FRAGMENTS OF SCIENCE. 



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 stating is 

 that the terror, hope, sensation, and calculation of Lange's 

 merchant, are psychical phenomena produced by, or asso- 

 ciated 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 connection, 

 if any, between the objective and subjective between 

 molecular motions and states of consciousness? My answer 

 is: I do not see the connection, nor have I as yet met any- 

 body who does. It is no explanation to say that the ob- 

 jective 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 exhibit 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 coherent 

 picture of the physical processes the stirring of the brain, 

 the thrilling of the nerves, the discharging of the muscles, 

 and all the subsequent mechanical motions of the organ- 

 ism. But we can present to our minds no picture of the 

 process whereby consciousness emerges, either as a neces- 

 sary link or as an accidental by-product of this series of 

 actions. Yet it certainly does emerge the prick of a pin 

 suffices to prove that molecular motion can produce con- 

 sciousness. The reverse process of the production of motion 

 by consciousness is equally unpresentable to the mind. 

 We are here, in fact, upon the boundary line of the 

 intellect, where the ordinary canons of science fail to 

 extricate us from our difficulties. If we are true to these 

 canons, we must deny to subjective phenomena all influence 

 on physical processes. Observation proves that they 

 interact, but in passing from one to the other we meet 

 a blank which mechanical deduction is unable to fill. 

 Frankly stated, we have here to deal with facts almost 

 as difficult to seize mentally as the idea of a soul. And 

 if you are content to make your " soul " a poetic render- 



