. However, it needs yet to be stated here that, as now presented, the work really consists of two parts. Part first, which occupies much the larger space, contains a series of articles that were originally published in a metropolitan journal; in which shape this part was widely read, calling forth not a few responses indicative of special interest. Those articles, however, have been thoroughly revised, much new matter has been added to them, and in places the text has been entirely changed. Essentially, though, this part of the work remains largely the same.

Part second, which we have named a Supplement, contains, first, quite a number of matters, deemed important, which are naturally related to the subject in general; and, secondly, replies to various objections such as could not well be answered in the main body of the work. Thus, it is believed, the production has been rendered more comprehensive and up-to-date, as an expression of what can and should be said, in these times, upon the great matter of human immortality.

Bishop Samuel Fallows, of Chicago, who is widely known as being himself an earnest investigator and writer upon immortality, has very kindly written a note of introduction, giving some account of the work; for which kindness we are deeply grateful, Also we wish

FOREWORD here to express our thanks to many other friends who have, in one way or another, kindly advised, or requested a republication of the work—that is, in book form and with the alterations above mentioned.

One mistake this book has earnestly tried to avoid, namely, an overuse of speculation, or a construction of arguments simply upon unprovable hypotheses—a method which naturally leads to uncertainty, and does not promote an earnest and positive faith, such as men should have, in the great hereafter. Our effort has therefore been, in all the fields of our inquiry, first of all to ascertain if possible the pertinent facts, and then to build what argument we could upon these facts. More-_ over, since science, philosophy, and religion all have in them important facts bearing upon immortality, we have included in our studies all three of those fields ; thus endeavoring to make the general argument as widely supported and as strong as possible.

With these explanations and acknowledgments we again commit the work to the public; only expressing a desire that it may, in this enlarged and much improved shape, be received with as kindly consideration as upon its first appearance, in the form mentioned.

It might be added yet that this work was prepared for the press about the time when the great European war began; but because of that war its publication has been deferred until now. Also the war has caused some important changes to be made in the work.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

By BISHOP SAMUEL FALLOWS My attention was first called to Doctor Heagle’s production, entitled “‘ Do the Dead Still Live? or, the Testimony of Science Respecting a Future Life,” when it was first published as a series of articles in the Chicago Inter- Ocean, now a considerable time ago. Also I have been conversant, more or less, with the changes which Doctor Heagle has since made in the original form of the work. As now offered, therefore, the production seems to me to be really a whole library of condensed information respecting the important subject discussed. Moreover, it may be affirmed that this subject is one that can never grow old; because men will always die, and therefore will always be interested in the question of what comes after death.

In his discussion of that great question Doctor Heagle has undertaken to present the entire argument in favor of human immortality as such argument can be drawn from all possible sources—that is, from science, philosophy, and religion. Among the special topics therefore discussed by him are the various notions sometimes taken of the idea of immortality: whether a person is to live again only as an influence upon coming generations, as a kind of repetition of himself in his offspring, or as a real living individual—these and other different conceptions of the matter having been taken by scholars. Also the learned author of this book has discussed at consider-

INTRODUCTORY NOTE able length the historic origin of the belief in a future life—whether it has come from revelation, from experience, or as a matter of intuition; his own view being that dreams, shadows, reflections, and other such experiences will explain at least most of the facts connected with such origin.

Of course, the doctrine advanced by this book is that man is personally immortal, and in defense of that doctrine different kinds of argument are used. The doctrine is defended on scientific grounds, on philosophic grounds, from the important principle of the “conservation of force,” also from that of the “ conservation of value,” and from other considerations. 1

But it is especially in the fields of science that Doctor Heagle finds most of the facts upon which he builds. his general argument. Such facts he gathers particularly from the fields of biology, physics, physiology, and psychology, normal and abnormal. Moreover, not to neglect any possible source of fact bearing upon the subject, Doctor Heagle, although not by any means a spiritualist himself, has carefully and in the true scientific — spirit, investigated even the spiritistic phenomena, obtaining from them, as he thinks, some important evidence which at least corroborates other proofs of immortality. His special conclusions with respect to that matter are stated in the book.

But, after all, it is more especially in the realm of religion that our author finds his most convincing proof that man is truly an immortal being. Here indeed, if anywhere, must be discovered the solid rock upon which man may securely build his hope of life everlasting. Furthermore, in order to render ‘‘ assurance doubly sure,”

INTRODUCTORY NOTE this book presents a large amount of other data, or facts, all bearing in one way and another upon the general subject.

