The brain and the Bible; or, The conflict between mental science and theology

Front matter

AIN aKp dSlBLE •

Edgar, C.Beall

Shelf. 3-1

Contents

Dedication, .....

Preface by R G. Ingersoll, Author's Preface, ....

Introduction, ....

Author's Preface

" The purpose of my writing is to make men anthropologians instead of theologians ; man-lovers instead of Godlovers; students of this world instead of candidates for the next; self-reliant citizens of the earth instead of subservient and wily ministers of a celestial and terrestrial monarchy." Feuerbach.

THE mission of Infidelity is not to destroy any thing that is good, but simply by the light of science to discover the one sublime Temple of Truth, in search of which, groping and guessing, bruised and bleeding, humanity has wandered through all the long unhappy night of the past. Instead of wishing to undermine the principles of virtue, we seek only to make them more secure. And so far from aiming to blot out the religious nature of man, we wish only to purify and intensify it by directing it to its legitimate objects of flesh and blood.

(xxiii)

xxiv A TJTHORS PREFA CE.

He who can find no incentive to do right for the love of man, is incapable of sincere devotion to any noble ideal. And he who has no fear of human retribution, or hatred of wrong for its own blackness, can have but little fear of' Hell. Hence, instead of an absolute, conditionless Deity, of whose existence there is no evidence, we regard Humanity as the only true object our sense of duty toward which should restrain us from evil and impel us to purity of life.

Nothing can be more sacred than the happiness of mankind, and no book sincerely written in defense of such an object should need an apology. But the Church, never willing or able to meet logic with logic, denies that Infidels aim to make the world better, and, to give color to this charge, defines Freethought as a synonym for all that is vile, and describes as its representatives only the monstrosities and dwarfs to which she herself has given birth. As to this, and all other objections, we court investigation.

A UTHORS PRE FA CE.

All we ask is that the world may be permitted to think, and that the problem of our highest duty may be submitted to reason. Christians should not expect to discover any truth by false methods. And no greater mistake can be made than that of allowing the feelings to usurp the place of judgment. The Roman Catholic is just as sure from the voice of his "subjective cognition " that his creed is the only true one as the Protestant is that the Roman Church is the " Harlot of Babylon." But if " spiritual discernment " is superior to science, why is there so little unanimity of belief? If the "heart" is of any value as an authoritative guide, why does it present such contradictory evidence ? And if the unshaken faith of millions affords any ground for an argument, why not accept Buddhism, which is believed by almost a third of the population of the globe ? He who repudiates reason as the only torch, can not consistently deny that the grossest superstition may be the true religion.

AUTHORS PREFACE.

However, while rejecting the solutions offered by theology, the true Infidel is far from presuming to unravel the ultimate mystery of the Absolute. " His refusal of the creative hypothesis," says Tyndall, " is less an assertion of knowledge, than a protest against the assumption of knowledge which must long, if not forever, lie beyond us, and the claim to which is the source of manifold confusion upon earth." Moreover, it should not be supposed that wherever Science is mute, the garrulity of Faith is necessarily true. Our inability to establish an absolute negative, by no means renders the affirmative certain ; and as to the question of Theism, the burden of proof falls wholly upon the Church.

All forms of argument employed to defend the dogmas of the Bible, must, of necessity, be within a circle. Hitherto, when closely pressed, theologians have exhibited remarkable dexterity in shifting from one side of the circle to the other, and one of the chief reasons whv the warfare between science and supernaturalism has con-

A UTHORS PliEFA CE.

tinuecl so long, is because Infidelity has seldom attacked both sides of the circle at once. Forced by the revelations of modern physics to withdraw her lines of defense beyond the material world, the Church now seeks refuge in the supposed unfathomable mysteries of mind. It is to this field of investigation that I wish especially to call attention, and with an earnest desire to promote the highest interests not only of those who live to-day, but also of the millions yet unborn, I offer this book as a humble contribution to the

sacred Cause of Humanitv.

