Invading the Invisibles JA Edgarton 1931 359pgs PHI

7/27/2019 Invading the Invisibles JA Edgarton 1931 359pgs PHI

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/invading-the-invisibles-ja-edgarton-1931-359pgs-phi 1/358

k

t h e l a t e s t word- : ' m P h i l o s o p h y . The , n e w f a c t o r

ae , b r o t i g h t o g e t h e r ` a n g iv e n n w in t u - a l i nt e r s € e t ~

i R e l a t i v i t y , t h e p s y c h i c s c t e a

e v o l u t i o n , t h e n e w p h y s i c s , a n d t h e - n e

rough t h e i h t a n d _ mad e t o t e l l ' t h e i r

t h e ' l e v e r a n d g r a v i t a t i o n r e

o u h ' d i t i e n s i o n a n d i f ie " w

i c e , m y s h

the c i r c l e o & > o w ccnimon

and -Pythago ras, o Plato and ;PI

1 i s Io

s e e

± m o Q n i s r e v e a l e d .



By the Same Au tho r

THE PHILOSOPHY OF JESUSVOICES OF THE MORNINGGLIMPSES OF THE REAL

THE STORY OF NEW THOUGHTAN ADVENTURE IN TRUTHIN THE GARDENS OF GODSONGS OF THE PEOPLEOUR HIDDEN FRIEND

THE SONG OF THE MORNING STARS



I n v a d i n g t h e I n v i s i b l e

By

JAMES ARTHUR EDGERTON

THE NEW AGE PRESS74 IRVING PLACE, NEW YORK

NATIONAL PRESS BLDG., WASHI NGTON, D . C .



Co pyright, 1931,

THE NEW AGE PRESS



CONTENTSCHAPTER PAGE

XVII . CONCLUSION - - 348

PREFACEI . INTRODUCTION - - -

II . PHI LOSOPHI C AL I DEALI SM -

III . THE ABSOLUTE - - - -

IV . MYSTICISM

V. THE EXTRA CONSCIOUS MINDVI. PURPOSIVE EVOLUTIONVII THE NEw PHYSICAL THEORYVIII . RELATIVI TY -

7

- 1129

- 46

61

- 7695

- 122

1 45

IX PSYCHICAL RESEARCH - 16 4

X METAPSYCHICS - - - 19 5

XI. PSYCHOTHERAPY - 21 4

XII . THE NEw PSYCHOLOGY - 241

XIII THE PHILOSOPHY OF VALUES - 261

XIV A NEw SYNTHESIS - - - - 278

XV AFTERTHOUGHTS - - 3 01

XVI PRAC TIC AL IDEALISM - - 325



PREFACE

THis ser ies of lessons has been given in

su bstance in half a d o zen citi es in the United

States and C anada, and in parts elsewher e . The

talks were all extempo r aneo us, but those deliv-

ered to a pr ivate class in Washington were taken

in shor thand and many of the chapters p u t into

shape fr o m these notes . The cor r ectio ns and

wr iting o f other chapters w ere do ne in Flor id a,

w her e there were no boo ks available, so that

citatio ns to r efer ences had subsequently to be

made in foo tnotes .

Philo sophy is rather d ifficult for the averag e

reader, fo r which reason the simple and conver-

satio nal style of the talks has been retained so

far as possible . Metaphysics is a clo sed boo k to

most, and I have long felt that the subject sho u ld

be stated mor e plainly and mad e accessible to

m ore peop le. This wo r k may seem to lack finish

and po lish for that reason, yet it is hoped that

it may at least contain sug gestio ns not entir ely

devoid of value or interest to trained philo so-

phers as well as to other seekers after tru th .

The general pl an of the boo k is an inqui r y

into and a new synthesis o f the recent d isco v-

eries of science that have a bearing on philo s-

ophy. I am aware that other and abler w r iters

have already d one this w o rk for certain o f the

7



8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEsciences, but no one, so far as I can discover,

has sou g ht to co ver the w hole field . Amongo ther s may be mentio ned A . S . Ed di ngto n, who

confines himself lar g ely to physics and r ela-

t i v i t y ; Jo hn S . Haldane whose two boo ks o n the

sciences and p hilo sop hy embr ace most ad mir ably

bi o l o g y a nd ph ys i o l o g y , bu t r ej ec t o u t r i g h t

certain factor s of the new psycholo gy and psychic

phenomena and r each a conclusi o n wi th r egard

to immortality that I do not believe justified by

all the facts that science has bro ught to lig ht ;

and John Dewey, who has confined himselfchiefly to what I w ou ld call i nstru mentalism or

the empir ical metho d in philo sop hy . Acknowl-edgment is made to all of these and o thers, espe-

cially to Dr . Gu stave Geley, whose boo k, Fromthe Unconscio us to the Consciou s, comes morenearly to embr acing the w ho le field o f w hat I

may call the psychic sciences and evolu tio n, but

d oes not so ful ly d eal w ith the new physics .

The Positivist Philo sophy o f Aug uste Co mte

o f the early Nineteenth C entur y in a w ay em-

braced this same field of the special sciences and

on this basis evol ved a relig io n of humanity .

No fu rther reference is made to C omte, how ever,

for two r easons : Fir st, because the special sci-

ences have vastly changed since his d ay, no ne

of the new factor s dealt w ith in this boo k then

having been di scovered, and second, because his

whole treatment of the subject was in an almost

do gmatically r ationalistic and intellectualist

vein . I explain l ater w hy this method is no t

only anti-r elig io us but is one-sid ed and do es not



PREFACE 9

r each true results from a philoso phical stand-

point .May I add that in this w o r k I have sou ght

only for tru th and have endeavor ed to eliminate

all personal bias so far as I w as consciou s of

po ssessing such . If I have seemed u nfri end ly

to mater iali sm, mechanism and ki ndr ed trends

o f mod ern thou ght, it is because I believe them

not only to have been refuted by science itself,

but to be u nw holeso me in their effects on the

pu blic mind . If a tr ee may be jud g ed by its

fru its, that tree is not g oo d, and this, on prag-

matic g r ou nds, at least, may be r eg ard ed as a

fur ther p ro of that it do es not g ro w i n the soil

of Truth .

J. A. E .



CHAPTER IINTRODUCTION

PHILOSOPHIES have made civilizations . Stat ed

in another w ay, each civilizatio n has develo ped

its o wn philo sop hy that expr essed its basic and

fund amental character, and, because for mulated,

tended to fix and perp etuate it . Per haps ther e

is an element of tru th in both views . The phil -

o s o phy and the civ il izat i on a r e conc o m itant .

They g r o w u p t o g ether . They ar e no t so mu ch

cause and effect, whichever we place as the ante-

ced ent ter m, as they are both pro d u cts of so me

d eeper and mo r e fu ndamental cau se o r cau ses

in w hich mig ht be d isti ng u ished su ch elements

as relig io n, histor ical backgr ou nd, enviro nment,

racial characteristics, langu age, econo mic con-

ditio ns, the spirit o f the times, science and in-

ventio n and the like . Yet the force of the open-

ing statement is not diminished by these consid -

eratio ns, for while philoso phy may be the pro -

du ct of these and other factor s, it in tur n sums

them up and incor po rates them for futu re ages .

It unites, synthesizes and g ives them system and

meaning . It becomes the spirit o f the civiliza-

tion, its idea, or, to u se a musical term, its under-

lying motif .

1 1



1 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLESome rather str iking illu stratio ns of the influ -

ence of philo sophy on civilization occur readily

to mind . In C hina C o nfucianism may be called

the national philo sop hy, for I think it is u niver-

sally recog nized that Co nf ucianism is no t so

much a religio n as a system of philo sophy, espe-

cially of ethical philosophy . One o f the pr o mi-

nent featur es o f the teachings o f C onfuciu s and

of Chinese life and r elig io n generally i s ancestor

w o r s hi p . An obvio u s effect of su ch a system

is to beget reverence for the past, to turn men's

faces to the past and thus to create fixed con-

cepts and a static or u nprog ressive civilization .

Exactly that has happened in C hina . For manytho u sands o f years, and u ntil the recent influx

of Western id eas, the Chinese civilizatio n prac-

tically stood still, or at least its pro gr ess was

vastly retarded by this very attitud e of mind .

In I ndia there was a somewhat analog ou s situ-

atio n, except that her e it w as not ancestor -

w o r ship bu t a belief in r eincarnatio n that was

the chief factor in the national philo sophy and

religio n . In a way each one became his ownancestor , but the net resul t was the same. Thetendency o f this universally held vi ew w as to

tur n people's tho ug hts to the past, and in con-

sequence Indi a was as u npro gr essive as C hina .

Here are, perhaps, the two o ld est cultu r es now

o n earth . Nothing cou ld mo re for cibly bri n g

home to us the effect of fixed co ncepts and o f a

static philosophy and relig ion than that affor ded

by these two gr eat gr ou ps, and, indeed, by all

the peo ples of the Far East, who have been fo r



INTRODUCTION 13

the most par t und er the d ominatio n of similar

id eas .

What is here said shou ld not be interp r eted

as being antago nistic to a pr o per r everence for

the past or to the tr u th o f the d o ctri ne o f

re-embo di ment, or r eincarnation . A beli ef in

the last named id ea is, perhaps, more wid espr ead

than any other si ngl e r elig io u s tenet now held

on earth, asid e fro m faith in Go d and the im-

mortality of the soul . Du r ing r ecent year s this

d o ctri ne is invad ing the West . It w as held by

Pythago r as and Plato and by at least some of

the ear ly C hristian Fathers . There ar e seeming

r eferences to i t in the New Testament . It w as

at least sympathetically r egar d ed by some mod -

ern philo sop her s, a sympathy that is shared by

the wr iter . Ther e are many thing s to commend

it, yet if d welt u po n und ul y, the tendency o f

such an idea wo u ld be in the d ir ectio n above

po inted o u t, to tu r n men's thou g hts backwar d .

All I am trying to stress here is the influ ence of

fixed concepts and of such systems of philo sop hy

on civilizatio n .*

*Perhaps there i s something o f a tendency in the same d ir ecti on inwhat are know n as the classics, especially Latin and Greek . During theMiddle Ages, learning w as confined lar gely to su ch studies and to fixedreligious and kindred concepts, and these ages were correspondinglyunprog ressive. What little science existed w as taken on the wo rd of the

ancients, especially Aristotle . If it was desired to p ro ve that water runs

dow n hill, it did not occur to scholars of that time to go o ut and observe

a stream, but r ather learned citations w ere made of authori ties who had

wr itten on the subject .It may be countered that the Renaissance was the beginning of themod ern pro gr essive age and, at the same time, that it was a revival o f the

learni ng o f Greece and Rome, but the Renaissance contai ned o ther elements,

such as a revolt against the fixed co ncepts of that day, as it also includ edthe beginnings o f science .A rather striking proof of the view here advanced is found in theexample of Descartes, the fou nder o f mod ern philoso phy, and Bacon, the

generally r eputed initiato r o f the scientific method . Both broke with thepast, especially with Scholasti cism, and started anew . The same was trueof Kant in abandoning dogmatic philosophy .



1 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEIn this connection, it may not be withou t in-

terest to r efer to the id eas of o ne wr iter, perhaps

it is Berg son* on the rather striking similarity

between biological and sociological pro cesses, or

between natur al and human histo r y . He refer s

to the effor t to o btain secur ity . Every species

endeavor s to pr otect itself and the devices fo r

pr otectio n are almost as wi dely di versifi ed as

l i f e i t s e l f . In o ne case it w ill be a co lo r ation

that will either d eceive the enemies of its pos-

sessor o r w ill so blend w ith the envir onment as

to make it invisible . In another it w ill be fleet

heels or swift w ings . In still another it will

consist in "playing dead," like the op ossum ; and

again it will be an armor , or hard shell, such as

wo r n by alligato rs, tor toises, snails and all man-

ner of shell- fish . It i s to this last metho d of

safeguar ding li fe that the writer mentioned par-

ticular ly refers . In his opinion it exacts a rather

hig h price, that is, pr otectio n is g ained at the

expense of fur ther evolu tion and p ro gr ess . Thespecies obtains secur ity, it is tru e, but becomes

fixed o r stationary in its hard shell o r armor -

plate, while other mo r e ventu resome species, wil l-

ing to take a chance, and to pr o tect themselves

by their abili ty to r un away, to d isappear into

bur ro ws, or to fig ht back, go on w ith their evolu -

tio nary d evelo pment . The allig ators and to r-

to ises are among the few li fe for ms that have

sur vived fro m the old reptilian age . They o b-

tained secur ity at the pri ce of pr og ress . Hethen po ints ou t hu man civi li zatio ns that have

* I have been unable to l ocate this in the wor ks of M . Bergson, but

my memor y is very defini te of the passage itself .