Nor is it altogether with the “dry light of the understanding ” that this book has been composed; the glowing sentiments of the heart are also manifest everywhere in its composition. With clear and attractive language _ the author presents his thought, thus rendering the book both comprehensible and winsome to all degrees of culture.

I therefore do not hesitate to commend this work very highly to the reading public in general, believing that it is calculated to meet a real need of the times and accomplish much good.

. bree ne y

Ape, »

SELLS ES og RA Aah Sc oe a Wp PY A INTRODUCTION BY BisHop SAMUEL FALLOWS..........+.

3. Need of Change in Form of Argument........ III. Usefulness and Desirability of the Doctrine...... How this Doctrine Affects the Present Life......

CHAPTER Two. THE OLDER ARGUMENTS, FROM PHI- TOSOPIEVEAND SRELIGION tuts hasloccs ocd eile eee bes

PeArouments trom Pnilosophy ' <2... 2006. Vi oes’, 1. From the Universality both of the Idea and the POSS EMC MP Ie Phe creel ce torre alate Ligtcle’ a Ce ea dala 6

2, From Man’s Unlimited Capabilities............. 3. From Inequality of Rewards and Punishments.. 4. From the Peculiar Nature of the Soul.......... BME OLS CAAT PUTT TIES 0 occ So grels ays a) at sibs n o\s 6 ah9 eho) oes “1, LECSNTAEL TONE RED hig) 00 54'S EPeeTes AL SI CUR ee ae Gn a SMU TOMPREVEAlCCY RENQION fas costes vaicce soo ke screen we BbesiMoiy Orme biDiGucss oostlew ss '<% «Moka tele

PENEM CSUTTECTION VOLECHTISty sh. oes. paras ees General Force of these Arguments ...............

1. Fuller Statement of Evidence of Christ’s Resurrec- PTO NR Une Ce eer ete sp chine See A aie 8 Ve eusle Gilets 2. Strongest Argument from Religion and Philosophy

3-9 et

16-19

19-22

19-22 22

II. Biology a Comparatively New Science

Peculiar. Stracttireiot the Gelbieiaci tee eee

1. Life not‘a}Chemical Compoundais ce. sien ee 2. Life not merely, a )Machinesrcs.,: s.secers en 3. Lhe, Lite-principle, Defined yaoi... ec snes Vitalism’ and Mechanism: 2. aiomec so eee Inferences Bearing upon Immortality.............. 1. From the General Nature of the Life-principle.. 2. From the .Method’of /Propagation.2.. 2205 eee 3. From the Seeming Permanence of the Life-principle Amid Bodily ‘Changes vii)... wes oa Other. TheoriesvandjPacts hac joas cree. se eee

Conclusion (eee Tees sls ais kaa ie ok eee

CHAPTER Four. THE ARGUMENT FROM PHYSICS......... IT

Cumulative Nature of General Argument.......... Definition of Physics tacit emcee das eee en oe Helps from this Source for Proving Immortality...

. The Indestructibility of Matter and Force..........

1. Application of the Law’ to: Matters... 2.0.22 02. 2. Application of the Law to Force, or Energy..... Existence and Peculiar Properties of Ether........ i. Inference from the Supersensuous Nature of Teter ee et Rn Ora no er 2. Inference from Resemblance of Ether to Spiritual Essence: or Body ivcviccusiion aes «lL nee ener 3. Inference from Ether as a Medium of Commu- NICATION Vesicle wate ahead sate lee nis eter eikes caine atenela naan

CHAPTER Five. THE ARGUMENT FROM PHYSIOLOGY...... I

Teaching of Materialism Respecting Future Life... Materialistic “Arcuments (7 tions o een eaie ee meee 1. From Association of Mind with Brain.......... 2. From Anatomical Dissection of the Brain or

Nervous) System 2 e5 gd eee Ceres nee

This Argument Refuted.

3. From Localization of Mental Activities......... 4. From Comparative Study of Mental Capability

and | Nervous: Tisstie uc 8s mute anu aqieneae ta eee 5. From Ontogenesis of Consciousness............ strength of these Arguments . <i... ...2.secccre ak

PAGE

23-33

24-30

43-45

40-56 46 46-51 47

47 48 50

50 SI

1. (Already Given above, in Refutation of Materialistic Argument No. 2, p. 47.)