Edgar C. Beall.

Cincinnati, Ohio, December 1 1881.

Introduction

"This is truth, though at enmity with the philosophy of ages." — Gall.

FIST the infancy of humanity, the intellectual ■*■ horizon was an unbroken gloom. The inexplicable every-where suggested the supernatural. The orb of day in his majestic march, the variable moon, and the serene stars, all seemed endowed with life and thought, while the voices of the genii echoed from rocks and clouds, and from wind and wave.

Although the air was filled with mystery, investigation was discouraged. To account for the miraculous by natural agencies was deemed an indignity to the gods. Science slumbered,

THE BRAIN AND THE BIBLE.

and for many dark and weary years the great problems of life and happiness remained untouched. Anatomy and physiology were unknown. Physical disease was held to be one of the dispensations of Providence, while the realm of thought seemed directly linked with a spirit world. Temptations to commit crime were supposed to be suggested by Satan, while the disposition to be pure and good was regarded as the inspiration of Divine Grace. However, these dreams of deities and demons did not satisfy the brave few who have always dared to think, and hence the attention of the earliest philosophers became directed to a study of the human mind. For thousands of years, many of the most learned men endeavored to establish some definite system of mental science — some classification and analysis of the psychical activities which would solve the mystery of human nature. But, until near the beginning of the present century, scarcely any thing definite was ever ascertained respecting the true character of the

INTRODUCTION.

mental organization. Theory upon theory was proposed, adopted for a while, and subsequently rejected. One after another of the great metaphysicians rose and refuted the doctrines of his predecessors, only to meet the same fate himself a few years later. But, it will be asked, why did so many seekers fail to discover the truth? Simply because of their false methods of investigation. They reasoned almost entirely a priori, which constantly led them into deeper mysticism. Each blindly assumed his own consciousness as the standard of human nature, and occupied himself chiefly with the contemplation of his own feelings, utterly ignoring the fact that all persons do not possess the same development of the mental powers, and that no individual could properly regard his own mind as an ideal of perfection, without first establishing the true standard with which to compare himself. Of course, every such investigator naturally evolved a philosophy corresponding simply to his own peculiar organization. For example,

THE BRAIN AND THE BIBLE.

in the last century, the popular teleologist, Dr. Paley, who was evidently endowed with more "Veneration" than "Conscientiousness," did not admit the existence of an inherent sentiment of justice in human nature, but held that virtue consists in "the doing good to mankind, in obedience to the will of God, and for the sake of everlasting happiness." This would be the natural expression of a mind in which the selfish propensities are strong, and in which reverence is more powerful than the love of right for its own sake. Looking in upon one's own feelings with such a combination of faculties, of course it would be difficult to form any other conception of moral principle. In his " Theory of Moral Sentiments" Dr. Adam Smith taught that sympathy was probably the source of moral approbation. This idea would naturally emanate from a mind dominated by "Benevolence." Then there were writers who made the desire for praise, and various other forms of selfishness, the basis of all virtue; in teaching which they usually betrayed their own deficient sense of justice, while Mr. Stewart, Lord Karnes, Dr. Brown, and many others, earnestly contended for the existence of an inherent love of justice independent of any other consideration. Equally discordant and chaotic were the opinions respecting the existence of an inherent sense of beauty; some philosophers asserting that the esthetical element in the mind was purely factitious, and acquired wholly by the post-natal experiences and education of the individual.

Scores of similar examples might be cited to show how utterly conflicting and unsatisfactory were the speculations regarding man's mental nature, when, toward the close of the last century, the functions of the brain, and the true philosophy of mind were discovered and made known to the world by Dr. Francis Joseph Gall.