INTRODUCTION 1 5

fol lo w ed an analo go us cou r se, _mentioning espe-

cially China and her famou s pr otecting wall .

Retur ning to the influence of philoso phy on

the cou rse of human development, I have referred

in another boo k* to the stri king ways in w hich

C hri stianity and Mo hammed anism have affected

the institu tio ns and histo r y of the natio ns en-

ro lled u nder their respective banners, also to the

remarkable pro gr ess of the Christian wo rld fol-

lo wi n g the Refor matio n, which, mor e sig nally

still, was most marked in those nations ado pting

the new o r r efor med faith . The tendency o f the

Refor matio n, as well as o f the Renaissance, and

the Ag e o f Enli g htenment that wer e app r o xi-

mately co ntempo r aneo u s wi th it, w as to break

u p fixed co ncepts and to fr ee the human spir it

for fur ther adventur es in the seeking o f tru th

and for advancement g enerally . This tendency

was still further accentuated by the Age of Revo-

lu tions that fo llo wed closely after , which had the

add ed effect of shattering the fixed ideas in the

realm of po litics as the others had alr eady do ne

in the spheres of religio n and science . It mu st

be understoo d in this connection that I d o not

u se the terms r eligi o n and philo sop hy inter -

changeably but the two o ver lap and what is here

said of the influ ence of the one on human civil-

ization and p r og ress appli es almost equally to

the other . I t has been sai d that, "As a man

thinketh in his heart, so is he," and it is equally

tru e that as nations and civi lizatio ns think in

their collective hearts, so are they . It shou ld

* The Philo sop hy o f Jesus, Christopher, Boston, 1928 .



16 INVADING THE INVISIBLEalso be s a i d , per haps, at this p oint, that the

tendency of relig io us faith is to fix men's con-

cepts i n u nchangeable creed s and d o g mas . There

is something sacred abou t relig io u s concepts .

Chur ches in ever y age and fo rm o f w or ship have

natur ally cri ed, "Hands o ff," to all and sundr y

scientists and investigator s generally who w ou ld

pu t pr o fane hands o n these mor e o r less static

articles of belief . There is a conser ving valu e

in this attitud e, for the hig hest hu man ideals

canno t be held l ig htly, or the hou se o f man's

faith be bu il d ed o n the shifting sands, but o n

the other hand to o conservative an attitud e, too

blind a devotion to tradition and too static con-

cepts, even if they be termed sacr ed, r esult i n

exactly w hat has happ ened in C hina and I ndi a,

i . e . , stop the clock of human pro gr ess for co unt-

less ages .

It is evid ent that the natio ns of the West, at

least, will not stand still, and this is the hope

of the wo rld . It is likewise evident that they

are just now in a state of r evo lu tio n both in

their p hilo sop hy and relig io n . The fixed co n-

cepts o f the past have been so br o ken up by

science and by the new needs and viewp o ints o f

mod ern life that they must be recast or replaced

by mor e adequate id eas and id eals that wi ll sat-

isfy the most enlightened as well as the masses,

for it is tr ue no w as always that what the most

enlig htened believe to day, the masses w il l believe

tomorrow .

Man is natur ally relig io us, ju st as he is gen-

erally at hear t something o f a philo so pher , so



INTRODUCTION 1 7

that he wil l alw ays have a reli gio n and a meta-

physics . His mind and heart ar e so co nstituted

that he cannot d o w ithou t them . So lo ng as

he has w o nder in his heart, so lo ng as he has

cur io sity, so lo ng as he asks as to the w hy of

thing s, so lo ng as his heart thir sts for higher

and mo r e du r able values, for the ineffable and

the perfect, so l ong as he seeks Go d and immor -

tality, for help and so lace, for ethical and aes-

thetic satisfactions, for insight and understand-

ing into the myster ies and meanings o f life, so

lo ng w ill r elig io n and philoso phy have a place

in his mind . These thing s have a pr ag matic

value, and that, accor di n g to Will iam James,

constitutes an infer ential and mor al pr oo f of

their tru th . But w hat is the relig io n of the

fu ture to be? I have alr eady expr essed the view

in the w o r k mentio ned that the teaching s o f

Jesus w il l r emain as its basis, but that they mu st

be fr eed fr o m the myths and theo lo g ical d o g mas

that have encu mber ed and misi nterp r eted them .

Then, to o , there are fu ndamental co ncepts that

are common to all r elig io ns and that have en-

d u red lo nger than histor y, such as a belief in a

universal Father, in a spiritual universe, in hier-

archies o f spir itual or angelic intellig ences that

somehow influ ence fo r g o o d the r aces of men,

in the su r vival o f the so u l after d eath, in the

advantage of a mor al li fe here on earth, in the

efficacy of faith and prayer both for o ur welfare

her e and her eafter, in the sovereig n valu e of

ri ghteou sness and g oo d wi ll and in the bro ther-hood of man. These and o ther l ike id eals ar e



1 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEheld by all r elig io ns and these will sur ely r emain

as among the fu nd amental elements o f the re-

ligion of the future .

There ar e those who ar e co nvinced, how ever ,

that the mor e definite and specific ar ticles of

the new faith will be derived fr om science . This

is w here philo sop hy comes into the pictur e for

it is philo sophy alone that can unite the special

sciences and extr act fro m them their hig hest

and mo st general tru th and meaning . Then, too,

science and r elig io n are in co nflict and wi ll

d o ubtless remain in conflict until the material-

istic element is eliminated from science and the

mytholo g ical and d og matic facto rs d isappear

from religion. Philo so phy alone can harmo nize

these differences, fo r its peculiar pr ovi nce is to

gather d iverse elements into the unity o f a hig her

synthesis .

Novalis said so mething to the effect that phil-

o sop hy bakes no bread but d oes reveal to us Go d

and i mmor tality, and a gr eater than he stated

that man do es no t li ve by bread alo ne but by

every w o r d that p r o ceeds o u t o f the mo u th ofGod. As already r emarked , philo sop hy and r e-

ligio n overlap . A system of philosophy hastaken the place of relig io n in China . The teach-

ings o f Bud dha were largely philosop hical and

these tod ay serve as a religi on for a larg e section

o f the human race . Christianity itself contains

a philosophical element for there is a philoso phy

in the teaching s o f Jesus, ju st as there is in the

Fourth Gospel and in the Pauline epistles .

Christianity absor bed mu ch of the Platonic phil-



INTRODUCTION 1 9

o sop hy and so mething o f the Stoi cal, altho u gh

there is a joy and regenerative pow er in the re-

lig io n of Chri st that Stoi cism never knew .

As po inted o u t elsewhere in these pag es, a

phil os o p hica l str u g g le d u r i n g the schol a st ic

perio d of the Mid dle Ages had a pr ofo und effect

in in it iat in g and g iv in g d i r ect i on t o m o de rn

prog ress. Then, too , many of the mod ern cul ts

su ch as Chr isti an Science, New Tho u g ht, Spi r -

itu alism and Theoso phy, which wil l have their

o wn co ntributio ns to make to the faith o f the

futu re, have a basis in metaphysics .

It is fo r these and o ther r easons that a new

philo sophical synthesis is so needed in the pr es-

ent transitional era . It is obviou s that the cor -

rect method of arr iving at such a synthesis is to

g ather to g ether the mater ials fu r nished by the

special sciences, especially in the last hund red

years . That is the method fo llo wed in this boo k .

Not all o f the sciences are dr awn u po n for r esults

that have a meaning fo r philo sop hy . C hemistr y

and astr o nomy, fo r example, w hile they have

made signal pr og ress du ring this perio d, are not

d ealt wi th in a separate way but ar e inclu d ed

under the new physics and r elativity .

These new facto rs, as they may be termed, fall

und er fo u r g eneral heading s : Ev o l u t i on ; the

Subconscio us, or Extra-C onsciou s Mind ; the New

Physical Theor y ; and Einstein's Relativity, w ith

mino r su bdiv isi o ns such as Psychic Pheno mena,

Psycho ther apy and the New Psycho lo g y gener -

ally . There is also a new d evelo pment in phil-

o so phy itself which has a place. I t has been



2 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEcalled by variou s names s uch as Pragmatism,

Humanism, Instr u mentalism, etc . , bu t may be

summed up und er the general head ing of the

Philo sop hy o f Values .

A fur ther w or d shou ld be said as to method .

While I co nfine myself to science and philo sop hy

as develo ped and generally accepted in the West,

I d o no t limit this w or k exclusively to the intel-

lectual metho d . One o f Kant's g r eat contr ibu-

tio ns was in po inting o u t the bou ndari es of

r eason and its inability to d eal w ith the nou -

menon o r "the thing in itself ." This he di d in

his Cr itiqu e o f Pur e Reason and i n his famou s

antinomies . Our i ntellects are dependent on the

senses which o nly r epor t appearances and r eact

to a comparatively few of the possible stimuli

in the universe, also colo r and add their ow n

su bjective elements to what they see. Likew ise

the intellect loo ks on the part thro u gh analysis

and ,ar ri ves at its r esults by a r ather cumberso me

and inexact metho d o f in du ction . There is a

mor e universal and spir itual kind o f mind actio n

w hich Ber gso n and o ther philo sop hers call i n-

tui tion and which r elig io us peopl e refer to as

faith . This i s the metho d u sed almost exclu-

sively by the Hind oo s, and while it has its ow n

d efects, the ideal way w ou ld be a co mbination

of intellect and intuitio n, the reasons for which

are bro ug ht ou t more full y in later chapters .

Perhaps the intuitive methods are used by scien-

tists themselves mor e than they su spect . Theytake a lot of things on faith, as we all d o, and

that necessarily . The new psychology of the



INTRODUCTION 2 1

subconsciou s i s thro wing light o n this r ather

obscure subject and is show ing the impor tance

o f the dedu ctive as well as, the ind uctive reason,

of intuition as well as intellect . It shou ld be

said at this po int, ho wever , that long stud y,

training and pr eparatio n are necessary to get

the best results fr om even the intuitive pr ocess .

The mind must be made ready and attuned to

the receptio n of tru th, ju st as a mu sician or

artist must be perfected in his technique before

harmony or beauty finds him a fitting instrument

thr ou gh which to express . Then the resul ts co me

mor e o r less spontaneo usly, just as a novelist,

after his characters are o nce created, d iscovers

that they act fo r themselves, or men in any line

or calling find that in the heat of creative wo rk

they often sur pass o r transcend themselves and

do their best wo r k, they know not exactly how .

To beget the chil d, Tru th, there must be a mar-

r i a ge of I n tellect and In t u it i o n , a un i o n of

Reaso n and Faith .

One wo rd fur ther . In the same way that those

w ho u se intellectual metho d s exclu sively need

the intuiti ve, so those who d epend o n what they

call the spir itual need a deeper gr ou ndw or k of

science and philo so phy . This app lies especially

to so me of the new sp ir itu al cults alr eady men-

tioned . They ar e based o n metaphysics bu t they

requir e a mor e thor ou gh knowledg e and tr aining

in their fu ndamentals and especially d o they

need the scientific spirit, with its love of accuracy

and its lo yalty to tr u th above any preconcep-

tions or favorite theor ies. Too many follow ers



22 INVADING THE INVISIBLEo f all such movements are pro ne to ju mp to con-

clusio ns, to ru n off at tangents, to claim more

than they perfo r m and to pu t for th notio ns that

are perhaps ineleg antly bu t aptly d escri bed as

"half-baked . " We owe a tremendous debt toScience. It has made over our modern humanw o r l d ; and i ts wo rk has only started . H. G .