2. Association of Mind with Brain,—Holds Good only for this World and Does not Imply Causality.

3. The Brain’s Function Might be Transmissive, Hoe Necessarily Productive’... 3.3002 sun evens

CHAPTER Six. THE ARGUMENT FROM PHySsIOLoGy, Con- CVT ER Se ea RG ora le 2 A a Cg MMe TIM-OUNTET-ATZUMENTS sec eles kno ccloce oo sles olelree Pecontrariety,;or; Mind; to. Matter... 00 es

2. The Nervous System a Closed Circle...........

3. Phe) Brain’s Need of Education. .......0...0. 0.0

5. Intelligence Without a Brain or Nervous System LATS LS SRT OSORIO dp, WAS URL el a

Arguments More Positive in Nature..............002: Peerom otructire:oL. body. Cells. icc. ese ott meron iHaeckel’s Peculiar Teaching... ...02...3%.

J. Bearing of Personality on a Future Life......:... SeeOUperiority (OL. Mind to) BOdY ics... os eee wleiesy ae ivinevsidenot Personality si oo5 cies iyo ole sletee's 3. Axiom of the Conservation of Value............

iieetareatness of Man's Capabilities of)... vise ea. s

Practical Impossibility of Considering Death an

PERI CON Cm ESCIINO Is Swine crea le aa aie kta ais Ineradicability of the Instinct of Immortality.... Religious Experience, Testimony of the Dying,

The Soul’s Capability to Triumph over Death,

IV. Argument from Moral Character ...............3.

CHAPTER Ficut, THE ARGUMENT FROM ABNORMAL Psy-

. Speculations and Facts Concerning a “ Sixth Sense” . Possibility of Help from Mechanical Inventions.... Aopititual’Bvolutionsiys . os eee eee nea ars tee

III

TIFICALLY EXAMINED We 0 chu atc ait ole seetelelee tee teeta Spiritistic Phenomena not a New Experience.....

. Nature and Classification of Spiritistic Phenomena av

Scientific Examination of these Phenomena....... 1. By the British Society for Psychical Research.. 2. By Other Organizations and by Individuals.....

Results of these Different Studies. 00... )..... 28005 1. Many of the Phenomena Proved to be Facts... 2. No Merely Naturalistic Explanation Suffices Demands of Reason ..... RR VA Meta Sata BARS Ae,

3. Opinions Differ as to Proper Interpretation..... Some of the Investigators Accept the Spiritual Frypothesig® ite el ee oe ae ee ar ee Others Oppose this Hypothesis................. Still Others—Perhaps the Larger Number—Wait for’ More Lightsey. vod sain Peels» Cte eee

TV. Our: Personal Attitudes... ee eee

1. Personals Disposition? .4. c0054 2) eee ee ee ee 2; /The! Weight \Orwh acts iter ccrcisty dss coate ae are ee ere

SPECTAT oN OTES or ee rate g aaratoietele ood, Uae a ora ae

I.

Ze

A Distinction to be Made Between “ Spiritualism ” as Commonly Known and “ Spiritism”’ as Scientifically *Examinediicn. ac ve ecient Meme eee

Final (Conclusion eines s ctes aa ohicete e ce e eee

CHAPTER TEN. CONCLUSIONS, AND POSSIBILITIES OF FuR

. Conclusions 6.02 y ah See ele ante a eee

1. Extensive Sources of Information..... Nee peg t ik 2. The General Argument Cumulative............. 3. Strongest Argument Still from Religion........ 4:Religion’ and Science, Combined) . 2.4 ecu eecee « 5. The Testimony of Science not Merely Negative.

103-109

Pacr

II. Possibilities of Further Discovery ................ 109Q—I12 Pein - the Realm: OF Spiritistny co en dae cee we open 109 POP Nee NACA SCIENCES (ns ais de oe os harris) avers 110 PmAeADOLMNAl EE SYCHOlOS yd cls oe eed rk eet om III

Ea notherp liiistration: J ovate oe ae et ols asta 112

SUPPLEMENT. RELATED MATTERS, AND OBJECTIONS, WITH OPINIONS OF EMINENT PHILOSOPHERS AND SCHOLARS 115-176

Part A. RELATED MATTERS, INCLUDING OPINIONS OF

EMINENT PHILOSOPHERS AND SCHOLARS.........006 117-154 Topics: I. Different Notions of Immortality .............. 117-121 Meron Or the ldea ee. a acd Ona cs cbka es basse cses 122, 123 III. Immortality Among Savages and Beehivione Peo- CEES pal Beaks Us eee ela mR Sy anEe Peat 124-127 IV. Opinions of Eminent Scholars Respecting Christ’s PPC IT ECCT ION Mente Meese tee calc Lise es o's wate ae Digsehe 128-130 Vorlne: Permanence’ of: Personality... .. 0c sicc ees eee ene: VI. John Fiske’s Argument from Evolution.......... eee ey Pepe pyections ‘to: Opiritism -o 6. syc oi cess ace eeaw eens 135, 136