Words would fail to describe the abuse and ridicule which were heaped upon this man. The Church, with her usual hostility to science, suppressed his lectures in Vienna, so that he

THE BRAIN AND THE BIBLE.

and his companion and pupil, Dr. Spurzheim, were obliged to leave their native country in order to continue their investigations. The result of their labors, however, has been the establishment of the science known as Phrenology (a term derived from the Greek words pliren and logos, mind and discourse). Dr. Gall's mode of investigation was purely a posteriori, or inductive. This man, a profoundly learned physician, and metaphysician, as was also Dr. Spurzheim, began his great life work when a mere schoolboy, by noticing the peculiarities of his fellow-pupils, and until stricken by death at the age of seventy-one, he continued to labor for the perfection of his discoveries. He visited hundreds of schools, prisons, hospitals, asylums, and other institutions, which afforded him excellent opportunities for observing a great many distinct types of people, of which all the individuals in each class possessed alike some one leading trait of character; and by carefully comparing the cranial developments of all such persons to

INTRODUCTION.

whom he could gain access, he was generally able to discover, in each class, a particular configuration of brain which was equally marked in all, and which appeared to be the only peculiarity which all possessed in common. For example, in the prisons, he noticed that the heads of all the thieves were remarkably wide about an inch back of the temples, while, in other respects, they differed as much as any other ciass of criminals. All the murderers were remarkable for width of head just between the ears, though differing in other respects, etc., etc. In the asylums for the insane, he succeeded also very frequently in discovering a peculiar form of brain which was common to all who were deranged upon the same subject. The location of the cerebral center named Cautiousness, was discovered by Dr. Gall at an entertainment where he occupied a seat immediately behind a gentleman whose notorious irresolution and timidity had obtained for him the nickname Cacadubio. Dr. Gall was struck by the extraordinary width

THE BRAIN AND THE BIBLE.

of this head at the point known to anatomists as the "parietal prominence," situated at the extreme upper and hack part of the side head, usually about two inches from the tops of the ears. Being well acquainted with the man's predominant trait, it occurred to the Doctor that this part of the head might be the seat of a faculty of cautiousness. Accordingly, on returning home, he examined all his casts, skulls, and portraits, of which he had a large collection, and in the case of every one whose original he had known to be strongly endowed with the faculty in question, he observed a great width of head at the "parietal prominence. " He next examined the heads of a number of his friends and others who were remarkable for prudence, apprehensiveness, etc., and, in every instance, he found the same configuration of brain, while in all examinations of persons who were deficient in this mental quality, he found heads narrow in the region of the "parietal prominence. " Thousands of observations by later Phrenologists

INTRODUCTION.

have demonstrated beyond a doubt the accuracy of the discoveiy. By these and similar inductive methods this man alone succeeded in locating twenty-seven of the forty-three centers now established; certainlv one of the most remarkable labors ever accomplished by any one man. Some objectors have declared that it would be impossible for one man or one generation of men to collect sufficient evidence to establish the location of so many cerebral centers ; but such critics are obviously unacquainted with the requirements of the inductive method. Dr. Gall himself made thousands of observations more than were strictly necessary to confirm his discoveries, and the centers localized by his successors have been established by millions of observations. If a coin is tossed up five hundred times in succession, or even half as many times, and it invariably falls upon a particular side, we are entirely justified in the conclusion that it is "loaded," since it would be impossible for such a number of coincidences to be accidental.

The same principle may be applied to the question of special cerebral developments. If we find that all men who possess great physicoperceptive intellectuality, with deficient reflective power, have, in every instance, foreheads very prominent immediately above the eyes, but narrow and retreating in the upper portion ; while we observe that all foreheads largely developed in the upper portion and depressed in the lower, are accompanied by predominant reflective intellect, we logically infer that the perceptive faculties depend for their manifestation upon the cerebral matter beneath the superciliary ridge, and that in the upper part of the forehead are located the material substrata of the reflective powers. There is no jDOSsibility of evading the results of such reasoning. If Phrenology can not be demonstrated nothing can be demonstrated. Moreover, its leading principles are so simple that a child can easily master them, notwithstanding which, however, it is a fact that among the most learned men comparatively few understand even the rudiments of it. At first glance this seems almost unaccountable, but there are several reasons for it. First, scholars are usually very conservative, and disposed to be antagonistic to every new system of philosophy that bears an odor of empiricism, and especially if it threatens to subvert the established ideas of metaphysics or theology. Second, it is a peculiarity with the majority of philosophical minds, that they will not condescend to examine the alphabet of a candidate science, and by passing judgment upon its principles before investigating its facts, or familiarizing themselves with its technicalities, they are almost certain to arrive at conclusions exactly in accord with their preconceived opinions.

