147 
pend, as the propounders of these theories have advanced, on physiological 
conclusions— upon some action taking place in that physical organ which 
we call the brain. Therefore the obvious conclusion to be derived from 
this is, that all the phenomena of life and of the soul, all the highest 
emotions of our nature, all our greatest thoughts, are nothing more no°r less 
than mere modifications of the structure of the brain, and”that when the 
brain and the corresponding nervous structure have passed away, then 
according to this school of philosophers, all that we have or are, will have 
ceased to be for ever. Now, I believe such opinions as these are held 
by a very important school of physiologists ; it seems to me to have been 
the purpose and the object of the writers of this book to show, not on 
moral or on religious grounds, but on physical grounds, by an appeal to 
.he laws of nature, that there is not that reason which some have thouaht 
for supposing that the phenomena of life depend on anything to which we 
have been in the habit of attributing the name of “ matter.” The writers of 
this book have, therefore, taken up this notion of matter ; and as far as they 
have been able to throw light on what “ matter” is, they have endeavoured 
to show that there is nothing in that which we call “ matter,” in conser 
quence of which, through any change that may take place in the aggrega- 
tions of matter which we term “ the brain,” to lead us to conclude that The 
phenomena of life will necessarily cease. I do not think, that in an 
argument of this character, we are to expect accuracy or demonstration. Ii 
the writers of the book have succeeded in throwing the slightest possible 
doubt on the theory that the facts of the phenomena of life alone depend on 
the physiological action of the brain, they have gone very far indeed to 
establish the truth of those principles to which they refer, namely, the 
existence of a soul, and the existence of an unseen world. The fact is as 
Bishop Butler has said, that we are not to expect demonstrative or mathe- 
matical accuracy in speculations of this sort ; and Butler has himself set 
us the example in his famous book, the “Analogy,” by bringing forth argu- 
ments which, no doubt in his day were thought very sound, as to what we 
may call the physical character of the soul, and the living element that exists 
within us. We are all aware that Bishop Butler, in one of the chapters of 
his book, which is now passed over in all examinations, speaks of the bulk of 
t ie iving being ; and he shows, that unless we have reason to suppose that 
the bulk of the living being is greater than the elementary particles of 
matter of which the universe consists, then we have no ground for thinking 
that the event, which we call death, will result in the destruction of the 
iving powers. Now, if Bishop Butler could use an argument of that sort, 
we ought to be grateful to physicists of the eminence of the writers of « The 
nseen Universe,” if, in appealing to recognized principles of science, or, at 
a 1 events, to the principles of science that are recognized by the highest 
aut onties, they think that they are able to show that there is nothing in 
at we now concerning the powers of life and of conscience, why in the 
event of death, they should cease to exist. Therefore we should understand 
L 2 
