A discussion on the organic materiality of the mind, the immateriality of the soul, and the non-identity of the two ... / by G.D. Dermott.

  • Dermott, G. D. (George Darby), 1802-1847
Date:
1830
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A discussion on the organic materiality of the mind, the immateriality of the soul, and the non-identity of the two ... / by G.D. Dermott. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    7/46 page 5
    REPLY TO MR. DERMOTT’S COMMUNICATION ON THE MATERIALITY OF MIND. To the Editor of The Lancet. Sir,—Though a divine, I happen, never¬ theless, to be a reader of The Lancet, which has found its way even into this hyperborean region ; and, foreign as its contents may seem to my professional studies, I read it with great interest and pleasure, and rejoice in the good that it has done, is doing, and is likely still to do. I certainly never dreamed of becoming a correspondent to it; but an article in your Number for October 11, which 1 have just read, impels me to request further infor¬ mation upon the important subjects to which it relates, and which I hope the author of that article will feel it his duty to communicate. In the article to which I refer, the author, G. D. Dermott, Esq., has, by a very profound physiological in¬ vestigation, “ clearly” established the fol¬ lowing positions :— 1. That perception, thought, memory, judgment, and all other mental operations, are functions of mere matter. 2. That we have no conception whatever as to the nature of spirits, nor can any human language convey to the mind any just idea as to their nature, or as to the properties with which they are endowed ; that, in short, we have neither language nor ideas to enable us to express the na¬ ture of spiritual things. 3. That material and spiritual things are so different and incompatible, that the one cannot be the direct effect of the other— that they cannot be existing in a state of intimate association, because they must be as different in nature as two extremes can possibly be. 4. That the lower animals have minds, but that they have no souls. 5. That man, besides a mind has also an immaterial and immortal soul; but that so long as organic life continues, so long the soul must remain dormant; but, on the other hand, as soon as the life of the body ceases, so soon the soul enters into a state of development, or into a state of ac¬ tual—it may be said sensible—existence. 6. That there must be a great and al¬ mighty First Cause, or in other words, an omnipotent Creator—a God. 7. That without education, there would be neither knowledge nor conscience, which are just convertible terms—that it is education that forms the mind, or, what is nearly the same thing, calls it into action. I mean not, at present, to incur the guilt of calling in question the accuracy of any of these positions, as, besides being drawn from the depths of physiology—a science of which I am, as in duty bound, most profoundly ignorant—most of them bear the stamp of a very venerable antiquity, for which I have a great reverence. But as all the doctrines which we divines are accustomed to teach, vanish before these positions, “ like the baseless fabric of a vision,” I should like, before entirely new- modelling every article of my creed, to apply to Mr. Dermott for some explana¬ tions, which I hope he will consider it a duty to give. I am naturally very anxious to know what is to become of us poor parsons, in consequence of the new light which has thus been poured over this happy age. If men should conclude that. “ Bibles, reve¬ lations, ministers, and religions,” are to¬ tally useless in this present world, and owe their existence to a mere delusion, why then you know u Othello’s occupa¬ tion’s gone.” And how this conclusion is to be avoided I really cannot see : for “ Bibles, revelations, ministers, religions,” have nothing whatever to do with the mental powers, since Mr. Dermott shows that the lowrer animals possess these pow¬ ers, yet need neither Bibles nor ministers, because they have no souls. And, as far as I can see, Bibles and ministers can be of as little use to the soul, which does not begin to live till the body be dead. Why then should these articles be retained, on the pretence of preparing for futurity a soul, which has no actual or sensible ex¬ istence, till it is far beyond their reach? Truly I tremble for my craft, and so may you too, Mr. Editor, for yours. For when theology is banished from the world, I again ask, what are we poor parsons to do? We can neither dig nor beg, and I doubt not that many of us will just turn physi¬ ologists, and crowd the already over¬ crowded ranks of your profession. One of the nonconformists, who was ejected in the reign of Charles II., said that many would have reason to mourn his eject¬ ment ; and being called to account for his words, said, all that he meant was, that, he intended to commence the practice of medicine. Now, when Mr. Dermott has got us all ejected from our pulpits, I fear many will have cause to rue it, and your profession hardly less than ours. Ministers often complain of the inatten¬ tion with which they are heard, and of the little good that they are able to do; and no wonder, truly, now the secret is out. The soul to which they are addressing themselves, is all the while enjoying a sound repose. This fact also accounts for a mode of preaching which has become very fashionable, and wi£h which, I con¬ fess, I have hitherto been so ignorant, as to be not a little disgusted. I have seen men—and should you have happened to stray into a church, so probably have you —labouring in the pulpit like a quarry man at piece work, with their arms going like the sails of a windmill. And because old people like noise nearly as well as children, 1 have heard preachers highly
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3