Sessional address of the President (Mr. Serjeant Cox), November 4th, 1875.

  • Edward William Cox
Date:
1875
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Sessional address of the President (Mr. Serjeant Cox), November 4th, 1875. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    5/12 (page 5)
    O Psychic Forces which, like the forces of Magnetism and Electricity, are themselves imperceptible. This programme of the practical scheme of the Society was widely circulated and extensively noticed by the press; by some severely criticised, by many warmly eulogised, by others abused, according to the preconceptions of the several reviewers. The objections were, however, not so various as numerous. They resolved themselves into the following: The first was that, raised at the meeting—to the rigid exclusion of Theological discussion and reference. To discuss Soul, its being and its destiny, without reference to Theology is, it was contended, to exclude all that we can possibly know about it. One reviewer read to myself personally a very grave rebuke for having per- mitted this exclusion of authority. On the other hand, some sceptical writers were equally desirous that advantage should be taken of the Society for the promulgation of an^-religious opinion and argument. Thus, by two opposing parties, there was a desire to make Psychology a cloak for promulgating doctrinal views that are in direct antagonism. This fact alone is conclusive as to the prudence of our resolution. The very purpose of our being is to investigate scientifically, not theologically. We are working with express design to ascertain if there be any or what proofs to be found in nature of the existence of Soul, what Mind is, what Life is, and what relationship they bear to each other— not what opinions this or that sect, or men, or creed, or dogma, maintain about them. To permit theological re- ference would be to drown discussions of Psychological ques- tions in disputes about theological authority. All men may be brought to agree about scientific facts and even differ without quarrelling about the inferences to be drawn from them; but if Mr. Smith were permitted to quote a text as conclusive, Mr. Jones would dispute the authority of the text, or cite some other, and the evening would be occupied [91]