♦ KNOWLEDGE ♦ 



I 



'^rfi^V^ AN ILLUST^RATED t^^ 



>^ MAGAZINE OF SCIENCE ^ 

 PlainlyWorded-ExactlyDesqribed 



LONDON: FEW AY, AUGUST 14, 1885. 

 Contents of No. 198. 



1 Eliot on Mental Decajr/ 1 Odd Superstitions 



tichard A. Proctor 1:7 , Gossip. By Richard A. Pructor 



Mysteries and ifor»Uties. IV. By 



Edward Clodd i; 



Inflnence of Mechanical Indention l; 



larwinrsm - The 



GlEORGE ELIOT ON MENTAL DECAY. 



Bt Richard A. Proctor. 



"The old man says, 'Son, I have swallowed and digested the 

 wisdom of the past.' The young man says, ' Sire, I proceed to 

 swaUow and digest thee, with all thou knowest.' "—0. Wendell 



ALTHOUGH none of the unpublished letters relating 

 to the views of George Eliot on old age, and on 

 mechanism in life and thought, have been forwarded to 

 me, I can gather from answers by my friend the acting 

 editor that several readers regard those views as objection- 

 able from a religious or theological point of view. For 

 instance I find the editor at p. 14 reminding a correspon- 

 dent that George Eliot's dicta were put forth in these 

 columns " as those of a dead woman of the highest 

 literary ability, and of almost world-wide fame (or 

 notoriety) " [!], — he might have said of a dead woman who 

 stands as high above all others living or dead, in literary 

 and philosophical ability, as Shakes] cai-e abrive all men, — 

 " and neither as arguim-uis n. !■ ,'. i''i :. v . \ pi'issiim of 

 approval. I suppose,'' lie piMr. ' , ' 1 i rpi'iKliu-t'd 



a conversation here in w liieli Si i ii . ilocutdi-, 



you would accuse nic cf ailnnn, j , iliir, f,.i- Pan- 

 theism! You, however, yimr-df" (],• i- ihMrr-^in- 

 "H.R.B.") "did unquestionably I IV,., 1, ,), t Ii. .1-.^ ,, ;,| 

 ground, inasmuch as yours was a cMir-Mi ii.il , (-ni, n' i .ii 

 for positive miraculous interferuucc in cxi'lauatum cf a 

 phenomenon of nature." 



Well, now, let any want of definiteness as to my own 

 aim and purpose in quoting George Eliot's views be 

 corrected. I quoted tlirm as fn- llie inr.st ]iart tlu' virus 



which in these our (inir. ,,, ' 1., i ,: ■, .p,.-! i,,j- il,, 



mechanism of life aial ( IhiH- 111 ; i . m :i ; n mn m wiiliall 

 that has been learncl ;,liu,,i ,■, ,1 ,-,1 ;., i ,, ,, ;,,i,| |.l,_vsio- 

 logic 



. lia 



[r.\ ll,r 



eof 



subj.vl, fan tl..ul)i that tl.e.se virNV s are just; and finally 

 as relating to a matter of purely seieutitic interest. The 

 iilea tliat such inquiries arc to be regarded ns relating to 



iiuittc IS tlic'ilcvgical, because this or that person is disposed 

 t,. (l,.lut.- su, h and such inferences in regard to theo- 

 1 i-i,al .picMinns, is simply absurd. Every one sees the 

 absurdity when the flat-earth man tells us that the 

 doctrine of terrestrial rotundity is irreligiotis. And I 

 suppose most people would recognise the absurdity of 

 criticism on a treatise upon Epilepsv, that the phmo- 

 ineiia fl. ■ I'l. 1 ,'. . v •;f:'-..r t i-i:. -" iv-arded as du( 



ribed 



l^a— !-■-..: ■. I .■.',:;,.■!• ■ jiral doctri 



(.'hrislia!,;';, .lal;:-:::. .\1 ,, 1.- .n,. . I,. :. i ^ iii. Buddhism, and 

 other religions. It is fully as absurd to regard the 

 subject of George Eliot's remarks, introduced among 

 other scientific matter into these columns, as related to 

 religion or theology, — though of course they can be con- 

 nected, like every earthly thing, with religious matters. 

 Two stejs will take the religious enthushist of the exube. 

 rant tyiie (whose religion somehow one always doubts) 

 from Consols to the Gospels. But Knowledge is not 

 meant for such persons. 



I look over everything said by George Eliot and Mr. 

 Lewes in the conversation quoted, and excepting her 

 remark that the moon is a material mirror (which is 

 inexact, but probably Bueliaiian, rather a careless reporter 

 I imagine, altered what she saiil)! Hnd absolutely nothing 

 which can even be questioned, far less anything which I 

 should myself oppose. Her remark that the phenomena 

 of old age afford a strong argument against the popular 

 conception of a personal immortality is too guarded to be 

 questioned, — and asserts too little to be conceivably offen- 

 sive even to the weakest brethren. For my own part I 

 regard even the doctrine of a future life as open to 

 scientific discussion, and not necessarily a religious 

 doctrine at all. 



But I remember that when Dr. Holmes was writing on 

 the " Mechanism of Mind and Morals" he found it neces- 

 sary to make a concession to the timidity of those who 

 cannot separate the scientific study of his subject fi'om 

 certain religious ideas which they have been accustomed 

 to associate with it. "We need not," he points out, "be 

 frightened from studying the conditions of the thinking 

 organ in connection with thought, just as we study the 

 eye iu its relation to sight. The brain is an instrument 

 necessary, so far as our direct observation extends, to 

 thought. The ' matn-ialist ' bcli ryes it to be wound up 

 bytheoi-,li,i:,ry .M Mill,, f, a'ees, aihl to -ive them out again 

 as meiitiil jir, iihu'ts ; '■ \\u- ' spir:t u;ilist ' believes in a 

 eonselna. ,a„l,y. uM i Mr,.,vl, ;.„.-,: M. .. i,h motive force, 

 wliirii I'l •;> . >:-!, 1,1- i' •,■!;"!' ' ''■'''"' i :.strument 



tuasi I..- ■ ^•.1 , . .; ' ■ - I , - ,,lt,r; the 



"f \"""1 "i-" '' >- " -'-^ ouly eonduiou of iife with 



which we are experiment iliy acquainted. And whi 



hat all 



wiiiuu vvc aic KApenuieni; uiy acquamieu. Ana What al 

 recognise as soon as disease forces it upon their attention, 



.leveloped 



tion of its huniiony cnunot l>o regarded as depenjingon the nui-sic 

 being drawn forth antoroaticahy or otherwiEe from the instrument 

 wLi;h renders it. 



