The relations of mind and brain.

  • Henry Calderwood
Date:
1892
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The relations of mind and brain. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Leeds Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Leeds Library.

    28/584 page 2
    the inquirers present the grandest elements in the whole pro- blem. For, to study, and to unfold even partially, the system of things existing, is to prove superiority in the midst of the system. It is to prove that there is reason in all things. And if so, the rational nature, which can unlock the secrets of the universe, most of all deserves attention. From such elementary considerations, it is plain that all science is in a radical sense philosophy, and all philosophy science. It may even seem a needless distinction to speak of one form of inquiry as scientific, and of another as philosophic: making one set of generalised results a science, another set a philosophy. Usage has, however, established the practice. And it is convenient to have the distinction. The sciences have come to be regarded as concerned with some department of the physical universe, in contrast with what pertains to the nature and laws of mind. This distinction has been held with sufficient definiteness for all practical purposes. Yet, science is so obviously a philosophy, that the old terminology was warranted which distinguished a Natural Philosophy from a Mental Philosophy,—a philosophy of nature from a philosophy of mind. On exactly the same ground we may speak of philo- sophy as a science. Scientific knowledge, the higher know- ledge gathered by recognised scientific methods, cannot be restricted to certain spheres. Wherever observation is possible, and reflection as to the laws which regulate recognised facts, science is possible. If there may be a science of the formation of bone, muscle, and nerve, leading to the recognition of laws which operate in some manner quite beyond our experience, so may there be a science of perception, association, and in- ference, leading to the recognition of laws applicable to the facts of our experience. Man himself belongs to nature. The science of human life, in the full breadth of meaning belonging to the word “ life ” in this connection, has its place among the natural sciences. Physiology and Psychology when taken together are sciences of human life; they cannot be dis- sociated. Only when they are combined can we be said to have a science of the life of man. The claim is therefore a reasonable one, that the whole nature of man be included within the scope of natural science. I am far from thinking
    No text description is available for this image
    No text description is available for this image
    No text description is available for this image