Wells has expressed the opinio n that in the com-

ing centur ies it will tur n its attentio n inward

r ather than ou twa r d and that it wi ll make as

gr eat pro g ress in di scoveri ng the finer fo rces

w ithin man as it has already mad e in revealing

the outer forces of the envir onment ; that, instead

of bui ldi ng machines, it w ill bui ld men andwomen.* That is a pro g ram in w hich all spir i-tual peop le are inter ested and w ith the accom-

pli shment of w hich they shou ld co- o perate .

Then, too , we shou ld follo w o ur ow n science

and p hilo so phy here in the Western natio ns . I

have as hig h a respect as any for the Or iental

and especially fo r the Hind o o teaching s, and

rejo ice at the gr o w ing interest wi th which they

are r egar d ed in the West. They have elements

we need, such as medi tatio n and spir itu ality ;

but, after all, they are not o u r teachings ; they

belong to a w idely different cultur e ; they are too

intro spective and d r eamy and co ntain too much

of a negative element, too much of a sid e-step-

pin g of li fe fro m so me non - being i n Nir vana,

r ather than facing lif e and making the best o f

i t ; i n a wor d are too unpro gr essive ever to make

any w id espr ead o r p ermanent appeal to the pr ac-

• I am t o l d that t h e great e l e c t r i ci a n , S t e in m e t z , e x p r e s s e d a s i m i l a r

view .



INTRODUCTION 23

tical and energetic races of the Occid ent . Fur -

thermo re o ur ow n sciences and philo sop hy have

all fo r which we ar e seeking , if w e follo w them

far enou gh and g et at their d eeper meaning s and

values . It is, perhaps, true that we are becoming

mor e and mor e cosmo po litan and that hereafter

we shall deal in terms of the whole wo rld rather

than of particu lar nations or even of par ticular

civilizations or cultur es, and that more and mor e

we are to have wo rld religio ns and w or ld phil-

oso phies as well as wo rld po litics . I f that be

tru e, perhaps o ur futu re system wi ll be some-

thing o f a fusio n of bo th the East and the West .

Even so, it will be reached by a slo w process and

each civilization w ill fo llow its ow n evolu tionary

line to attain this mo r e general and u niversal

system ; and it is also pr obably true that then,

as no w , the pr o g r essive West wi ll d o minate the

wo rld -scene .

Some one has said that philo sop hy is its his-

tor y, or rather that we cannot know philoso phy

until w e know i ts histor y ; so that as a fitting

close of this intro du ctor y chapter we shou ld give

.a recapitulatio n, necessar ily bri ef, a sor t o f

bir d's-eye view, of the histor y of philo sophy up

to the last century . It shou ld also be said that

the contributio ns of each philo sop hy, as of each

ind ivid ual philo sop her, so far as they are gen-

er ally accepted , become incor po r ated in the

tho u ght o f the race ; an d thus that o u r wh o le

bod y of p hilo sophy has had a composite or ig in .

Emer son said that when he read boo ks of d if-

fer ent gr eat men they all seemed to have been



2 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEw r itten by the same au thor . This is peculiarly

tru e of philo sop hy for in it, necessarily, each

writer has to transcend the self, the particular,

and to think universal tho u ghts . As Keplersaid, he "thinks God 's thou ghts after Him ." Inthis sense, philo so phy is fro m one au tho r , the

Divine Mind thinking in u s . So the recapitu la-

tio n of its histor y is something like the embryo

recapitu lating, in its o rg anism, the histor y o f

the race fr o m which it spr ing s and all the ac-

cepted featur es of which have been inco r po r ated

in its own bod y .

Philo sop hy comes fro m Gr eece . The w o rd it-

self is Greek and means love of w isd o m . There

is no t space here even to mention the names be-

fore the time of Socrates, but the evident effor t

fro m the begi nning w as to find a u nifying pr in-

ciple or element . With Pythag o r as it w as num -

ber ; wi th others it was air, or fire, or water, u n-

til finally one called it noes, by w hich he meant

spirit. One di scovered the underlying pr inciple

in lo ve and hate, attraction and repu lsion . An-o ther saw change as the do minant featur e of the

cosmos while still another too k exactly the o p-

po site view that change is o nly seeming, the one

reality being the fixed and immutable Absolu te .

These vari o u s view s seem confl icting yet each

f r o m its o wn an g l e rep resented an aspect of

tru th or an attempt at tru th and all were caug ht

u p into the compo site o f that wo nderfu l thing

called Greek philoso phy . The g o ld en age o f So -

crates, Plato and Aristotle will be dealt with in

the next chapter .



INTRODUCTION 2 5

In the succeeding centur ies there was rather a

d ear th o f gr eat names, the two scho o ls know n

as the Sceptics and the C ynics o ccu pyi ng the

stage . Per haps these wer e not so bad as their

names, but they left little mar k o n Philo so phy

as a whole, which is all w e ar e concerned w ith

here . Then aro se the two g r eat scho o ls o f the

Epi cur eans and the Sto ics, that represented two

d iverg ent tendencies of thou ght w hich were to

r emain thro ug hou t the lo ng histor y of the Ro-

m an em pi r e an d even un t o o u r o w n d a y .

The scho o ls at Alexand r ia w ere do minated fo r

the most p art by Platonism and Neo pl atoni sm

and contained mu ch of the religi ou s and mystic-

al element . I t w as her e that Philo came and

her e pro bably Hermes Trismegistu s flo u ri shed,

that wonderful figu re of w hom so li ttle is known

but w ho was so C hri stian in his spir it and fun-

d amental teaching s altho u g h it is no t pr o bable

that he w as ever actu ally asso ciated w ith the

chu rch . Of him w e shall have mu ch to say i n

f ut u re cha pters, a ls o o f Pl o t in us, the "new

P la t o, " an d chief li g ht of the new Plat on ic

g r o u p .

At abou t this time the main str eam o f phil o -

sop hic histo r y passed i nto the chu r ch wher e it

remained fo r a thou sand years . The two g r eat

o u t stan d in g names of Ch r i st ian phil o s o p hers

were Au g ustine at the beg inning o f that millen-

iu m and Tho mas Aqui nas near its end . These

two w ere much alike in their thou ght, althou gh

Au g u stine of the "C onfessions" and the "C ity of

God ," wr ote much in the spir it o f Plato, w hile



2 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEAquinas, "the angelic Doctor " and "the angel of

the scho o ls," leaned mor e to Ar istotle . I n the

inter im the center o f the wo r ld 's cul tur e had

shifted f r o m Greece, Ro me and Eg ypt to the new

and ri sing civilization of Western Euro pe .

Sever al centu r ies again pass . Scho lastici sm

is o n the wane and the "new learni ng" is start-

ing in Eur o pe . It w as then that mod ern philos-

o phy was bor n fr o m the br ain o f Rene Descar-

tes, who turned his back on the past and initiat-

ed not o nly a new philo sop hy and at least one

branch of a new mathematics, but a new method

as well. He do u bted ever ything that cou ld be

d o u b ted a n d r ed u ced k n o w led g e t o i t s l o w es t

fu ndamental valid ter m-"I think, therefor e I

am"-and on that cor ner stone he bui lt his sys-tem Shor tly after Descar tes came two names

equally illu strio u s, Spino za and Leibnitz, both

o f who m also fo llo w ed the mathematical method ,

and o ne of w hom, at least, Leibnitz, intro d u ced

a new branch in mathematics, although heshar ed the fame fo r this wi th Sir Isaac Newto n .

We shall have many r efer ences to Leibnitz'monads. It was his op timistic philo sop hy thatinspi r ed Po pe's "Essay on Man ." It w as Leib-

nitz also who said that "This is the best po ssible

u niverse, else Go d w o u ld have made a better ,"

as it w as he li kewi se w ho mad e the searching

rejoinder to John Locke, who had said that

"There is nothing in the intellect which was not

pr eviously in the senses," to which Leibnitz ap-

pended : "There is nothing in the intellect which

was not p reviou sly in the senses, except the in-



INTRODUCTION 2 7

t e l l e c t i t s e l f , " a di ffer ence w hich may seem

slight at first g lance, but g ro ws as w e think of

it- becomes so big in fact that it mi g ht have

served as the basis fo r Kant's who le cr iti cal

philoso phy . There ar e o ther ill u stri o u s names

we cannot omit-Lord Bacon in England, whof o u n d ed the i n d u c t i v e phi l o s o p h y a nd m o d er n

science, Geor ge Berkeley the id ealist and charm-

ing w r iter and David Hu me, whose scepti cism

aro used I mmanuel Kant into action ; and with

Kant we come to the German idealists, with

w hom we deal later .

While the idea is a bit fanciful, and is no t in-

sisted on, there is an interesting fact about the

appearance of at least three of the great gr o ups

in this histor y . In each case there is an initial

figur e, followed by an idealist, cou nter- balanced

by a materi alist and then a final fig u r e, w ho

su ms up , g athers to g ether and harmo nizes these

tw o antitheses . I n the Gr eek g r o u p Socr ates

was the initiator , foll o wed by Plato, the id ealist,

and Demo cri tu s, the mater iali st-ltho u gh

Demo cri tus w as not o f the immed iate So cratic

g r o u p - a nd Ar i st ot le as the summer u p . In the

C artesian gr o u p, it w as Descates himself who

w as the fou nder, Spi noza, the id eali st, Lo cke,

the mater iali st, and Leibnitz who summed u p,

not o nly for these but har moni zed w ith the o ld

Scho lastic philo so phy as well . In the case o f

the Germans, Kant w as the fo r eru nner , Fi chte,

the subjective id ealist, Schelling the objective

id ealist, and Heg el the su mmer - u p, Hegel whose

pecul iar style has made him so d ifficu lt to u nder-



2 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEstand that his w o r k has suffer ed an eclip se it

di d not d eserve . It too k o ne thou sand years fo r

the wor ld to u n derstand Aristotle and it may

requir e several centur ies for it to und erstand

Hegel, but w hen it d oes und erstand him it w ill

r eali ze that his "Phil o so phy of the Absolu te"

comes as near to deservi ng that au g u st title as

the histo r y of Philo sop hy has ever know n . Hewas not only the adequate summer -u p o f the old

philo sop hy bu t, in a sense, the pr o phet o f thenew .

In the next chapter we will go more into

detail i n examining the certain features of that

ol d philo sophy which concern ou r par ticular in-

quiry .



CHAPTER IIPHILOSOPHICAL IDEALISM

BEFORE consi der ing the new factor s in p h i l -

osop hy, i t will be necessar y to get o u r back-

gr o und , and o u r next three chapters w ill be de-

voted to that task . All p hil os o phy as w e kno w

it in the Occid ent goes back to Socr ates, as re-

po rted, elabor ated and id ealized by Plato, whose

special contr ibuti o n has beco me know n as phil-

osophical idealism . This was passed o n to u s by

the Neop lato nists w ith Plo tinu s at their head

and by the chur ch fathers, especially Augustine .

For it is a fact of fu ndamental impo r tance that

this id ealistic philosophy became the basis no t

only of very much of modern philosophy but

was in a larg e sense the backgr ou nd o f ou r r e-

lig io n, of Chri stianity itself .

In mod ern times the oustanding fig ur es in this

same g eneral g r o u p ar e Leibnitz, Ber keley and

the German id ealisti c schoo l r u nning fr o m Kant

to Hegel, the g reatest schoo l that has appeared

on earth since the days of ancient Greece .

There are several aspects, but two especially,

of what is know n as philo sophical id ealism .

Fir st, ther e is the aspect that man can o nly

know his ow n id eas . There is no w ay that he

can get outsid e of his mind to verify these. He29



3 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEmust take the rep or ts br o u g ht to him by the

senses . We do not know how the sensor i stimu-

li cr eate imag es . What actually happens, is that

there is some stimulu s given to the sense or gans .

