1006 Dynamic Theory. 



of absorbing sensations, and conveying impressions, be greatly en- 

 hanced. It is true that this post mortem person would be deprived of 

 the force which, while he was in connection with the body, was sup- 

 plied to him by the consumption of brain tissue, made good as fast as 

 exhausted, by fresh accessions of new blood, which in turn, was peri- 

 odically replenished by substantial meals of bread and beef; and so the 

 sanguine speculator would be under the necessity of discovering some 

 other source of energy to keep him in activity. Such a theory as this 

 might prove interesting, or even fascinating, but the pl^sical difficulties 

 in its way must be considered insurmountable. The same difficulties, or 

 even greater ones, follow the theory of the immortality of the soul, when 

 the soul is conceived of as an immaterial substance. There is no possi- 

 bility of considering any sort of phenomena in connection with an im- 

 material soul, or making it an object of scientific investigation. So 

 that any notion of it we get is purely fanciful, and any account of its 

 mode of existence or means of support, entirely out of the question. 



There is much vagueness and confusion in the use of the terms soul 

 and mind. I have all along used the latter word to signify the aggre- 

 gate of the active phenomena, the sensations, thoughts, and reflections. 

 I shall use the term soul to mean the part of the body concerned in the 

 production of these phenomena, and whose motions are such phenom- 

 ena. The soul then, is a thing or entity, while the mind is its motion, 

 and is not a thing. The soul considered as a material thing, must be 

 seen to be subject to the accidents of matter, liable to waste and re- 

 quiring repair, or at least when functioned to be in alliance with other 

 matter, the brain cells, that are thus liable. As an immaterial thing 

 there is no way of considering it at all, either in connection with the 

 body or out of it. Nevertheless a vast number of people have, or think 

 they have, an idea of the existence of the soul apart from the body, 

 some calling it material, and others immaterial. The Doctrine of im- 

 mortality has become the fashion, and to reject it is now commonly 

 regarded heresy. Formerly the doctrine of immortalitj 7 was associated 

 with that of the resurrection of the body, but was of subordinate im- 

 portance, because the soul of the dead, though in some sense alive, was 

 supposed to remain in a state of inactivity or sleep, until the resur- 

 rection, when it would be revived and rejoined to its body. Now the 

 notion of an active immortality has come to the front, and the doctrine 

 of the resurrection of the body is ignored or denied. 



It would be difficult to show that the theory of the independent ex- 

 istence of the soul has any vested rights as a doctrine of the bible. It 

 is in fact a heathen idea. It was held by some ancient Greek philoso- 

 phers and poets, and from them was adopted by the modern deistical 

 speculators, and is now held by the heathen in many parts of the 



