COMMUNICATIONS.

From Professor STACKPOOL E. O'DELL:-
:-

I read with interest "The Right Way in Psychology," by the Rev. F. Storrs Turner, B.A.

I am thankful to the author for such enlightenment as his paper gives, especially for his definition--"Study," as preferable to science. We know so little about the soul or spirit, except in relation to mind, that probably "mental philosophy" might well take the place of "psychology."

All our knowledge of psychology is strictly confined to mental manifestations. But this knowledge is extensive. The history of nations, science, religion and art, with all that has ever been made or manufactured, is the result of the unseen powers we call mind. From ancient pyramids or temples to modern London we see the manifestations of the spirit or mind of man. This is what psychologists should study. Mental manifestations, for the purpose of developing them in the formation of character, in the maintenance of mental health, in the alleviation or curing of the insane, in the education of children, in the government of nations, and the general well-being of all peoples morally, mentally and socially. If in some measure psychology does not lead to such desirable ends, it is not justified in its existence as either a science or study. At the same time I would like to state that my knowledge of psychology or mental philosophy, leads me to the belief that it is capable of all I here mention and more, much more.

Remarks by D. BIDDLE, Esq., M.R.C.S.E. :—

I trust I may be allowed to supplement the discussion on Mr. Storrs Turner's interesting paper, by expressing the pleasure I feel in finding that views, which I have held in almost the same form for forty years, have been independently arrived at by so skilled a logician as Mr. Turner. My "Post-mortem Examination, or What is the Condition of the Disembodied Human Spirit?" (Williams and Norgate), was published in 1867, and was followed in two years by "The Spirit Controversy," an expansion of the former.

In these I tried to show that memory, an essential factor of thought, belonged entirely to the body, upon which the human spirit was dependent for the reception of all impressions, internal

as well as external, the chief function of the spirit being Feeling (more or less complex and of various kinds) and Will; the one receptive, the other re-active. Hence the importance of the Christian doctrine of "the redemption of the body," and comfort also to those who fear ghosts.

Remarks by Professor H. LANGHORNE ORCHARD:

There is much in this thoughtful and ingenious paper with which I have the satisfaction of agreeing. Especially valuable seem to me the author's observations upon free will and the regulative character of our knowledge.

I cannot, however, assent to his definition of psychology as the study of man (page 26). Psychology is the study of soul; the study of man concerns itself with anthropology. Nothing is gained by using terms in a sense different from their accepted meaning. I also wish to point out that the author speaks of "that thinking which we call knowing or believing." Does this mean that (a) there is no third form of thinking (e.g., doubting); or that (b) knowing or believing are one particular form of thinking, and both are one and the same thing? The correlation of the sciences is an important truth, which, to my mind, is obscured by calling everything psychology that is not physics. And does not the study of man necessarily connect itself with that study of physics from which it is proposed to separate it? The theory that the self consists of a human soul and a human body in union may appear to have some historical support in Leibnitz's supposition that a person consists of soul and body together. But, if the theory be sound, the self of to-day is not the self of yesterday, for one of the constituent parts, viz., the body, has changed. Further, if the self is constituted by a human soul in union with a human body, it certainly follows that when this union is dissolved at death, the self is dissolved also, and ceases to exist.

Remarks by Mr. MARTIN ROUSE :

The mind is a unity in a different sense from what the body is; or what the body and mind in combination are. For, firstly, there are portions of our body that we are continually rubbing off or cutting off; but whoever heard of one's taking off a piece from one's mind (although figuratively we may speak of "giving a man a piece of one's mind"); and, secondly, the

body can be stretched so as to touch at one moment two points that it would otherwise not extend to-for example, by spreading apart one's two arms or two legs; but the mind cannot thus be stretched, since it is impossible by any efforts to think of two objects at the same instant-they must be thought of by turns.

