202 MYSTICISM AND LOGIC 



one in which it is determined quite independently of 

 scientific laws, namely, the sense that it will be what it 

 will be. We all regard the past as determined simply by 

 the fact that it has happened ; but for the accident that 

 memory works backward and not forward, we should 

 regard the future as equally determined by the fact that 

 it will happen. " But," we are told, " you cannot alter 

 the past, while you can to some extent alter the future." 

 This view seems to me to rest upon just those errors in 

 regard to causation which it has been my object to remove. 

 You cannot make the past other than it was true, but 

 this is a mere application of the law of contradiction. If 

 you already know what the past was, obviously it is use- 

 less to wish it different. But also you cannot make the 

 future other than it will be ; this again is an application 

 of the law of contradiction. And if jou happen to know 

 the future e.g. in the case of a forthcoming eclipse it 

 is just as useless to wish it different as to wish the past 

 different. " But," it will be rejoined, " our wishes can 

 cause the future, sometimes, to be different from what it 

 would be if they did not exist, and they can have no 

 such effect upon the past." This, again, is a mere 

 tautology. An effect being defined as something subse- 

 quent to its cause, obviously we can have no effect upon 

 the past. But that does not mean that the past would 

 not have been different if our present wishes had been 

 different. Obviously, our present wishes are conditioned 

 by the past, and therefore could not have been different 

 unless the past had been different ; therefore, if our 

 present wishes were different, the past would be different. 

 Of course, the past cannot be different from what it was, 

 but no more can our present wishes be different from what 

 they are ; this again is merely the law of contradiction. 

 The facts seem to be merely (i) that wishing generally 