VIII. “Raymond,” or Sir Oliver Lodge’s Latest Expression of View Respecting a Future Life.... 137-143

IX. Eucken and Bergson on Immortality............ 144-147 em lato seboctrine of Immortality oO...) od. foe. 148-151 XI. Other Opinions, Especially of the Great Philoso- MHCtSPANGOLOCTSE cess uel weatan ee scar aia ee ye 152-154 ‘Part B. Various OsjEcTIONS—OLD AND NEw........ 155-176 Mem ce ead 00. NIMETOUS 25.2). sos cw wlesle nit nw eiets 155-159 II. If Men Are Immortal, why not Animals and esa TAP ee eee ie o's cil clare sista etal Ge see St che As 159-162 III. Max Verworn’s Materialistic Argument.......... 162-166 Meelnanswerable: Questions steel eecd cs ecce cases 166-168 V. Limited or Conditional Immortality.............. 168-171 W aeimmortality.a Selfish Doctrine. . 022.22... 02. 171-174 Belient NET AONOSHC'S® POSIUION o's ook lows c's Ge teac ebiele es 174-176 PORES. TO THE WORK IN {GENERAL (lspci esc cases ecee's 177-193 To Chapter I: Proper Definition of the Word “ Science”.......... 179

Belief and Unbelief of English Agnostics.......... 180

To Chapter II: Great Writers and the Argument from Natural In-

SINCE a. aa a Bee Oa Pe eRe ace gece s caeres Annihilation Intolerable to Greek Mind.......... ws To Chapter II; Important Works on the; Gelli eee Chemists Cannot Produce Organized Matter....... Great Mystery of (Lifey oar oi eee ete ee Various Definitions of Lifev. ccc ee ee Distinguished Vitalists and Mechanists............ To Chapter V: | Man not Merely a Psycho-physical Organism...... Bergson on Certainty of Knowledge Respecting ~ SelPreTiSterCe ii cee oree serete ubecahen ie ts tev toe ae cn ae Longevity and the Mental Powers....:........0. 64

To Chapter VI: John Fiske on Relation of Thought to Cell Activity Materialists’ Admission of Mind-power in Nature..

To Chapter IX:

Noted Mediums Examined by the British Society for Psychical Research BAe bast eh Rae he A Ae a

To Supplement: New View of Matter as Related to Force.......... Aristotle's’ View “of Immortality; 201c5.0). ee eee W. R. Aiger on Predominance of Great Believers... Spiritism and the Great War—A Historical Note. Bibliography 4 yee es meee oars lata Rina a ee che ee

Pace

181 181

182. 182 182 183 183

186 186

187 188

"198-203

“T know that my Redeemer liveth.”—Job,

“Who hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.”—Paul.

“Today scientists are interpreting anew the instincts of animals and men. Instincts are nature’s prophecies foretelling coming events. In vain we ransack all nature for a single instance in which nature’s instincts have deceived insect or bird. Does nature use so great skill for guiding beasts, but become a blunderer in guiding man? ”—Newell Dwight Hillis.

“My own dim life should teach me this, That life shall live forever more; Else earth is darkness at the core, And dust and ashes all that is.”

—Tennyson.

“Tf I am in error in believing that the soul of man is immortal, Terr willingly; nor have I any desire, while life lasts, to eradicate this error in which I take delight. But if after death (as some - small philosophers think) I shall feel nothing, I have no fear that those departed philosophers will ridicule my error.”—Cicero.

“No race or nation will ever be great or will long maintain greatness unless it holds fast to the faith in a living God, in a beneficent Providence, and in personal immortality. To man as to nation, every gift of noblest origin is breathed upon by this hope’s perpetual breath. Where this faith lives are found courage, manhood, power. Where this faith dies courage, manhood, and power die with it.’—Senator Hoar.