In the case of sight, it is supposed to be a wave

motio n in the ether . This wave moti o n sets u p

certai n mov ements in tu r n in the eye, in the

li qui d matter that constitu tes the eye, w hich

acts on w hat is kno w n as the retina and that

again acts on the ends of certain nerves . These

nerves pass back to the brai n, and affect some

brain cell or collection of brain cells . How thisstimulu s, how ever, i s translated into sig ht of

the familia r w o r ld, w e do not un derstand . It

may be by an analo g o u s pr o cess to the way that

so u nd w aves are changed into electrical valu es

in radio . These are transmitted speedily, almost

as speedi ly as li ght, thr ou gh the ether, and at

the statio n where they are picked u p ar e trans-

lated back again into so u nd w aves, ampli fied

and heard thr o u g h the r eceiving set . I n the

same way pictu res are sent by televisi on . Thismay be the metho d , or something analo g o u s to

it, by which we see . It is absolutely sur e, how-

ever , that the mer e wave mo tio n in w hatever

medi um tr ansmits the lig ht impu lses, coul d not

in itself create visio n . There mu st be in the

mind so me imaging faculty that is so stimul ated

by these symbo ls o r sug gestio ns as to bu ild the

pictur e . No w , that is all w e see of the ou ter

u niverse as far as the sense of sig ht is con-

cerned . We react to this stimu lu s fr o m the

ou tside and o ur imaging faculty bui lds the pic-



PHILOSOPHICAL IDEALISM 31

tur e and clothes it on w ith co lo r and meaning .

That is one aspect of id ealism . Growing outof this phase, it has been the contentio n of the

idealistic philo sophers thro u ghou t the ages that

all thou ght know s is thou ght ; that, in the very

n at u r e o f thi n g s i t c o u l d o n l y kn o w th o u g ht .

To know anything as alien to it as we have

imagi ned matter to be creates a d ifficu lty that

canno t be sur mou nted , because matter has been

sup po sed to be exactly the oppo site of thou g ht .

How, then, can tho u ght take hold o f it, to know

a thing utterly fo reig n to i tself? Thou ght can

only behol d what it pu ts into matter-r elation,

quali ty, appear ance, function, meanin g, use .

But we can carr y this fu rther .

We di scover fo r example, that what we call

colo r is merely a certain rate of vibration . Thecolo rs d epend d ir ectly on the reaction o f the mind .

In o ther wo rd s, the mind creates colo r, it takes

one rate of vibratio n, which it translates into the

thou ght that the col or is r ed . Ano ther set of

vibrations a little higher it translates into the

thought that the colo r is blue and still another,

that the colo r i s violet, and so o n . That is so

evident that colo r s have been called second ary

qual ities while lig ht itself has been tho u ght pr i-

mary . A little analysis w ill show , however ,

that lig ht is o n exactly the same fo oting as colo r .

Lig ht is a fr equency in the tr ansmitting me-

di um, call it ether o r what we will, and i t is the

mind that clothes the rate o f fr equ ency or vi-

bratio n wi th the qu alities that we know as lu-

minosity .



3 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEThere are o nly cer tain very nar r ow bands o f

fr equ ency to w hich we react at all . Lig ht is a

certain series of vibratory rates in what is sup-

po sed to be the ether o f space, while sou nd i s

another narr ow band o f vibrator y rates in what

we call o rd inary matter, su ch as air , water or

whatever the transmitting medium may be .

There is a certain reaction of nerve termini that

the mind interpr ets as lig ht, still ano ther as

sou nd, taste, smell and the like . That is al l

we know o f this w ond er ful thing called sensa-

tion .

Take the sense of touch . When I pu t my hand

on the table, I seem to be tou ching a hard board ,

but as a matter of fact science know s that what

happens is that the ener g ies in my hand contact

the ener g ies of the electro ns, molecules, etc . ,

that g o to make u p the table and the resistance

of the one set o f ener gies cannot be penetrated

by the other set of energies .

I have often gi ven the illu stratio n, that a mod -

ern ra d i o in st r u ment is anal o g o u s t o o u r o w n

sense o rg ans . I may have a receiving set in thisroom. There are all so r ts o f messages passingthro u gh the r oo m fro m the d ifferent statio ns in

this and other cities ; but each of these messages

is at a different vibration frequency . I can se-

lect o u t of these the particul ar message I w ant

to hear by tu ning in my instr u ment to the same

fr equency or wave length as that of the statio n

to w hich I w ish to listen . All the other mess-

ages are there, too, but I d o not r eact to them .

Well, in exactly the same way there are all sorts



PHILOSOPHICAL IDEALISM 3 3

of vibrations passing thro ug h the ether, not only

in the range we call lig ht and l ow er d o w n in

the range we call so und but in between these and

abo ve them there are o ther r anges to w hich w e

do not react at all . If I had the same equi pment

fo r tu ning in my mind to a different frequency,I would get a different message exactlyas on the radio. Now it happens, we dohave pr ecisely the same thing in the case of the

X-r ay . It is a higher frequency . 'There is a con-

sid erable g ap betw een lig ht and the X- r ay bu t

we, by electrical means, are enabled to tune in

the eye to this higher frequency . We see a d if -

ferent wo rld , ou r color values disappear, whatwas opaque becomes transparent, we lookthro ug h our clothing and flesh and see our hearts

beat . We tune into a d ifferent fr equ ency and

all the universe is changed .

There are other bands of frequencies that exist

in the ether o f space or whatever the med iu m is

that transmits lig ht, electr icity, g ravitatio n and

energ y gener ally . They ascend all the w ay to

the cosmical rays of Pro f . Mill ikan that are sup-

po sed to be involved in the build ing o r d estru c-

tion o f atoms . Indeed, the latest suppo sition is

that the ether is no t o nly the basis o f the physi-

cal universe as we know it, but is, perhaps, the

plastic medi um that thou ght moul ds and o per-

ates, the nexus between matter and spirit . How-ever that may be, what we call li g ht is a com-

po site of ether vibrations and ou r reactions

thereto . Man is an active par tici pant in the

pr ocess . He is not merely a passive instr u ment .



34 INVADING THE INVISIBLEThrough the kind o f sense or g ans he po ssesses

man not o nly sees a particular kind o f wo rld but

this wo rld is different for every d ifferent indivi-

dual that sees it. I have no way o f visu alizing

y o u r w o r l d . Relatively yo u u se the same terms

for what you see that I d o for what I see . Weassu me that they ar e appr o ximately the same,

but that they are not id enticall y the same is

show n by individ uals who are colo r blind. They

do not know their defect until it is po inted ou t

to them because they are familiar only with their

ow n reactio ns as we are with ou rs . In the hu -

man, the col o r r espo nses are appar ently a late

development as it is g enerally su pp osed that it

is o nly in recent ages that men have seen colo rs

in the detail that we see them . It is fairly cer-

tain that all animals do not see col or . Thusthe earth varies with the observer. To a mole it

is a place to d ig holes in . Being blind his re-

actions are entirely di fferent from those of a bug,

for example . We do not know much about thepsycho l o g y o f m o les and bu g s but ther e mu st

be some reaction because there is a perceptio n of

envir o nment and an adaptatio n to envir o nment

du e to the perception . There is an i nfinite scale

of these reactio ns . Even in the low est g rades of

life there is evidence of some form of perceptio n

and ad aptation . Thus each fo r m o f li fe sees a

di fferent wo rld , depending o n its or ganism, its

senses and i ts pr actical needs .

The wo rld I see I in part create . I c o l o r i t a n d

behold it relatively to the kind of sense organs

develop ed i n my particular o rg anism . These




respond only to certain bands o r ranges of vibra-

tions. A being that responded to differentranges wo ul d see a different universe, very much

as a rad io tuned to a d ifferent wave-length trans-

mits a different pro gr am .

I lo ok o n things fr om the ou tside and thus

see only their appearances . I d o not view them

as they are infinitesimally but o nly in certain

larg e agg regates . A very mu ch smaller being ,

such as a microbe, would see them differently . I

realize this w hen I lo ok thro ug h a micro scope,

which cor r espo nds w ith the micro scopi c eye o f

the animalcu lae . This reveals the relativity o f

my vision fr om another angl e . It is thus I look

u p o n what I ca ll matter . It seems soli d and

opaque. Yet loo ked at d ifferently, say with the

super-micro scope or the X-ray, it is neither . Asfor solid ity, it is so po ro us that ether passes

through it without hindrance ; and modernphysicists declare it is o nly a certain arrange-

ment of electro ns or electri cal charg es relatively

as far ap ar t as the planets . To t he sense of

sight it o nly o ffers certain l ig ht frequ encies and

to the sense of to uch certian energy resistances .

It is ou r minds that interp ret these as soli dity

and o pacity .

This br ings us to another aspect of i dealism,

that of matter accor ding to Berkeley . This go o d

bisho p has been g r eatly misu nder stoo d . He did

not say there is no matter in the sense usually

ascribed to him . He mer ely said that abstr ac-

tion is not real and the thing we call matter is an

abstr actio n mad e by the mind . We have ab-



3 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEstracted certain qualities and app earances fr om

the universe and app lied a label, w hich we call

matter . No w all that Bisho p Ber keley ques-

tio ns is that there is any reality to that abstrac-

tion . He d o es no t d o u bt the o bjects of sense

but co ntends that what we see is r eal enou g h,

such as the ind ivi d u al chair , ho u se, etc . ; bu t

that there is this hypostatized or actualized ab-

stractio n ou t there, such as we term matter, he

denies . Science denies that also . Science has

g one far enou gh to d iscover that what we call

matter i s for ce o r g anized i n a cer tain way and

that du e to the moti o n and ener g y w e get the

resistances we interpr et as sig ht and feeling .

There is o ne r ecent d evelo pment in relatio n

to light that has a bear ing . Certain scientists

are questioning the wave theory o f lig ht and ar e

reviving the emissio n theory . No t o nly so , they

are insisting o n some sor t of emission o f matter,

still d ealing in that abstractio n called matter in

a n i ner t f o r m . The latest view is so mething

in the natur e of a co mbinatio n o f the w ave and

emissio n theo r ies . No w , as a matter o f fact,

if the emission theory be cor rect, it is an emis-

sion of energ y . That idea wo ul d fi t in readi ly

wi th the w ave motio n . For example, apply ener-

g y t o wa ter w i th an oa r an d w e start a w a ve .

Apply energ y to liqu id or gas and we start some

sor t of vibration . Thu s not o nly do es this co m-

binatio n o f emission and w ave frequ ency seem

lo gical but as a matter of fact that is the only

way mo tio n can be star ted . It is perfectly sim-

ple fro m that viewp oi nt .




The qu antum theor y of l ig ht is this : The o r -

bits of the electro ns in the atom, which is su p-

po sed to be made up li ke a miniatu re solar sys-

tem, chang e by defini te ju mps . With addedenerg y app li ed to the atom, su ch as heat, the

electro ns jump to a hig her or bit and in so doing

emit ener gy to the su rr ou nding med iu m and that

i s t h e b a s i s o f l i g h t . I see nothing inharmonio us

in this theory with that I have already pr op osed .

There is a second phase of the id ealistic phil-

oso phy, and now we come to the peculia r con -

tribution of Plato . It is this . Plato fou nd cer -

tain general characteristics . In fact, his who le

philo sop hy was a movement fro m the particul ar

to the gener al, thence to the mo r e gener al and

finally to the ultimate and absolute through this

same lo gi cal o r g eneralizing pr ocess . It is like

the steps of a lad der . We cli mb fr o m o ne gen-

eralization to a higher . This i s know n as the

di alectical method bro ug ht us by Plato and elab-

o r ated by Heg el . In a manner so mewhat analo -

go us, the species binds together the individuals,

the g enus, the species . Thu s all hor ses are

classified under the species of hor se ; this belongs

to a higher classificatio n of pachyderms ; these

in tur n to mammals ; all ar e generalized as ver -

tebrates ; these belong to animals, etc . Ther e

is an ever- ascendi ng seri es, bo u nd to g ether by

mor e and mo re g eneral similar ities . Thus the

concept is bo r n, desig nated i n langu age by thecommon noun. Thr o u g h all r u ns the id ea, the

general pu r po se . There mu st be in the u niverse

somewhere archetypes, that is, there is an id eal



3 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEman o r ,an id eal of man. I r ecently r ead a Hin-

d o o w r iter w ho said that man had been latent

and pr omised fro m the begi nning o f evolu tion ;

that we find so me of his featur es and character-

istics cropping o ut here and there all alo ng the

evolu tio nary path . It is something like a theme

in music . In Wagner w e find a phrase hinted

and then later su g g ested a li ttle mor e u ntil

finally the full theme flowers o ut in a burst o f

melod y . So w ith life, we perceive it ad vancing

fro m stage to stage u ntil at last man emer g es

and says, "I AM ." In saying that he utters the

name o f Go d . ,That w hich was invo lved becomes

evolved . The divi ne id ea has fo und a voi ce .