Also the mind can work quite independently of the body, dispensing with the bodily organs through which it usually works altogether. Children who were born blind learn to weave baskets and bird-cages, preserving the shapes round and true, which it is impossible they should do without having images of them in their minds; while men who have become blind (like the poet Milton) can conjure up with the keenest vividness images of all the scenes and incidents that their eyes have witnessed, representing them anew upon the mirror or illumined screen of memory and even reflecting fresh forms upon the kaleidoscope of the imagination. Again, before children are able to speak, they certainly think, as can be proved by many instances; and conversely, when men have ceased to be able to speak upon their dying beds, their signs prove that they think still, while an instance is on record of a Christian man writing a dying exhortation after speech had thus left him.* And lastly, whereas they who are dumb through having been born deaf can actually be taught to speak with lips and tongue; some who have become stone-deaf through old age (like the late Sir Arthur Cotton) have shown themselves to possess memories as clear and intellects as vivacious as the ablest of their contemporaries, who have every organ of sense perfect.

Now, if the absence of each of these faculties separately leaves the mind intact, the absence of any two or all three of them must equally leave it so ;- —an inference confirmed by the recent case of a girl born both deaf, dumb and blind, and yet rising to scholarly attainments through the unwearied patience of her teachers. And it is further evident that if the absence of bodily sight, speech, and hearing does not cause the mind to lose any of its soundness or wholeness, the superadded absence of the inferior faculties of smell, taste, and touch cannot possibly make it less sound or whole. The mind is therefore a unity independent of the body.

* Mr. Edward Read of Tasmania, father-in-law of Dr. Harry Guinness.

D

REPLY OF THE AUTHOR.

I meant no offence to science, and do not understand how my sentence can have been so misinterpreted. Science is not metaphysical; and glories in its abstinence from metaphysics.

To question (a) I answer that doubting is a kind of thinking; so is inquiry, etc. I cannot answer (b) in a sentence, the questions require at least a whole paper to themselves. In Knowledge, Belief and Certitude, published by Sonnenschein in 1900, the results of years of thought and research are contained; and there, too, will be found a full statement of my view of science.

Limits of space forbid my discussing other criticisms. I cannot, however, refrain from expressing my dissent from Professor Orchard's arguments against the union of soul and body. The soul also changes, and far more than the body. In some cases, it is "born again," it becomes "a new creature." Change is not incompatible with identity. That the dissolution of the body involves the annihilation of the soul is an argument which rests upon the assumption that the visible and tangible body is real; and the soul only a dependent phenomenon. We do not know the ultimate nature of matter, nor the ultimate nature of spirit. An argument which is based on ignorance is worthless. The soul is the life of the body; it is more than that, but it is that. If the body is disintegrated why should not the life continue, and acquire a new body? St. Paul says "it is sown a natural (psychical) body; it is raised a spiritual body." Death is an event of which we have no experience. When we have passed through it, and look back upon it, we shall know something about it. I do not pretend that our present conjectures as to what is possible are proofs of resurrection and immortality; I am only contending that the alleged argument from the dissolution of the body is not valid.

I thank my critics for their kind compliments, and for their criticisms, which shall receive careful consideration.

ORDINARY GENERAL MEETING.*

REV. JOHN TUCKWELL, M.R.A.S., IN THE CHAIR.

The Minutes of the previous Meeting were read and confirmed. The following candidate was put forward for election by the Council:ASSOCIATE -Rev. C. V. Fraser, Holy Trinity Rectory, Jamaica.

The following paper was then read by the Author :-
:-

CONFUCIANISM. By the Rev. ARTHUR ELWIN, "Long" Lecturer on the Religions of China.+

TO-D

10-DAY our subject is Confucianism, which is one of what are generally called the Three Religions of China, that is, the three religions which have been handed down from ancient times, viz.:-Confucianism, Taouism, and Chinese Buddhism.

Of course, in the short time we have at our disposal, it will be impossible to go fully into this interesting subject; but we must try first of all to give a short account of Confucius and his doings, and then very briefly examine his writings and his teaching.

Before we pass on, however, we cannot but notice that Confucius was born in the sixth century B.C., which was certainly one of the most remarkable centuries in the world's history. In China, in this century lived Laou-tse, the founder of Taouism; and in India, Gautama, the founder of Buddhism.

*Monday, January 2nd, 1905.

The author is indebted to the writers mentioned below for information contained in the following paper, viz.: Berry, Davis, Doolittle, Douglas, Du Bose, Dyer, Ball, Elkins, Eitel, Grant, Henry, Huc, Legge, Martin. Medhurst, Moule, Smith, Tisdall, Williams, and, last but not least, Mrs. Howard Taylor.