Such men try to walk before they can crawl, and the result is, they accomplish but little in their investigation of a subject until they chance to become prejudiced in its favor by external influences. Third, it must be confessed that none of the phrenological treatises have ever been presented in the best manner to facilitate the stuclv of the science. From the time when Drs. Gall and Spurzheim published their first books on the functions of the brain, to the present day, it has been customary to indicate the locations of the cerebral centers by illustrations which, to persons unacquainted with the subject, often convey the impression that the centers always exhibit visible and tangible protuberances upon the surface of the cranium ; than which, however, nothing could be more erroneous. By the term cerebral "center," or "organ," as Phrenologists usually call it, is meant simply that portion of the gray or convoluted brain substance the action of which constitutes what is understood by a mental faculty. All of the centers now regarded as established, have received names which are used almost synonymously to designate either special parts of the brain, or their manifestations which we call mental faculties, and are, for convenience, written with large initials to distinguish them, as referring to individual faculties, from the manifestations which proceed from different centers acting in combination. One of the most plausible objections ever made against Phrenology, is based upon the idea that its advocates profess to have discovered forty-three distinct and independent compartments in the brain.

But this is not a fair statement of their teaching. In no instance has it ever been asserted that the seats of the faculties are entirely separated, and independent of one another. On the contrary, they must be connected, and their boundaries literally interwoven like the colors in the rainbow, in order to facilitate their necessary co-operation. And yet it is quite possible that there may exist very distinct lines of demarcation which our present means of observation are too imperfect to detect. Modern anatomists show that there is really no difference in structure between a motor and a sensory nerve, except in the manner in which it terminates. A motor filament begins in a cell and ends in a kind of loop, while the sensory filament begins in one cell and ends in another. In view of such peculiarities it is not strange that the dissecting knife should fail to reveal many complex nervous functions. But while we do not profess to separate the individual fibers or cells composing each center, it is true nevertheless that the boundaries of the centers may be observed externally with sufficient exactness for all practical purposes. In cases of extreme development or unusual deficiency these limitations and consequently the shapes of the centers are very plainly discernible. As, for example, when Combativeness is very much larger than the surrounding convolutions, its form is plainly seen to be elongated, and its position perpendicular. Very deficient Continuity, when surrounded by large Inhabitiveness, Friendship, Self-Esteem, etc., causes a depression in the shape of a crescent, the points inclining downward. Other centers present still different configurations, some running horizontally and others perpendicularly. It is very difficult to understand the exact rela-

IN TR OB UCTION. 1 5 tion between brain and mind, or at least to express the idea in popular language. The German physiologist, Bock, says, " Geist ist die Arbeit des Gehirns" (Mind is the labor of the brain.) Force is only a quality or property of matter, and all we can say of the mind, is, that it is the activity of the brain. For want of any more strictly accurate expression, I shall continue to use the word " center," to designate the local seat of a particular mental power, although it is to be regretted that we have not some other term which would be at once entirely philosophical and unambiguous. Now the diagrams or "mapped" heads in the phrenological treatises are intended only to show the spaces or territory which the centers occupy at the cortex or surface of the brain. These centers seem to expand from the terminus of the spinal cord upward and outward, very much as the branches and fruit upon a tree grow upward and outward from the trunk; and, in order to estimate the development of a center, it is necessary to measure the distance from the space it occupies at the surface of the brain or cranium, to the medulla oblongata, or terminus of the spinal cord. A line drawn through the head from the opening of one ear to that of the other, will pass through the anterior portion of the medulla oblongata, thus constituting the meatus auditorius externus, or external opening of the ear, an entirely •convenient and accurate base of measurement.

