are obliged to confess that we do not know. When, therefore, we assert that the essence of the soul is the same as the essence of matter, we merely assert that it is the same as something of which, by confession, we know absolutely nothing. Were this assertion granted, it would then add nothing. whatever to the sum of human knowledge. Would it not be better frankly to confess our ignorance on the subject? Thirdly, so far as the grounds for an opinion exist, they favor precisely the opposite opinion. The qualities of matter and the energies of mind are as widely as possible different from each other. In all languages they are designated by different classes of words We recognize them by different powers of the mind, powers which cannot be used interchangeably. Our senses cannot recognize the thoughts of the mind, nor can consciousness recognize the qualities of matter. To assert, then, that the essence of mind and of matter is the same, is to assert, without the possibility of proof, that two things are the same, which not only have no attribute in common, but of which the attributes are as unlike as we are able to conceive. It may not be out of place to enumerate the several mental states consequent upon the enunciation of any given proposition. In the first place, the assertion is made without any evidence either in favor of or against it. In this case (supposing the veracity of the assertor not to be taken into view) my mind remains precisely as it was before. The assertion goes for nothing. I have no opinion either the one way or the other. I neither believe nor disbelieve, nor have any tendency in either direction. In the second case the assertion is made, and though sufficient proof is not presented to create belief, yet considerations, as, for instance, analogies, are shown to exist, which create a probability either in favor of or against the thing asserted. Here, then, is ground for an opinion, and the state of mind is changed. We neither believe nor disbelieve, but we hold an opinion either in favor of or contrary to the assertion. In the third case, the assertion is sustained either by syllogistic reasoning, or by testimony conformed to the laws of evidence. Here a different state of mind is produced. I believe it. I rely upon it as I would upon a matter which came within the cognizance of my own perception or consciousness. To illustrate these cases. A man asserts that the moon is a mass of silver. His assertion leaves my mind where it was before. I know nothing about it. Another man asserts that the planet Jupiter is or is not inhabited. He cannot prove it, but he presents various analogical facts in harmony with this assertion. I form an opinion on the subject. In the third case, a man asserts that the sun is so many millions of miles from the earth, and he proves, by testimony, that the observations forming the data were made, and he explains the mathematical reasoning by which this result is obtained. I believe it, and in my mind it takes its place with other established facts. Any one, who will reflect upon the evidence presented in favor of the materiality of the mind, can easily determine which of these mental states it is entitled to produce. But it has been sometimes said that the brain itself is the mind, and that thought is one of its functions. The reason given for this belief is, that diseases of the brain and nerves affect the condition of the mind; that the mind declines as they become debilitated by age, and that the mind becomes deranged when the brain suffers from disease. To this I would reply, that, so far as I have observed, the facts are hardly stated with accuracy when this course of argument is adopted, and a large class of facts bearing in an opposite direction is too frequently left out of view. But, granting the facts, they do not justify the conclusion that is drawn from them. Suppose the brain to be the instrument which the mind uses in its intercourse with the external world,- as, for instance, suppose the brain to secrete the medium by which the mind derives impressions from without, and sends forth volitions from within,any derangement of this organ would, by necessity, create derangement in the forms of mental manifestation connected with that derangement. Disease of the nerves may create false impressions, or may lead to acts at variance with the spiritual volitions. As the facts may be thus accounted for on the supposition that the brain is an organ used by the mind, as well as on the supposition that the brain is itself the organ of thought, they leave the question precisely where they found it. If, then, it be asked, what is the relation which the mind holds to the material body? our answer would be as follows: The mind seems to be a spiritual essence, endowed with a variety of capacities, and connected with the body by the principle of life. These capacities are first called into exercise by the organs of sense. So far as I can discover, if a mind existed in a body incapable of receiving any impression from without, it would never think, and would, of course, be unconscious of its own existence. As soon, however, as it has been once awakened to action by impressions from without, all its various faculties in succession are called into exercise. Consciousness, original suggestion, memory, abstraction, and reason, begin at once to act. These various powers are developed and cultivated by subsequent exercise, until this congeries of capacities, once so blank and negative, may at last be endowed with all the energies of a Newton or a Milton. Locke compares the mind to a sheet of blank paper; Professor Upham, to a stringed instrument, which is silent until the hand of the artist sweeps over its chords. Both of these illustrations convey to us truth in respect to the Ж relation existing between the mind and the material system which it inhabits. The mind is possessed of no innate ideas, its first ideas must come from without. In this respect it resembles a sheet of blank paper. In its present state it can originate no knowledge until called into action by impressions made upon the senses. In this respect it resembles a stringed instrument. Here, however, the resemblance ceases. Were the paper capable not only of receiving the form of the letters written upon it, but also of combining them at will into a drama of Shakspeare or the epic of Milton; or, were the instrument capable not only of giving forth a scale of notes when it was struck, but also of combining them by its own power into the Messiah of Handel, then would they both more nearly resemble the spiritual essence which we call mind. It is in the power of combining, generalizing, and reasoning, that the great differences of intellectual character consist. All men open their eyes upon the same world, but all men do not look upon the world to the same purpose. REFERENCES. Mind first called into action by the perceptive powers-Locke, Book 2, chap. 1, sec. 9; chap. 9, sections 2-4, and sec. 15. On the proper means of knowing the operations of our own minds-Reid, Essay 1, chap. 5. No idea of substance or essence, material or spiritual - Locke, Book 2, chap. 23, sections 4, 5, 16, 30. Energies of mind expressed by active verbs - Reid, Essay 1, chap. 1. Stewart, Affirmation concerning the essence of mind unphilosophical As much reason to believe in the existence of spirit as of body-Locke, SECTION II. OF THE PERCEPTIVE POWERS IN GENERAL. BEFORE entering upon the consideration of the individual senses, it may be of use to offer a few suggestions respecting the perceptive powers in general. I propose to do this in the present section. 1. I find myself, in my present state, in intimate connection with what seems to me to be an external world. I cannot help believing that I am in my study; that, looking out of the window, I behold in one direction a thronged city, in another green fields, and in the distance beyond a range of hills. I hear the sound of bells. I walk abroad and am regaled with the odor of flowers. I see before me fruit. I taste it and am refreshed. I am warmed by the sun and cooled by the breeze. I find that all other men in a normal state are affected in the same manner. I conclude that to be capable of being thus affected is an attribute of human nature, and that the objects which thus affect me are, like myself, positive realities. I cannot, then, escape the conviction that I am a conscious existence, numerically distinct from every other created being, and that I am surrounded by material objects possessed of the qualities which I recognize. The earth and the trees seem to me to exist, and I believe that they do exist. The grass seems to me to be green, and I believe that it is green. I cannot divest myself of the belief that the world around me actually is what I perceive it to be. I know that it is something absolutely distinct from the being whom I call myself. I am conscious that there is a me, an ego. I perceive that there is a not me, a non ego. I observe that all men have the same convictions, and that in all their |