Plato su ppo sed there is a pattern so mewhere

in the cosmos, o r in the mind back of i t, some-

w hat as a human bu il d er makes a specifi cai o n

or blue print of a building he is go ing to erect .

Plato's i deas or archetypes were something like

final causes . In the mou th o f Ar isto tle, who

stu d ied u nder him, they became entelechies, o r

realizations. A thing is o nly know n in its final

pu rp ose, or r eason of being . Plato and Ari sto-

tle differed sharply at many po ints, but w ere

alike in this . They sa w d esi g n thr o u gh o u t na -

ture . Thought was at work in the universe .

Thro u gh all things r an the idea . It manifested

in f o r m an d f unct i on . It w as specialized and

di fferentiated in the individ ual ; but the indivi-

du als were gener alized into classes ; and the

highest gener alizatio n was Go d .

The idealilst has recently entered the field of

psycho lo gy . Benedetto C ro ce finds two for ms of




min d actio n ; first perception . I perceive an in-

di vid ual thing, then other ind ivid uals . These

are particular . I r elate them to each other, see

the difference or likeness and begin to classify,

to d iscover r elations and quali ties and g ather

them into a concept, that is, I g enerali ze o r

universalize them . So Mr. Cr oce says, there are

these two mod es of knowing, fir st perceptio n and

second conceptio n, or generalized perception .

The same pr o cess is app li ed to the r ealm o f

the wi ll o r to min d in action . First it do es

things particularly, to g et food or for gr atifica-

tion o f some desire or appetite . That is fo r

the individual . We generalize by acting fo r the

family, the nation, o r fo r a cause, and that is

ethics . He makes the four products of mindaction fi rst, perception of indivi du al things, that

is beauty ; w hen w e gener alize in the concept,

that is tru th ; w hen we .act for indi vid ual needs,

that is use ; and w hen we g enerali ze this into

actio n for o ther s, it beco mes go od . Thus wehave as the four products of mind action-beau ty, tru th, use and g oo d . He left ou t one

metho d o f mind action, ho wever, feeling o r emo-

tion, the generali zatio n of which is r elig io n .

Throughout the Middle Ages, the war over

Platonic i dealism rag ed . It is very interesting

the for m it took . So me may think this u nimpo r -

tant but I call attention to the fact that modern

civilization gr ew ou t of it . The stru g gl e was

over this questio n : Does a common noun standfor a thing o r is it a mere convenience of human

speech? That di vid ed tw o schoo ls of thou ght



4 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEfor five hundred years and is still d ividing them .

The realists held that commo n nou ns repr esent

actual entities . The nomi nali sts o n the o ther

hand co ntended that these classifi catio ns are

mer ely hu man inventio ns fo r the convenience o f

human speech and hu man tho u g ht ; that the only

thing which exists is the individu al. The no mi-

nalists wo n ou t, at least in part, and in so d oi ng

laid the gr ou nd w or k for indu ctive science, for

theolo g ical sceptici sm which r esu lted in the

Refor mation and for mod ern d emocracy . MayI mention in this connection another school, for

the distinctio n here is not o nly a matter o f wo rd s

but of co ncepts . This o ther schoo l w as kno w n

as the conceptu alists . The contention of the con-

ceptualists w as that there is the id ea which is

an entity in the intellegible universe, and that is

the basis of idealism .

In a way these three schoo ls have always been

in existence. In Greece the idealists were rep-

resented by Plato, the nominalists, or material-

ists, by Demo cri tu s and the conceptu alists by

Aristotle . The id ealists said that the gener al

is befo re the par ticu lar , the mater iali sts that

the general comes after the particular, but Aris-

totle too k a midd le gr ou nd by stating that the

general is in the particul ar . The tw o cannot be

separ ated . They are concomitant and accom-

pany each other . The only reason w e try to sep-

arate them is ou r habit of abstracting . We areever tr ying to abstract, to take things away fro m

their settings, divid ing the part fro m the whole .

After that we classify and bui ld u p these ab-




stractions i nto entities . Berkeley war s agai nst

cutting ou t the abstraction called matter and

then apostatizi ng i t into an entity . The part

has n o r eality a wa y f r o m the wh o le . The ab-

straction is only for thou ght . It may gi ve u s a

clue to r eality but is no t to be co nsidered as

anything in and for itself apart fro m that from

which it is abstracted . It o nly belongs to i ts

id ea, or rather it is o nly a phase of something

else. What we call matter i s o nly a phase o f

the whole universe . It is a function or mo de of

manifestatio n . It is the objective sid e of spir it,

a mediu m thro ug h which spir it acts . If we real-

ly und ersto od this we shou ld be on the ro ad to

overcoming the chasm between idealism andmateriali sm .

The idealisti c philo so phy means mo r e than

this, how ever . We come to Hegel in our next

chapter . He sug gested a solu tion o f this w hol e

questio n in one of his familiar d ialectical triad s .

You know the method o f taking the o ne po le and

its opp osite. The tw o to g ether g ive u s a mean-

ing that do es not belo ng to either po le alone . We

find this polar ity not only in things but in

thou ght . We cannot think without it . This

gives rise to the Hegelian thesis, antithesis and

synthesis, that is, the o pp o sites gather ed to -

g ether into u nity and meaning .

Hegel po sited the u niversal and the par ticu -

lar. These are the two po les . Now gather them

to g ether and w hat have w e? The u niver sali zed

particular . What is that? The in d iv i d u a l . If

we think of any individ ual thing in the universe,



4 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEw e find i t contains these two elements . It is

particular, that is, this thing . At the same ti me

it is a part o f the universe just as the dro p o f

water is part of the ocean. If w e know any part

o f the universe all i n all, we know the whole

universe .

Now we have the universal-i ndivid ual . Eachone of us represents the universe fro m his view-

po int, but he only manifests so much of i t as

he knows, comp r ehend s, app reciates, uses .Whenever I hear anybody talking about theChri st in him, I o ften wo nder how much d oes he

manifest, ho w much of the thou ght is he living ,

ho w much of the tru th of C hr ist is he incarnat-

ing .

Leibnitz sai d that each monad r epr esents the

universe fro m its viewpo int, bu t repr esents it

wi th more or less confusio n . A gr eat deal of

ou r thou ght is confu sion and the whol e pr ocess

of know ing is to clarify and o rg anize it into a

living truth. I f w e co u l d b r i n g o u r k n o w le d g e

of matter to i ts ful l meaning, it wo ul d be spir it .

It is matter o nly so lo ng as there is confu sio n

abou t it .

There is yet another aspect to idealism . Theid eal is dynamic . There is nothing so po werfu l

in this universe, nothing that can so galvanize

the so ul into action, as a gr eat ideal . Jesu s

transcended others because of His ideals. Theywere an inwa rd spri n g o f healin g, pr otection

and po wer . They w ere r egener ative . They r ep-

resented the creative and renewing fo rce of the

thou ght of God , for He was in tou ch wi th the




Divine, He had the divine ideal that he reflected

in His who le life, His w hole being .

Ou r i d eals have a mor al valu e also . It is to

them and because o f them that we aspi r e, and

w e co ndemn ou rselves because we fall shor t o fthem. In this aspect they constitu te o u r co n-

science. There is an element of sin in o u r fail-

u re to li ve u p to these id eals concerning w hich

w e ar e o u r o w n j u d g e s . We alo ne see that fail-

ur e perfectly and so in the last analysis our ow n

hig her thou ghts jud ge us and the ju d g ment is

inerr antly tru e . We can have no su ch a stri ct

mentor as the self j ud g ing the self . And fromthat judgment we cannot escape . Our ownid eals jud ge us . The universal w ithin u s sets

up a standar d o f perfection . It r eveals to us

w hat w e ou g ht to be. The micro cosm is a univ-

erse in itself . It may be latent, it may be po -

tential, but it is all there. Go d is i n us because

Go d is in the cosmo s . That is the visio n of the

mystic . It was the natural o utg ro wth of Plato's

id ealism .

To sum u p, there are two aspects of id ealism .

We do not d ir ectly know objective things, bu t

only ou r r eactions fro m sensori stimuli . Thereare but small bands of frequencies that affect us

a t a l l . One narr ow band w e call so u nd, another

light . Nu mero u s g aps between these and beyo nd

are unknow n, or know n imperfectly . The senses

are apparently designed for pr actical p ur po ses .

They tell us nothing o f the ultimate . There is

no w ay we can get ou t of o u rselves to verify and

discover w hat Kant called "the thing in itself ."



44 INVADING THE INVISIBLEWe have taken so me steps tow ard veri ficatio n,

however , thro ug h reason, intui tio n and w hat is

know n as "instr u mentalism ." This wi ll be dealt

w ith in later chapters .

Another aspect of idealism, which is peculiar-

ly asso ciated wi th the name of Plato g ro ws o ut

of generalization . The po pu lar concept is that

there are ideal archetypes o r p atterns, such as

an abstract man or an abstract hor se, and that

individ uals are appro ximations towar d this ideal,

each one repr esenting the perfect patter n mor e

or less inadequately . This concept fu rnished the

battleg r o u n d thr o u gh o u t the Mi d d l e Ages be-

tw een w hat w ere know n as the Reali sts and the

No minali sts, the fir st contending that a co m-

mon nou n stands fo r a thing ; the second, that it

is o nly a convenience o f human speech . TheC o nceptio nalists w ere a later phase o f the re-

a l i s t s . This stru gg le laid the gr ou nd wo rk for

mod ern civilization . Mo d ern science w ill have

s omethin g t o sho w w ith reg a r d t o a r chetypa l

patterns . The latest lig ht on the subject seems

to ind icate that there is an archetype o f each

individ ual w hich is unfold ing and pr og ressive,

and that the general ideal is subsumed, or

rather incor po rated, in an indi vidu al sou l or

dynamo-psychism.

Mo d ern Id ealism has given us such names as

Leibnitz, Berkeley, Kant, and Hegel, whose

philo sop hy elabo r ates that of Plato . Hegel's

dialectic of the universal, the particular, and the

individ ual thro ws a new li ght on ol d pr oblems .

,The idealism o f Jesus is a regenerative force .



CHAPTER IIITHE ABSOLUTE

THROUGHOUT the wor ld of life the individ ual

develo ps by feeding on that which is o utside it-

s e l f . It i s thu s that the plant g ro ws, o r the

animal . In the acorn is the germ, or potentiali-

ty of the oak. It d oes not actualize, or r ealize,

this po tentiality until i t assimilates from its

envir onment the materi als to fi ll o ut and br ing

into fo rm its latent possibilities . The same is tr ue

of the animal, of the hor se, fo r example . The germ

contains the archetype, the specificatio n, but this

must be evolved thro u g h feeding on that which

is outsid e, which is taken into its body, o r gan-

ized and made a part of itself . A similar pr ocess

occu r s in man, and strangely enou g h, not only

in man's body, but in man's mind . The egog r o w s thro u g h absorbin g the non -ego . Just as

we take fo o d i nto the bo dy, so there is o utsid e

of us what we call food for thou ght . We becomeconscio us and g ro w in conscio usness by feed ing

on o ur enviro ment, by gaining and assimilating

new kno w led g e, new i d eas . We grow by con-tactin g and know in g o u r other .

This pr ocess go es on throu ghou t natur e . Thepr oto n assimilates its other, its negative, the

electron . Chemical combinatio ns resu lt fr o m the

46



THE ABSOLUTE 47

attractio n and ad her ence of co mplementary ele-

ments . The same method is o bser ved thro u g h-

ou t the wo rld of living things . It appears on a

hig her level in the wo rl d o f tho ug ht . As the

oak tree is po tentially and id eally in the acorn,

so the universe is potenitally and ideally in the

eg o . We realize or actualize this thro ug h know l-

edge, that is, by absor bing the non-ego into our -

selves. We come to ourselves by knowing our

other . To be conscio u s we must be conscio u s of

so mething . Hegel calls natur e the other of spir it .

