CH. iv.] MATTER AND SPIRIT. 4& 



to material structure involves the assertion of materialism. 

 This is the non sequitur which lies at the very bottom of the 

 theological misrepresentation, and its utter fallaciousness 

 needs to be thoroughly exposed. 



It would be grossly unjust to throw all the blame of this 

 particular non sequitur upon the theologians, who Lave 

 enough logical delinquencies of their own to answer for, 

 without being required to carry the burden of their adver 

 saries errors into the bargain. The illegitimate inference is 

 one which scientific writers, and philosophers of a certain 

 school, have been quite as ready to make as theologians : 

 indeed, I believe it was the former who first suggested it to the 

 latter. At all events, without going into historical minutia3 

 concerning the origin of materialism, but confining our 

 attention to its more recent scientific phases, we may observe 

 that it was not a theologian, but an eminent man of science, 

 who first suggested that the results of modern objective 

 psychology might be represented in the formula, Ohne 

 Phosphor Jcein Gedarike. This formula has been caught up 

 as a watchword by a school of atheistic writers, some of 

 whom, as Moleschott and Vogt, rank very high as scientific 

 specialists, but none of whom seem to be worthy of mention 

 for psychological capacity or for acquaintance with the best 

 thoughts of modern philosophy. The most conspicuous 

 representative of this school is Dr. Biichner, a writer who 

 deserves praise for his power of lucid exposition, but whose 

 pages are too often deformed with brutalities of expression for 

 which no atonement is made in the shape of original or 

 valuable thought. Although this writer has no scientific 

 reputation whatever, and although his school has no more 

 claim to rank with the great schools of philosophy in our 

 time than it had when the now-forgotten Lamettrie repre 

 sented it in the days of Hume and Kant, yet through 

 loudness of asseveration it has succeeded in doing much to 

 mislead and perplex the public mind with reference to the 



F F 2 