A well balanced head will, in general terms, present a development of about two-thirds forward of a line drawn upward through the opening of the ear, and one-third back of this line. After becoming familiar with this proportion it is easy to detect at a glance any variation from it. All the developments visible in the profile are measured from the opening of the ear, just as one might estimate the length of the spokes in a carriage wheel by glancing from the hub to the tire. The centers in the lateral parts of the brain, or "side head," are estimated by measuring the head through from side to side. The seats of the faculties are all double, like the eyes and ears ; each faculty having a center in each hemisphere of the brain. Special prominences or elevations upon the skull are indeed sometimes produced by special developments of the brain, but this occurs only when one center is much larger than those by which it is surrounded. In like manner a depression is often caused by the great deficiency of one center when it is surrounded by others which are largely developed.

However, only a small proportion of the forty-three centers will ever be found to present such appearances upon any one head, and in all cases the development must be estimated by observing the distance from the opening of the ear to the cortex of the brain, or the surface of the skull; or by the width of the head from side to side, as the case may be. For example, to measure the center named Firmness, project a line from the opening of the ear directly upward to the top of the head, and the length of this line will indicate the development. Or, to measure Secretiveness, place the open hands upon the sides of the head about an inch above the tops of the ears, and observe the width or diameter of the head at this point. Of course considerable practice is necessary to attain skill in estimating cerebral development, as in the case of any delicate mechanical work. In this connection I may remark that the centers in the extreme lower corner of the forehead, just back of the outer angle of the eye, are perhaps the most difficult of all to estimate correctly. But it is only in exceptional cases that real obstacles are presented here, and then they are by no means formidable. The physico-perceptives, which are located beneath the superciliary ridge, are not estimated by their anterior projection alone, but also by the appearance of the eyebrows. Individuality, for example, which observes things simply as individual existences, is indicated not only by the fullness of the brow above the root of the nose, and by the distance from the opening of the ear, or from the most

INTR OB UCTION. 1 9 prominent j)art of the zygomatic arch, but also by the space between the eyebrows; while large Order causes the eyebrows to arch over the outer angle of the eyes. In general terms, the eyebrows may be said to arch over large perceptives, and to present a horizontal and flattened appearance when these centers are deficient.

In view of these facts regarding the true methods of estimating cerebral development, all the anatomical objections to Phrenology fall to the ground. Such as, for example, those based upon the supposed difficulties presented by the frontal sinus, the temporal muscle, variation in the thickness of the plates of the skull, etc., etc. If Phrenologists really asserted that the centers always exhibited protuberances upon the surface of the cranium, and that these excrescences must all be measured like so many warts, it would indeed be ridiculous ; but they have never taught any such idea, and the popular notions regarding "bumpology" have arisen chiefly from superficial persons who criticised that which they did not understand. The same illiterate class who cry "bumpology," may generally be heard confidently discussing the "absurdities " of Darwinism. Their criticisms on Evolution may be chiefly summed up in the word "monkey" while the principal idea they seem to associate with the name of Dr. Gall is "bumps." With reference to this latter expression, I wish to remark, in the words of George Combe, that "its use is sanctioned by neither correctness of language, nor sound philosophy." If there is any one department of nature more important and dignified than all others, it is certainly the human brain ; and whether the terms "center," and "organ," are entirely philosophical or not, there can be no need of the vulgarism referred to above. However, as the masses of the people have had comparatively little opportunity to learn much of Phrenology, it is not strange that they should often misinterpret it, or fail to appreciate it; but it is not so easy to justify the large number of eminent scientists who stubbornly oppose it.

