SCIENCE AND MAN 373 



not forced by your own exposition into tlie hypothesis of 

 a free human soul ? 



This is fair reasoning now, and, at a certain stage of the 

 world's knowledge, it might well have been deemed con- 

 clusive. Adequate reflection, however, shows that instead 

 of introducing light into our minds, this hypothesis con- 

 sidered scientifically increases our darkness. You do not 

 in this case explain the unknown in terms of the known, 

 which, as stated above, is the method of science, but you 

 explain the unknown in terms of the more unknown. 

 Try to mentally visualize this soul as an entity distinct 

 from the body, and the difficulty immediately appears. 

 From the side of science all that we are warranted in stat- 

 ing is that the terror, hope, sensation, and calculation of 

 Lange's merchant are psychical phenomena produced by, 

 or associated with, the molecular processes set up by waves 

 of light in a previously prepared brain. 



When facts present themselves let us dare to face them, 

 but let the man of science equally dare to confess igno- 

 rance where it prevails. What then is the causal connec- 

 tion, if any, between the objective and subjective — be- 

 tween molecular motions and states of consciousness ? My 

 answer is: I do not see the connection, nor have I as yet 

 met anybody who does. It is no explanation to say that 

 the objective and subjective effects are two sides of one 

 and the same phenomenon. Why should the phenomenon 

 have two sides? This is the very core of the difficulty. 

 There are plenty of molecular motions which do not ex- 

 hibit this two-sidedness. Does water think or feel when 

 it runs into frost-ferns upon a window-pane ? If not, why 

 should the molecular motion of the brain be yoked to this 

 mysterious companion — consciousness? We can form a 



