Thomson. — On FranUaiuVs Paper on Mind-Stuff. 109 



ignorance. In the same way as I see myself in a glass, I see myself in 

 others ; but it is an error to think that what I see is not my face but that 

 of another. Father and mother are non- entities ; I am the infant and the 

 old man, the wise man and the fool, the male and female, etc. 



Thus we have the old adage exemplified, -that there is nothing new under 

 the sun, however unexpected be the quarter in which we find it. But we 

 have nothing to do with the peculiar persuasions of the Cliffords, Prank- 

 lands, Satnamis, and Sunyavadis in then" religious aspect, it is only in their 

 scientific phase that this society, by its constitution, permits discussion. I 

 shall, therefore, address myself to this portion. 



According to Mr. Frankland, " the universe of matter" is " a complex 

 of possibilities of feeling," and again "feelmgs or mental states, com- 

 prising comparatively vivid ones known as sensations and emotions, the 

 fainter copies of these, sometimes called ' ideas,' constitute the material 

 of which thought is woven, and certain unique states of mind which form 

 integral parts of volition and belief — states of mind which assimilate most 

 nearly to emotions, but which may be described as somewhat too colourless, 

 if the term be allowable, to be fairly classed with these." 



Here almost at the commencement of his paper I find myself at issue 

 with the author, my view going only so far as to say that the universe of 

 matter may be a complex of possibilities of feeling, but to which I must add 

 that these same feelings are either no guide or doubtful and very erring 

 indicators in comprehending such matter of the universe. 



Thus we stand on the surface of this world, and feel that the sun, moon, 

 and stars traverse the heavens above us. Our feelings lead us to the belief 

 that we stand stable, and the universe revolves round us. But a higher 

 faculty informs us to the contrary. This faculty we call reason, and which 

 is seldom at one with our feelings, but more often at variance ; further, 

 sometimes in diametrical opposition, such as in the case above recited. 

 How frequently do not our feelings impel us to do that which is wrong, 

 and how often would we do wrong had we not reason to stay us ? Indeed, 

 our feelings are astray in almost every direction, that it is a wonder to me 

 to see men with enquiring minds buildmg up a theory of empty existence 

 on them. Thus, in the physical world, our feelings tell us that the sun has 

 risen ; our educated reason tells us it has not, for it only appears to have 

 risen ; the truth being that it has not, atmospheric refraction creating the 

 deception. Many such illustrations might be entered into, but this would 

 be tedious. 



Again, in the moral world, how often our feelings would deceive us by 

 impelling us to retort the angry word, and how well it is when reason comes 

 to our aid and directs the opposite course, which is the true one, 