It is true we can in some degree account for their hostility, and, in view of certain reasons already indicated, they are perhaps not deserving of very severe censure ; but still they ought to honor the subject of their criticisms with a careful examination. This they have obviously never done. At least it is a fact worthy of note that none of the anti-phrenological literature extant is free from gross misrepresentations, together with objections of an exceedingly trivial and irrelevant character. For example, the modern " Physico- Psychologists," "Psychic-Physiologists," or "New Phrenologists," as they are variously called, say that as the brain is like a folded glove, the functions of its midmost and lowest parts can not be known to the disciples of Gall, and that in consequence of their vivisections upon pigeons, rabbits, frogs, etc., the "phrenological map" will have to be "revised." Now this is not only unscientific, but absurd. The contributions to cerebral physiology made by these gentlemen suggest the fable of the mountain that labored and brought forth a mouse. If, for example, in the exposed brain of a dog, we discover the nerve center which enables him to wag his tail, what relation does such a demonstration bear to the exalted mental faculties of man? Suppose that by such experiments we do ascertain that a certain nervous bulb in the base of the human brain relates to the involuntary operations of digestion, respiration, circulation, etc., or to the movements of our bodies or limbs. Can this invalidate the previous discovery of such centers as Conscientiousness, Firmness, Benevolence, or Causality? By no means. As well talk of denying the existence of Jupiter because of the discovery of his moons.

There are myriads of diminutive insects whose anatomical structure has hitherto completely eluded the most skillful microscopists. If these are ever dissected and their nature thoroughly understood, will it then be necessary for us to give different names to the lion or the horse? Every science has dim recesses into which no human eye has ever peered. To this rule Phrenology has never been presented as an exception. But its advocates do profess to determine, classify, and analyze, all of the important mental faculties, in precisely the same sense that naturalists have enumerated all the important animals now extant, or in the same sense that astronomers have discovered all the important planets within the solar system.

As a proof that there yet remains but little to do in the way of discovering new cerebral centers of special importance, we submit the fact that, already, centers have been localized which, either singly or in combination, correspond to, and satisfactorily account for, all of the normal mental phenomena with which we^ are acquainted. As the existence and functions of these centers have been demonstrated by a rigid and extensive induction, no amount of additional discovery can ever refute them. Furthermore, clinical observation has demonstrated that they are located in the gray matter, which composes the cortex or external portion of the brain, by the circumstance that when any faculty is especially excited, diseased, or otherwise affected, the only perceptible anatomical phenomena are in the cortical substance, and not in the striated or interior structure; much in the same sense that the growth or decay of an apple is not accompanied by any perceptible structural change in the bodv or limbs of the tree. And as the richest fruit usually grows upon the longest branches, or at the greatest distance from the trunk, so the strength of the cerebral centers, other things being equal, is indicated more by their distance from the medulla oblongata, than by their lateral expansion at the surface of the brain. Hence we might as reasonably split open the limbs or trunk of a tree to look for apples, as to seek new centers of important faculties in the midmost and lowest parts of the brain. Why or how this is true, need not here be discussed. We have irrefutable proof that it is true, and that is sufficient for our present purpose. Again, if the brain may be unfolded like the fingers of a clenched hand, or glove, which, be it remembered, Drs. Gall and Spurzheim were the first to demonstrate, it is equally true that the healthy functions of the brain are performed only when it is folded, and that its most important centers may be observed without unfolding it. That this may be done is sufficiently proved by the fact that it has been done.

To show clearlv and conclusivelv that the physiologists are, as a rule, very imperfectly acquainted with Phrenology, it is necessary only to observe the language they employ in their references to it. A single example will suffice. In Dr. Dunglison's Medical Dictionary, the edition of 1874, a well known work, and one regarded by the medical profession as second to none in authority, under the word Craniology, is the following extraordinarv statement:

"According to Dr. Gall, each projection, which he calls an organ, is the seat of a particular intellectual or moral faculty, and all persons endowed with the same faculty, have, at the same part of the brain, a prominence, which is indicated, externally, by a bump or projection in the bony case. The System of Dr. Gall is made to comprise twenty-seven prominences, which answer to twenty-seven primary faculties."