The ego and the non- ego are the two po les . They

come tog ether as conscio u sness . On a higherscale Spi r it and Natur e ar e the two po les, the

un i o n bein g u n iver sa l co n sci o u sness, o r Go d .

Ou r eg o i s a child o f Go d, an emanatio n ; and at

the spi r itu al po le, as we shall see in the next

chapter , there can be endless emanatio ns w ith-

ou t lessening o r d iminishing the sou rce . That

is the nature of sp ir it . So in the ego there is a

po tential universe, cor respo nding to the actual

universe wi tho ut . It r ealizes itself through its

other, by consuming or know ing i ts other .

Speaking o f the mo nads o f Leibnitz, H. Wil -

do n Car r* says

Take then my o w n existence . I am a monad , an active

centre, an agent, the whole universe is mir ro red into that

centre, fo cussed there, and my activity co nsists of my

perceptions, but only an infinitesimal po rti on o f these

are clear and di stinct perceptio ns, the rest are massed

tog ether, co nfused, obscure and u ndiscerned . I am alsoself-co nscio us, aw are of myself as perceiving . My monad,the monad which is me, is apperceptive . But then I am

* The General Principle of Relativity by H. W i ld o n C a r r , Macmillan



48 INVADING THE INVISIBLEin relation to a bod y, my mind is a do minant monad, and

it w or ks in complete harmo ny with the bod y, and yet this

body is to tally different and d istinct in its natur e from

the mind . What is it? It co nsists of monad s but of in-

feri o r monad s . They are infinite in number, for no pr in-

cipl e exists w hich impo ses a limitati on o n them, and yet

each is indi vid ual, an active centre mirr or ing the uni verse

fro m its ow n point of view .

N o t o n l y d o e s t h e e g o m i r r o r t h e u n i v e r s e b u t

corr esponds to it and partakes of its quality .

S i n c e t h e u n i v e r s e k n o w s i t s e l f a s m i n d , t h e e g o

a l s o k n o w s i t a s m i n d , i n s o f a r a s i t s i d e a s a r e

c l e a r .

Man's mind is ever seeking an absolute . In

t h e r e a l m s o f k n o w l e d g e h i s q u e s t i s f o r c e r t i -

tude. In the arena of action, of morals and of

l i f e h i s i d e a l i s p e r f e c t i o n . T h e h i g h e s t a t t r ib u t e

h e g i v e s t o G o d i s t h a t o f i m m u t a b i l i t y , t h e s a m e

yesterd ay, today and forever . He loo ks for ab-

solu te meaning, an absolu te end, absolute good .

H o w e v e r o f t e n f r u s t r a t e d i n r e a l i z i n g h i s a s p i r a -

t i o n s , h e s t i l l p i c t u r e s a p e r f e c t b e a u t y , a p e r f e c t

i m m or t a l i t y , a p e r f e c t b l i s s .

What is it in us that impels us to these ul-

t i m a t e i d e a l s w h i c h a r e n e v e r r e a l i z e d , a t l e a s t

insofar as ou r experience in this life is con-

cerned? Perhaps some of the philosophers may

g i v e u s a c l u e t o t h e r i d d l e , a n d a t l e a s t i f t h e y

do not answer the question, may sug gest the

r e a s o n t h a t i t i s a s k e d .

P l a t o l e d u s f r o m t h e p a r t i c u l a r t o t h e u n i v e r -

s a l , a n d i t w a s i n t h i s r e a l m o f u n i v e r s a l s t h a t

h e p o s i t e d h i s i d e a l s . In the contemplation of

b e a u t y h e a t f i r s t t h o u g h t o f a b e a u t i f u l o b j e c t ,



THE ABSOLUTE 4 9

su ch as a beautifu l woman, and f r o m this he

wid ened the concept to beautiful objects in gen-

eral, and from these led to the acme of abstract

and id eal beauty, wo rship o f beauty in and fo r

i t s e l f. In the same w ay he dr ew o u r minds to

the concept o f universal go o d and made this the

highest attribute .

,Spino za who was called by Novali s "the Go d-

intoxicated man" soug ht God thro ug h a sor t ofmathematical reasoning and found Him in au niversal concept of su bstance . Hegel carr ied

this thought one step further and changedSpinoza's substance to su bject, i . e ., a self-know -

ing, self- acting entity . Benedetto C r o ce w ent

still fur ther and reversed o ur usual d efinitions

o f concr ete and abstract . He made the worldo f mind concr ete, while that of p henomena is

abstract . He reached his result in this way : We

kn o w the min d as a w ho le . It is o ne thing- I,

ego , the know er . The world of phenomena weonly see fractionally and fragmentari ly and then

we loo k on it from the ou tside . In other w o r d s

we see it in symbo ls, and to kno w it at all w e

have to abstract from it, i . e ., cut it up, analyze

it, and fro m ou r glimpses of particulars arrive

at some mor e or less imperfect appr o ximation

o f a complete concept .

Berg son questio ned the human intellect itself

and said that obviou sly it is a specialized for m

of mind d esigned for the creation of to ol s ou t-

side the or ganism . The lo wer fo r ms of li fe have

their i mplements in the or ganism, such as claws,

teeth and the like . The bee has a very elabor ate



50 INVADING THE INVISIBLEset of too ls in its hind legs . Man, ho w ever , r e-

quires tools that are not an or ganic part of him-

self that he can lay asid e when not in u se . Tofabricate such too ls he had to have a mind adapt-

ed to knowi ng solid matter o ut o f which too ls

are fashio ned . F r o m t o o ls t o the machine is

only a step, and fr om that to the intellectual con-

cept o f materialism and o f natur e as a gi gantic

machine, is a lo g ical pro g ress . Berg so n says,

how ever , that this special mod e o f mind actio n

d oes n ot exha ust the ways of kn o w i n g an d o f

mental activity . In the low er animals we find

instinct, which in man becomes intui tio n . Bymeans o f intui tion w e know things fr om the in-

sid e as wholes rather than know ing them fr o m

the outside as parts .

Kant co u l d n ot f ind a p r o o f o f Go d and im -

mor tality in the theoretical reason, but did d is-

cover such a pro of i n the mor al or pr actical

r easo n, because ther e he di scover ed this same

lo nging for perfectio n, this same "categ or ical

imperative" that erects a universal standard and

jud ges the rig ht or w ro ng of an individ ual ac-

tion by this perfect criterion . Becau se man can-

not realize this longing or aspiration of perfec-

tio n in one life, there must be another ; and be-

cause of this demand in the reason, the heart and

the spir it o f man fo r absol u te meanings, values

and r eali zatio ns, there must be a perfect Go d

both to i nstil such aspir ations and to satisfy

them .

With these g li mpses o f the meaning o f the

absol u te that we gain fr o m the philo sop her s,



THE ABSOLUTE 6 1

perhaps we are somewhat better fitted to pro -

ceed w ith our quest . What do we mean by theabsol u te? Obvio u sly it can be nothing belong-

ing to the phenomenal u niverse in w hich ever y-

thing is subject to change, is manifested in de-

grees and is contingent or accidental . What wemean by the ter m accid ental is that any gi ven

thing might have been di fferent wi thou t impair -

ing the universe . In other wo rd s it is not a ne-

cessity . It makes no di fference to the ong o ing

o f the cosmo s whether it r ains tod ay or next

week, or w hether I d o this thing o r something

else. The universe wo uld continu e even if I w ere

not here at all, o r yo u, o r this earth, or even ou r

sol ar system . These are no t necessar y thing s

in the sense of the absolute. Babylon was andis not . Mars may once have been a populouspl anet in w hich the w hole theatre o f li fe was

enacted, cul minating in man, or somehting simi-

lar to man . Su ch astro no mical evid ences as we

are able to g ain now , how ever, ind icate that

Mars has passed the stage of supporting an

abu ndant life su ch as we know . There is to o

little air and water on that planet now to supply

any elabo rate flor a and fau na, to say nothing

o f an extensive hu man civil izatio n . Planets,

therefor e, with the whole of their life prod uct,

may come and go. Fr o m the standpo int o f the

abso lu te they are ephemeral thing s . They ar e

no t necessary . In the lig ht of this and o ther

facts, it is obvio us that we cannot lo ok for the

absol u te in the things of time and space, o r in

the wor ld o f appearances . We mu st seek else-



5 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEw h e r e , a n d t h e r e i s n o e l s e w h e r e t o s e e k e x c e p t

in the wo rld of pneumena, instead o f phenome-

na, in the "thing in itself" that Kant talked

abou t . Since the world of phenomena consti-

t u t e s t h e w h o l e v i s i b l e u n i v e r s e , w e m u s t t h e r e -

f o r e s e e k i n t h e i n v i s i b l e u n i v e r s e f o r o u r a b s o -

lute, in other w or ds in the wo rld of mind or

s p i ri t . The old Hermetic philosophy may offer

u s a s u g g e s t i o n h e r e . Its fu ndamental idea was

that the law o f po larity applies to everything

from the hig hest to the low est . This takes in

the pairs o f o ppo sites-the po sitive and nega-

tive-d ay and night- w inter and summer -man

and w o man-lo ve and hatred- g o od and evil-

light and darkness-life and death-spirit and

matter . Carr y it as far as you like . The pri-

mary pr inciple of po larity is that what we can

posit of one pole we cannot posit of the other .

Thus if we say of the phenomenal wo rld that it

changes, we must posit of the other that it is

c h a n g e l e s s . If the one is temporary, the other

i s e t e r n a l . If material is bound, the spir it is

f re e , e t c . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e a b s o l u t e i s n o t i n

the for m wo rld at all because for m in its very

n a t u r e a l t e r s . It is not even in an "Eternal

C i t y " l i k e t h a t s e e n b y t h e R e v e l a t o r , b u t i s a

m a t t e r o f p r i n c i p l e s a n d i d e a l s , t h e v e r y i d e a l s

that Plato talked about . I t i s l i k e r e a s o n . Athing that is reasonable in North America is

r e a s o n a b l e i n C h i n a . A t h i n g t h a t i s r e a s o n a b l e

i n t h e f i r s t c e n t u r y i s r e a s o n a b l e i n t h e t w e n t y -

second . O r i t i s l i k e c o n s c i e n c e , w h i c h f o r e v e r

h o l d s b e f o r e u s a c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e , a u n i -



THE ABSOLUTE5 3

versal standard which impels us to do ri ght . I

know there is a lot o f confusio n, intentional or

otherw ise, regard ing this question o f ethics and

morals . We hear peo pl e say that w hat is r ig ht

in one cou ntry is not r ig ht in another, and what

is r ig ht in one age is di fferent in another . Butif w e examine this clo sely we find that it i s

merely the content that changes and no t the im-

pulse or direction of conscience itself. What Imean is this . Our op inio ns of r ig ht may change

wi th cir cumstances o r ed ucatio n, but whatever

it is w e think to be rig ht ou r co nscience impels

us to d o that . It is like the form of r eason that

Kant mentio ns .* The co ntent may vary bu t the

ratio nal fo rms r emain constant . I su spect that

men have delud ed themselves a bit o n this ques-

t i o n o f r i g ht an d w r o n g . They have tri ed to

"alibi" o r explain aw ay and thus to evade the

dictates of this inner monitor , this voice of God

in the soul w e call conscience, but such evasions

are neither scientific no r satisfacto r y . Thevo ice of co nscience is thus absolu te, impelling us

to do right . If ou r opi nions as to w hat is right

change, that has nothing to d o w ith this abso-

lu te moni tor , the conscience, which tells us to

d o that thing which we really think to be rig ht,

w hatever it may be . Thus we are getting o n

solid gr ou nd and d iscover that these absolu te

qualities are spiri tual and not materi al-r ig ht-

eou sness, go od will, truth, justice, duty, loving-

kindness, go od , id eal beauty, freedo m, perfec-

tio n, Go d . In the pheno menal wo r ld w e get an

* It is o bjected that a baby do es not develop a conscience, but neitherdo es a baby exercise reason .



54 INVADING THE INVISIBLEinkling o f this absolu te in law- the mor al law,

the law o f natur e-and that in the final analysis

is the o nly absol u te and per manent factor w e

discover in this o uter u niverse of change and o f

becomi ng .