DO THE DEAD STILL LIVE? OR, THE TESTIMONY OF SCIENCE RESPECTING A FUTURE LIFE

I PRELIMINARIES

OME years ago, in accepting an honorary member-

ship in the British Society for Psychical Research, Mr. Gladstone, then prime minister of England, said of the work which was being done by this society, that it was “the most important in the world—by far the most wmportant.” This is a statement to which at least most intelligent people would very readily assent; for what in the nature of work could be more important than an earnest scientific attempt, such as has really been made by the society mentioned, to solve if possible the great problem of human immortality? Have all the many millions and billions of human beings that once lived upon this planet become extinct forever, or do they still live in another and different world from this? That is the question. Also a like inquiry might be raised with respect to the present inhabitants of our earth, including those who will people it in the future. Or, to notice a more personal form of the interrogation, what will be the final outcome of our own existence? Is this life only the beginning of another that shall endlessly endure? Or is it true, as the materialists teach, that when the body dies the soul must die, or perish, with it? Surely, these are questions of the vastest import, and no one can afford to pass them by with indifference.

Also it might be observed, in this connection, that the hope of a future life for man is one very common to the human race. Traces of it can be found among all nations and peoples and in all the ages, even in old prehistoric times. This hope seems to be planted very deeply in human nature, not only in the minds, but also in the hearts and consciences of men. { Of all the great expectations indulged in by our human genus probably none is more widely extended, more deeply grounded in the very elements of human nature, or when rightly considered, more highly prized than is this. It is indeed the great expectation of humanity. But now another question arises as to the legitimacy of this hope. Is it founded upon fact? Is there a true objective reality corresponding to it? Or is it, after all, only a vain expectation, a mere matter of the imagination? Is it all a dream, only a dream? ‘That is the question; and a very serious one it is, indeed.

I. GENERAL PuRPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION

In the following pages, therefore, it is purposed to discuss, especially from a scientific point of view, the entire argument for human immortality—whether it is true, or not true, that man has another life than this. To be sure, in the execution of this purpose other material than that coming merely from science will be used. We shall employ also for our work any and all helps that can be obtained from what may be termed the older sources of information respecting man’s future life—. that is, from philosophy and religion. Our main undertaking, however, will be to present the general scientific’ argument. In other words, we shall endeavor to obtain. from all sources—science, philosophy, and _ religion— whatever facts can be found that have a bearing upon the proof of man’s after-life, and we shall use those facts in the construction of our argument. In that way, it is believed, some new foundations can be laid for sustaining man’s great hope of life beyond the grave. Moreover, it might yet be said here, that in order to reach in this busy age the largest class of people, the uneducated as well as the educated, we have chosen to put whatever we might have to say in brief and popular form; hoping thus, of course, to accomplish the widest possible good.

II. Reasons Justiryinc THis Work

1. WIDE-SPREAD UNBELIEF

What then, it may be asked, are some of the reasons that would seem to justify an undertaking like that which is now before us? One such reason evidently is the vast amount of unbelief existing now in the world, respecting a future life for man. In his little book entitled “ The Hope of Immortality,” Mr. Charles Fletcher Dole says, “There are doubtless more people today than ever before in the history of the world who are in doubt whether they have any right to hope for immortality.” And to much the same effect Dr. Minot J. Savage affirms that “the number of persons in the civilized world today who have more or less questioning about continued personal conscious existence after death, is immeasurably greater than it was a century ago”; and he seems to think that even now the number is increasing.

Both of these views are probably too pessimistic; they do not accord with all the facts in the case. Still the idea needs to be emphasized that in these strange times of ours a wide-reaching defection from the old faith in immortality really exists. People no longer accept the belief so universally and without questioning as was the case in days gone by. On the contrary, more or less of doubt, or of positive disbelief, is characteristic of these days. This state of mind manifests itself in a variety of ways, not only in religion and morals, but in political matters, in the crimes and disruptions of society, in business affairs, in literature and education, and even in the ideals of life obtaining among men. No small amount of such unbelief is found in the text-books used in our schools, and a plenty of it is expressed even on the StLeeLs.

(1) Materialism (miscalled Science)

The causes of this extensive falling off from the old faith are not difficult to find. One such cause is undoubtedly the unusual amount of materialistic or unbelieving doctrine (often miscalled science) existing in the world today, especially among that influential class of men known as the scholars. Not that all the great scholars of these times are materialistic or unbelieving in their attitude toward the doctrine of immortality. On the contrary, we hold that the great majority both of the scholars and the scientists are still on the side of the old faith. They still believe in God, freedom, and immortality. Nevertheless, with this important exception, it must be confessed that in these days not a few even of the most eminent men of science—such, e. g., as Metschnikoff, Haeckel, Moleschott, Bttchner, Max Verworn, W. Ostwald, Maudsley, Loeb, and others t—all these have departed far from the old and as yet generally accepted doctrine of man’s being truly an immortal being. They do not believe any such doctrine; but in their conception man is but the creature of a day. Born in the morning, at night he perishes, with no possible hope of life beyond the grave. Besides, these materialists, or at least most of them, reject in toto the idea of God and of human freedom; and their entire creed is summed up in the words, Matter alone, or matter and force, are the all in all of existence. All things, therefore, according to this

1The great English agnostics might all be added to this list, since agnosticism is, practically at least, only another form of materialism. See Supplement, Part B, The Agnostic’s Position, pp. 174-176; also Note 2, p. 180.

theory, have come from matter and to matter they must return. With such a general conception of the universe, the doctrine of a future life for man is impossible.

