PROOFS FROM THE LIGHT OF NATURE. 



51 



I shall only remark farther, on this part of 

 my subject, that, although the arguments now 

 adduced in support of the immortality of man 

 ,vere less powerful than they really are, they 

 ought to make a deep impression on the mind 

 of every reflecting person, and determine the 

 line of conduct which he ought to pursue. If 

 they were only probable if they possessed no 

 greater degree of weight than simply to over 

 balance the opposite arguments, still, it would be 

 every man s interest to act on the supposition, 

 that a future world has a real existence. For, 

 in the ordinary affairs of human life, and even in 

 the sciences, our opinions and conduct are gene 

 rally determined by a series of probabilities, arid 

 a concurrence of reasons, which supply the want 

 of more conclusive evidence on subjects which 

 are not susceptible of strict demonstration. A 

 merchant, when he purchases a certain commo 

 dity, has no demonstrative evidence that the sale 

 of it shall ultimately turn to his advantage ; but, 

 from a consideration of its price and quality, of 

 the circumstances of trade, and of his immedi 

 ate prospects, he determines on the purchase ; 

 and, bv acting on the ground of similar proba 

 bilities, he conducts his affairs, so as to issue in 

 his prosperity and success. A philosopher has 

 no demonstrative arguments to support the one- 

 half of the opinions he has formed, in relation 

 to the phenomena of human society, and of the 

 material world. His deductions respecting the 

 causes of the winds, of thunder and lightning, of 

 volcanic eruptions, of the nature of light, sound, 

 electricity, galvanism, and other operations in 

 the system of nature, are grounded on that spe 

 cies of reasoning which is termed analogical, 

 and which, at best, amounts to nothing more 

 than a high degree of probability. Notwith 

 standing, he feels no hesitation in prosecuting 

 his experiments and researches, under the gui 

 dance of such reasoning, confident that it will ul 

 timately lead him to the innermost recesses of the 

 temple of truth ; for we know, that the most 

 splendid discoveries of modern times, have ori 

 ginated from inquiries and observations, con 

 ducted on the ground of analogical reasoning. In 

 like manner, in the important subject under con 

 sideration, we ought to be determined in our 

 views and conduct, even by probabilities, although 

 the arguments adduced should leave the question 

 at issue in some measure undetermined. For, 

 if an eternal world has a real existence, we not 

 only embrace an erroi 1,. rejecting this idea, but, 

 by acting in conformity with our erroneous con 

 ceptions, run the risk of exposing ourselves to 

 the most, dreadful and appalling consequences. 

 Whereas, if there be no future state, the belief 

 of it, accompanied with a corresponding conduct, 

 can produce no bad effect either upon our own 

 minds or those of others. On the contrary, it 

 would prove a pleasing illusion during our pas- 

 agc, through a world of physical and motal 



evil, and would revive the downcast spirit, when 

 overwhelmed with the disappointments and sor 

 rows which are unavoidable in our present con 

 dition. So that, even in this case, we might 

 adopt the sentiment of an ancient philosopher,* 

 and say &quot; If I am wrong in believing that the 

 souls of men are immortal, I please myself in 

 my mistake ; nor while I live will I ever choose 

 that this opinion, with which I am so much de 

 lighted, should be wrested from me. But if, at 

 death, I am to be annihilated, as some minute 

 philosophers suppose, I am not afraid lest those 

 wise men, when extinct too, should laugh at my 

 error.&quot; 



But, if the arguments we have brought for 

 ward, amount, not only to bare probability, but to 

 moral certainty, or, at least, to something nearly 

 approximating to moral demonstration if the 

 opposite opinion involves a train of absurdities, 

 if it throws a dismal gloom over the destiny of 

 man, and over the scenes of the universe, and if 

 it robs the Almighty of the most glorious and 

 distinguishing attributes of his nature no words 

 are sufficient to express the folly and inconsisten 

 cy of the man, by whatever title he may be 

 distinguished, who is determined to resist con 

 viction, and who resolutely acts, as if the idea of 

 a future world were a mere chimera. To pass 

 through life with indifference and unconcern, to 

 overlook the solemn scenes of the invisible world, 

 and to brave the terrors of the Almighty, which 

 may be displayed in that state in the face of such 

 powerful arguments as even reason can produce 

 is not only contrary to every prudential princi 

 ple of conduct, but the height of infatuation and 

 madness. Such persons must be left to be arou 

 sed to consideration, by the awful conviction 

 which will flash upon their minds, when they are 

 transported to that eternal state which they now 

 disregard, and find themselves placed at the bar 

 of an almighty and impartial Judge. 



Among the considerations which have been 

 adduced to prove the immortality of man, I have 

 taken no notice of an argument, which is almost 

 exclusively dwelt upon by some writers, namfly, 

 that which is founded on the immateriality of the 

 human soul. I have declined entering upon any 

 illustration of this topic, 1. Because the proof 

 of the soul s immateriality involves a variety 

 of abstract metaphysical discussions, and re 

 quires replies to various objections which have 

 been raised against it, which would tend only to 

 perplex readers endowed with plain common 

 sense. 2. Because the doctrine of the immate 

 riality of the thinking principle, however clear 

 ly it may be proved, can add nothing to the weight 

 of the considerations already brought forward ; 

 nor, when considered by itself, can it afford any 

 conclusive argument in favour of the soul s im 

 mortality. It simply leads us to this conclusion, 



Cicero. 