Hegel, who w as the author o f the "Philo so phy

of the Absolu te," had o ne pr inciple that he often

reiterated, "the rational is the real ." Thus heerected a universe of tho ug ht, or rather a uni-

verse that cor responds to the dialectic and logic

of thou g ht pr o cesses . He carr ied this metho d

t hr o u g h a scen d i n g l a d d er s o f t r i a d s . These

triad s consist o f thesis and antithesis, as the

two po les, and o f synthesis, as the unifying pr in-

c i p l e . Heg el started w ith his famou s triad o f

being as the thesis, nothing, or non- being as the

antithesis . The synthesis o r u nifying element

or pr inciple is becoming . The uni verse is be-

coming. Pro g r ess is a mo d e o f beco ming . Thushe laid the gr o u n d w o r k for the whole evolu -

tio nar y hypothesis . I n the same way he d ealt

w ith the age-o ld battle betw een the parti cul ar

and the u niversal that star ted w ith Plato and

Ar istotle and continued thro u g ho ut the Mid dl e

Ages . Hegel s u m med it u p i n this w ise : Theuniversal is the thesis, the particular the anti-

thesis and the unified synthesis is the individ ual,

the id ea being that the synthesis takes into it-

self both elements of the po les and unites them

into one . In other w or d s the ind ivid u al becomes

the universalized particu lar, the micro cosm in

the macrocosm, the whole quality of the ocean in

one d r o p o f sea wa ter . If this philoso phy of



THE ABSOLUTE 5 5

Hegel is ever r eally understoo d, it will thro w a

new and r evealing lig ht o n many of the pr o b-

lems that afflict humanity, especially those that

afflict relig io n and philo sophy . To Hegel, the

absol ute w as indi cated by the subject know ing

its o bject, and thus know ing itself . In o ther

w o r d s the tr iad here mig ht be the ego , the non-

eg o , and conscio u sness, w hich is analo g o us to

the po sitive and negative electro ns joi ning to

make the atom o r the positive and negative po les

constitu ting the magnet . We could follow ou t

this triadic method almost to an infinite detail,

as Hegel in fact di d . For example, go od -evil-

mor al responsibility ; father- mother- child : the

one-the many-u nity ; spirit-matter- life, the

living u niverse ; life-d eath-i mmor tality . Thewhole universe is the only self-subsisting, self-

acting thing, and w e are self-acting o nly as we

partake of the natur e and qu ality of this u ni-

versal reality . This i s the Go d - inman, "C hr ist

in us, the hop e of glo ry . "

So me seek the absolu te in i mmensity . They

po sit an infini te space and time, neither of which

can be thou ght, or can only be thou ght negative-

ly, as indicated by the form of the wor d i tself .

Infinite means not fi nite just as endless means

w ithou t end, both of w hich are merely the nega-

tion of limitation . That is the nearest appr oach

we can make to the absol ute fro m an intellectual

standpo int . No w , how ever, w e have d iscovered

that time and space are self-completing, or rath-

er that what we think o f as a boundless universe

becomes an almost inconceivably great, self- con-



5 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEtaining number of "island u niverses" like ou r

ow n "milky way," all constituting a gig antic cell

self- contained and self- completed thr o ug h the

three factor s of space, time and the velocity o f

lig ht, time being ano ther space di mensio n, al-

thou gh o ur intellects fall shor t of its compre-

hensio n .

In this connectio n there ar e so me factor s in

the materi alistic astro nomy that perhaps su g-

gest the absolu te by being something else. Oneo f these is the negative and materi alisti c con-

cept that the u niverse may r u n do w n, which in

bri ef gr ow s ou t of w hat is know n as the second

law o f ther mod ynamics, w hich is that heat to

give off energ y must step do wn to a lo wer level,

ju st as steam or water to gi ve o ff energ y must

d o the same thing . As the energy of the universe

is larg ely in the form of heat, and as this heat

is fo rever being rad iated thro ug h space and is

being u sed to perfo rm wo rk, it is therefor e dim-

inishing o r steppi ng d ow n to a latent form, and

sometime the universe wi ll r un o ut o f active

heat and w ill become a cold , inert, li feless mass .

That is the theory . The only tro uble with it is

that these same materialistic scientists who hold

it also deny creation, and therefore believe that

the universe is w ithou t beg inning . If that be

tr ue, then it has been in existence an infinite

time and would already have run down . Theconclusion is log ical and inescapable . I su spect

the di fficu lty with this whole pr o po sitio n is that

these materialisti c scientists have not inclu ded

all of the factors . In other wo r ds they are like



THE ABSOLUTE 5 7

the coll ege song of Noah who w as "a grand o ld

man," the rather ir r ever ent do gg er el ru nning,

"Old man No ah knew a thing o r two ," ,and "be-

cause he knew a thing o r tw o , he tho u g ht he

knew it all ." May w e ho pe that w hen o u r mate-

rialistic scientists know more they will know to o

mu ch to make such di smal pr o phecies? Either

time is not a factor , in this sense, or the universe

is self-r enew ing . Perhaps the real tru th of it is,

"Go d is i n His Heaven, all's r ig ht w ith the

w o r l d ."

Another o f these astronomical, negative, mate-

r iali sltic theor ies makes ou r so lar system the re-

sult o f accident . It is to the effect that some-

time in the remote ages past, another su n came

wandering this way and g ot near enou gh to o ur

ow n sun to pu ll o u t enou gh masses of the incan-

descent matter to form the planets, but that this

may not have happened anywhere else in the

universe. The tro uble with this hypothesis w ould

seem to be that if the wandering su n were strong

enough in its attraction to pu ll these masses ou t

of o u r o wn sun, it shou ld have pu lled them all

the way, since the attractio n of o ur sun w ou ld

have been gr eatest when these pl anets wer e a

part of its own bod y . After they were pulled o ut

this att ract i on w o u l d have decr eased as the

squar e of the distance . Ther efor e the other su n

wo ul d have carr ied them all the way to itself

either to disappear in its own body or to become

attendant bodies revolving aro und it as a center .

Some of these materialisti c scientists seem in-

tent on ascri bing everything to accid ent, evid ent-



5 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEly for the pu rp ose of getting away fro m desig n,

or in other w or ds in getting away fro m God .

Our whole idea of this spatial or materialistic

infinite gets in the way of o u r r ealizing the abso-

lute . Hegel calls it the "false infinite," and a

few ill u st r a t i on s may in d icate s omethin g o f

what the false element in the concept is . As amatter o f fact we can no mor e think o f the in-

fini te than we can think of its op po site, nothing .

We can think o f the absence of any assi g nable

thing, or of all assignable things, and yet ou r

thou g hts are of so mething . Ou r compr ehensio n

of the infinite is equally negative and meaning-

less, as I have already show n . Zeno g ave u s

some famou s pa ra do xes or impo ssible pro blems

that may help to make this a little clearer . Oneo f these was of Achilles and the to r toi se . It w as

to the effect that if Achilles runs twice as fast

as the to rto ise and they are a certain d istance

apar t, bo th r u nning in the same d ir ectio n, ho w

long w ill it take Achilles to catch the tortoise?

Let us say that they are a mile apar t, w hich

Achilles can ru n in ten minutes. Whil e Achil -

les is ru nning that mile, the tor to ise has ru n

half a mi le, and w hile Achil les r u ns the half

mile, the to rto ise has ru n a quarter o f a mile,

and w hile Achill es r u ns the qu arter o f a mile,

the tor toise ru ns an eighth of a mile, and so on .

It is a true infinite series, accor di ng to the pr ob-

lem stated, and Achilles will never overtake the

tortoise. As a matter of fact, how ever , he d o es

o vertake it in exactly tw enty minu tes . Whathappens is that this w hole infinite series is taken



THE ABSOLUTE 59

up and absor bed . It is an abstract or false in-

f i ni t e . I o nly sug gest this to sho w that the ab-

solu te cannot be reached thro ug h pu r sui ng the

wi ll- o- the-w isp of abstract infinites, or by cutting

u p the phenomenal u niverse of appearance and

change . It can only be fou nd at the o ther po le

of spir it, of i mmutable laws and pr inciples, of the

invisi ble and i neffable king d o m of cr eative

thought, of the being of Him who has beenknow n in all relig io ns and called by all names,

but to His most devout w or shippers is too p ur e

and high for man's designation, and therefor e is

the Nameless .

This is the Absolu te . There is no ne other .

The di fficulty with most of u s is that our minds

are so p r one to think in terms o f the materi al,

that any mention o f the Absol u te means a fixed

or static affair, a "frozen Absolute ." This has

no existence, except in d eath. Such a concept is

of a d ead u niverse . The only absol u te is the

w hol e mind and bod y o f Go d, the whole id ea and

its manifestatio n, the fu n dmental and i mmu-

table pr inciples of being, the Reality behind and

through all that is, the living universe .

Hegel's larg est triad takes something like the

follo win g form :

1 . (Thesis) . The pr e- existing Absol ute I dea

of the Universe .

2 . (Antithesis) . Externali zed into the

w o r l d o f Na tu r e .

3 . (Synthesis) . Reapp ear ing as mind o r Na-

tur e consciou s of itself .



6 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEI n this pro cess of taking ou r other into the

self w e r etur n to the opening thou ght of this

Chapter , that of consuming what is ou tside us,

by w hich we come into complete realizatio n o f

ou rselves . It is thus the potential becomes ac-

tual, the latent is made active, the evolutio n or

unfo ld ment appears in fu ll manifestatio n in its

final cause or end . This renders the life process

clear and intellig ible. It all comes fro m the Ab-

solu te Id ea to which it retur ns. This it d oes by

the subject or min d absor bin g o r kno wi n g its

object which is matter, and by this method it be-

comes a consciou s entity or the full statement of

i t s e l f . Thro ug h synthesis o f the two o ppo site

po les it r etur ns into a hig her unity . It is the

conscio us universe knowi ng itself .



CHAPTER IVMYSTICISM

THIS chapter comes as an afterthou ght . It

was not my o riginal intention to include the sub-

ject of mysticism in the pr esent book . My chief

r eason fo r the pr o po sed o missio n was that the

special sciences do not deal with mysticism, with

the po ssible exceptio n of p sycho lo g y, and even

psychologists generally explain it on physical or

patholo gical gro unds .

It w as on r equ est o f a member o f the class

that the subject was, after all, inclu ded . I nowsee that it belongs, fo r it serves to illu strate the

d iffer ence between the scientifi c and philo so phic-

al viewpo int . Science is descrip tio n ; philoso-

phy is explanatio n . Science deals w ith the howof things ; philosophy with the why . Science

thus lo oks on the material phase of the universe,

bu t philo sop hy must also includ e the spir itu al ;

and every philo sop hy that has failed to d o this

has br o ken d o w n . Science cannot d eal with mys-

ticism fo r the su bject is beyo nd i ts pale, bu t

philoso phy not o nly can, but mu st, do so .

The failu re of both science and philo sop hy to

solve the problems of the world has been chiefly

du e to their omission of the spiritual fr om their

equations, their perverse blindness, I w as about

61



6 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEto say, to the spir itual . It w ou ld be strange,

indeed, if w e were to find polarity, the pairs of

o p p o s ites, thr o u g ho u t nat u re, and sho u l d n ot

find them at the very top o f the scale in the two

op po site po les o f spiri t and matter . But that

is p recisely the viewpo int that science, o r rather

some of the special scientists, appear to assume .

They have a ri ght to i gno re the spir itu al, per-

haps, fo r they are necessari ly dealing w ith the

material aspect of things, but they have no right

t o d eny . In that they ar e go ing beyond their

pro vince . In fact, much of the confusion in mod -

ern tho u g ht is d u e to the attempt to explai n

the universe in terms of so me one special science .

In an earlier d ay it was physics, and a mistaken

fo r m of physics, at that . Just now it is biolog y,

and an accid entalist bio lo g y, as we shall see

later . Each special science belong s to its o w n

field, but shou ld keep ou t of the general field

and shou ld not seek to explain the universe ac-

cor di ng to i ts own pet hobbies or in line w ith

gli mpses thro ug h its own p articular peephole at

reality . When it d oes that there is tro uble. Wecan only explain life, consciou sness, freedom and

the like thro ug h inclusion o f the spiritual . That

is the r easo n why mysticism belo ngs here, for

mysticism is a d irect appr oach to spirit . Yet it

has also a scientific phase .