Materialistic “ Camp-followers.’ But not all the materialistic scholars of today are by any means of this advanced class. Not a few there are—perhaps the great majority of those claiming to be scholars—who, instead of investigating for themselves the facts of materialism, have accepted their views at second hand. That is to say, instead of being leaders in materialistic doctrine, they are simply followers, or retailers of doctrines they have received from others. The consequence is that, not understanding fully either the claims of materialism or the arguments to be so easily urged against that system of thought, they are, like all superficialists, unusually loud and vociferous in proclaiming their immature views. They are, as another writer has suggested, the housetop shouters in favor of unbelief; and, although they have accomplished a vast amount of harm by undermining faith in immortality among the masses, they are not of themselves greatly to be feared; because being, at least in a certain sense, mere “ camp-followers,” they are not of the kind that does much execution. They have nothing original, or of their own discovery, to offer; but they simply repeat what has been said, perhaps often, by other and more capable men. Nevertheless, it should be remembered that these men—the small scholars, as we will call them—mistaking materialism for real science, do what they are doing with a desire to be considered “ scientific”; all kinds of science, or anything passing under the name of science, being in these days especially popular. And all this we say, not by any means to the discredit of science—in which we most profoundly believe—but rather to the discredit of those who abuse the word science by misapplying it or by giving it much too narrow a meaning.”

2¥For proper definition of the word ‘ Science,” see Note 1, p. 179.

6 po THE DEAD STILL LIvE?

Inconsistency of Belief. There is, however, still another class of these materialistic scholars that should be mentioned. Paradoxical as it may seem, one may hold to the most ultra-materialistic notions and yet in his heart really believe in the future life. To illustrate, some time ago we remember reading an address, delivered by a prominent member of the medical profession, in which address the author, after having stoutly argued nearly all the way through against immortality, using for that purpose various materialistic theories, yet in the end confesses that, like Cicero of old, he preferred rather to err with Plato, believing in man’s future life, than to be right with those who opposed this view. Inconsistent, do you say? Surely it is. But this instance of inconsistency is only one of a large number, similar in kind, that could easily be adduced. In fact, materialism is itself exceedingly inconsistent, from beginning to end. For what could be more inconsistent than the idea of all things being derived from matter, when, in and of itself, _matter has no capability for producing all things? Or what could be farther from the truth than the notion that matter is the only thing existing, when we know of various other things that exist just as certainly as does matter? Therefore, Max Verworn, Mr. Haeckel, and other materialistic scholars have found it necessary to assume—so they usually confess—a psychic principle in nature, ‘in order to explain even the simplest processes of chemical and physical forces ”’;* all of which, to be sure, shows their inconsistency.

(2) Intense Business Activity

Another cause, however, for the extensive unbelief existing in these times, with regard to immortality, should here be noticed. It is the intense, all-absorbing business activity that characterizes today the life of so many

*See Note 2, p..180, also for Belief and Unbelief of English Agnostics.

earnest-minded and determined men. Never before in all the history of our world was there so much human energy and human ambition devoted to mere. secular enterprises as is the case now. And never before did the almighty dollar, or material possessions in general, seem to have so strong a grip upon the activities and affections of men as today. Consequently, being allabsorbed in the interests of this life, there are multitudes of men in these days who can find no time, so they say, to consider the things of another world. Their motto usually is, “One world at a time”; and they choose rather to live for the things of passing significance than for those of the great eternity. Such being the state of things, it is not to be wondered at if occasionally there comes forth from this class some one who declares himself to be an infidel, or unbelieving, so far as the future world is concerned. Perhaps Mr. Edison, our great American inventor, belongs to this class. At all events, it has been reported of him in various ways that he claims to be a materialist, that is, with regard at least to his believing in any future world.

Many other illustrations of this same kind, or of men who do not believe in immortality probably because they are so fully occupied with the affairs of this life, could easily be given.