There appears to be a basic mode of mind action

that accompanies life even in its l o w est fo r ms .

In the beginning this is undi fferentiated . Forexample, in the o ne cell o r g anism, such as the

amoeba, the cell seems to have an awar eness en-



MYSTI C I SM 6 3

abling it to perceive foo d and to reject what is

not foo d, also to mo ve fro m place to place . I n

the higher organisms that are differentiated into

or gan and fu nctio n, the mind actio n appear s to

be differentiated also . Thus, i n an incip ient

state, star ting , or r ather p r o phesying , the

special or gans and special senses, one set of

cells become a mou th, another a dig estive tract,

a thir d, the beginning of a nervous system, a

fou rth gro up for m a circulatory system, etc . I n

the same w ay that these var io u s gr o u ps ar e de-

velo ped as to fo rm and functio n, so, apparently,

they increase in mind actio n . The term `mind

action' is not exactly descriptive of the thought

I seek to convey, fo r w hatever mentatio n ap-

pears in these low for ms of life is almost wholly

u nconscio u s and d oes not answer to the mean-

ing of mind action as we know it, yet it is intel-

l i g e n t ; t h a t i s , i t a c t s f o r a p u r p o s e , a n d i n t h i s

sense it belo ngs to the wor ld of mind, or `mind

stuff' as Prof. Clifford wo uld put it . As the or -

g anism becomes still mor e hig hly perfected and

or g an and fu nctio n emerg e into g reater d istinc-

tio n, the intelligence increases and the special

senses pu t in an appear ance . In the same w ay

we may assume that the awareness, or conscio u s-

ness, of the org anism, foll ow s a corr espondi ng

d evelop ment . In the beg inning each cell covers

all the functions, but in a low and pr imary w ay .

Later . some of these general po wers are assigned

to o ne gr ou p o f cells, while others are unused,

or left do rmant . Different functio ns may be

develo ped in another gr ou p, while in a thir d set



6 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEspecialization takes place in still another fash-

ion . The pr o cess is in a w ay analog o u s to w hat

w e find i n soci ety, o ne set o f men being car -

penters, another farmers, still another pr ofes-

sio nal men, and the lik e . In this pro cess of

specialization, or differentiation, the go verning

factor appears to be necessity, or p ractical utili-

ty . ,The special senses emerge ou t of a pr imary,

or general sense, which may be what we now

term feeling . One set o f cells o r g anize them-

selves into an eye, responding to a certain range

o f d istu r bance in w hat w e call the ether . An-o ther set become an ear r espo ndi ng to a much

lo w er r ange o f frequ encies . Still another be-

come taste, which is useful in selecting the foo d

of the or ganism, and still another become smell,

which is like taste at a distance .

That all o f these special senses ari se ou t of

a primary sense is ind icated by two facts . First,

we all p ossess this pr imary, o r general, sense,

altho u g h in lo w d eg r ees, usu ally belo w the

threshold of consciou sness . So me of u s can feel

the presence o f another in a ro o m, altho u g h w e

do not see or hear him . In the same way wehave the same sor t o f aw a reness w hen w e ap-

pr oach a w all in the dark . In cases of blind-

ness, deafness, etc ., where one of the senses is

lo st there is what we call compensation i n the

heig htening of other senses, or i n the emer gence

of this pr imary sense. This is especially marked

in the cases o f Helen Kellar , Laur a Br id g man,

and many deaf mutes, and perso ns bor n blin d .

In the same way there appears to be a certain



MYSTICISM 6 5

pr imary mind action, or po tentiality of r eaction

to sensation, also o f cog nition . In other wo rd s,

not only o ur special senses but o ur mod es of in-

tellectual action are special forms o f this pr i-

mary and g eneral intelli g ence that appears in

some for m or degr ee wherever life is fou nd .

Ber gso n refer s to it as instinct in the low er

fo r ms of li fe, which in man beco mes intui tio n .

So cr ates r ecog nized this element in his "De-

mon," w hich he said tol d him not so mu ch w hat

to d o as what not to d o, so mething l ike inhibi-

tion . Plato, whether co nscio usly o r no t, was

highly intuitive, and his intuitions, by the way,

have been fru itful not only in creating a philos-

o phy that has lived tw enty-fi ve hu ndr ed year s,

but in being confir med in r ather striking ways

by mod ern scientific di scoveries . In Neo plato -

nism this intu itive and i dealistic featur e came

out in still g reater relief and assumed the for m

o f mysticism . Great figu res of this schoo l, suchas Ammonius Saccas, Porphry, Proclus andPl o t in us w er e c on tem p o r a r y w i th the r i se o f

Christianity, and it is not too much to say that

Neoplatonism and the philosophical schools

that led u p to it fu r nished the philo sop hical

backgr ou nd o f C hri stianity . Pau l and John, to

say nothing of the Master himself, had a mysti-

cal element . St. Augustine drank deeply at this

fou ntain .and carr ied something o f the spir it and

even the for m o f the Platonic p hiloso phy into

Christianity . Au g u stine had mu ch o f the same

mystical viewpo int as the Neopl atonists, w hich

he thus bequeathed to all C hristendom even unto



6 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEour own age . It has been said of this gr eat

father o f the Chur ch, that he bu ild ed a br id g e

w hich carr ied mankind acro ss the d ark ag es .

Plotinu s w as the for emost fig ur e of the Neo-

platonic school, as he was its great mystic . Hestated that thr ee o r fo u r times in his li fe he

knew the ecstasy of contact w ith the Divi ne .

Fro m his d ay to the pr esent, mysticism has had

not only a recog nized place in philoso phy, but in

religion . The annals of the C hur ch w o u ld be

po or er wi tho u t the histor y of mysticism such as

app ear ed in St . Teresa, in Eckhard t, in Tho mas

Aqui nas, in Bo ehme, w ho saw the signatu r e of

Go d in all things, and in many mo re beari ng the

most honored names in Church history . Themyst ica l element is f o u n d i n many reli g i o u s

leaders, especiall y in those who have g iven new

in sp i r a ti on an d a new d i r ecti on t o reli g i o u s

thou ght . It is especially p rominent in men like

Sw end enbor g , Geor g e Fox and John Wesley, and

in ou r o wn d ay it appears in the "Co smic Co n-

sciou sness" of Dr . Bu cke and in Walt Whitman

and Emerson.

Not only is it present in the history of C hris-

tianity, but in other r elig io ns, especially in the

Hindu faiths . Whatever the di ffer ence in ti me

or in creed, these mystic experiences are alike,

w ith similar inner states, and even an almo st

id entical symbo lism .

The mystical element is app arent in the w o r k

o f all the gr eat philo sop her s . It appeared i n

Spino za's intui tio n, or highest way of know ing .

There is a vein of it in German idealism . Even



MYSTICISM 6 7

Kant was inter ested i n Sw end enbor g and w r o te

a little essay about him. A r ecent pu blicatio n

by the University of Califo r nia Press refers to

this same element in the early w ritings o f Hegel .

John Cooper Powys suggests that both Kantand Hegel pr obably arr ived at their conclu sio ns

by intuitive or mystical means, but because this

method w as not in vog ue in their day they after-

w ard carefully o bliterated all their tracks and

made the u sual lo gi cal appr o ach .

Mysticism is d ir ect, inner contact with Go d .

How all this r efer s back to the pr imary fo r m

of know ing, or of mind action, of spir it break-

ing thr o u g h matter , that is an acco mpaniment

o f l i f e i t s e l f ! It is as tho u gh there were a uni-

versal sea of intellig ence lying under, o r back

of, all things, which or ganizes itself into mat-

ter and thro u gh matter i nto conscio usness, with

the p o w er both t o kn o w , and t o act u p o n , its

envir o nment . In many it becomes still mor e

hig hly specialized, but w ith a subconsciou s o r

extra conscio us su bstratum, that is in some way

in contact with this u niversal intellig ence per-

vadi ng all life and all the uni verse. Mysticism is

a tapping o f this level of universal intelligence .

The Her metic philo so phy declared man a micr o -

cism of the Universe, containing w ithin himself

either actually or potentially the quality or es-

sence of the whole . Jesus said, "The King d o m

of Heaven is w ithin you ." If this is tr ue, then

our mystical contact is with the Divine principle

of o u r o wn hig her natur es, a communio n with

the extra conscio us mind that presides over o u r



6 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEo w n or ganism, and, thro u g h this, a communio n

with the wo rld -so ul, or the intellig ence at wo rk

in the cosmo s .

We may approach this thought in anotherway. The universe is o ne thing, as indicated byits very name, and everything in it par takes o f

its life, its pow er, and its natur e . No t only so ,

but ever ything that occu r s in the u niverse af-

fects everything else in it, althou gh infinitesi-

mally. Thus each entity is aw are, in a sense, at

least po tentially, of every other entity, and o f

ever ything that happens . The whole u niverse is

accessible to each entity in it . As Emerso n said ,

we are inlets and o u tlets of the Infi nite, and all

o f i t .

We have an analogy to all this in rad io recep-

tio n, by which we select out the particu lar mes-

sage we desire and by amplification bring it into

the range of o ur sense perception . If w e cou ld

d o the same thing o n a lar g er scale w e cou ld

select and amplify any occurrence in the universe .

We are thus po tentially and essentially in p os-

session of the whole intellig ence of the cosmos .

When the sun shines the stars ar e blo tted o ut .In the same way the Here and Now makes somuch noi se w e cannot hear o r per ceive the r e-

mote either in space or time . These happ ening s

affect us i nfinitesimally, but affect us neverthe-

l e s s . As Leibnitz pu t it, each mo nad i s r epr e-

sentative of the universe fr om its viewpo int .

For pr actical r easons, how ever, we o nly respond

to that which is nearer at hand and therefore af-

fects us mor e intimately in practical life . Our



MYSTICISM 6 9

senses are coar se and r espond to comp aratively

gr eat agg regates, yet every g reat agg regate is

made up of infinitesimal elements. Every waveis constituted of a multitu d e o f smaller w aves .

We g et a cu mul ative effect, or the averag e of

these minu te happ enin g s, w hich w e lump into

w hat w e call sense impr essio ns .

The mystical app r oach is not fr o m the ou tside

w hich loo ks o n phenomena fro m these ag gr eg ate

o r massed appearances . It is mo r e immanent,

mor e from the inner, more of the spir it and life

that actuates these ou ter manifestatio ns . It is

analog ou s to instinct in the lower fo rms of life,

of being awar e wi thou t know ing ju st how , like

the wasp that someho w senses where to sting the

nerve centers to par alyze the caterpi llar ; like

the animal that auto matically r espo nds to an

emer g ency ; or as or ganisms on every level o f

life that use an almost infinite variety of meth-

od s of pr otection . This is the pr imary fo r m of

intelligence, already r eferred to, that is not only

pr io r to special for ms of intellig ence, but in a

sense superio r to them in that they in their very

nature are limited while it is u niversal .

It mu st be understo o d that I am in no sense

condemning the intellect, or seeking to challenge

the intellectual appr o ach to tr u th . My onlyplea is that it be supplemented by the intuitive .

An eagle can o nly fly wi th two wi ngs, and the

mind needs both intellect and i ntuiti on to so ar

to the higher levels of thou ght . Withou t intui-

tio n the intellect is in peril o f dog matism, of ab-

straction, and o f the endless spinning o f theory,



MYSTICISM 7 1

the mystical. As a matter o f fact ou r consciou s

minds ar e so co nstituted that they know o nly

symbo ls. They see things in pictu res . We havelangu age symbo ls, mathematical symbo ls, co n-

cept symbol s . We see nature in symbols and

clothe these on w ith meaning . We see not o nly

the appearance, but associatio ns which that ap-

pearance calls up . When we lo o k at a hor se we

see all that the ho r se means to us, all the essen-

tial histor y of o ur life as related to hor ses . Asavage in the mid d le o f Afri ca w hen he sees a

pictur e sees only a two d imensional thing w ith

scratches and marks o n it . He has not beeneducated into seeing its perspective and symbol-

ism, into w hat it r epresents and means. Whenwe loo k upon a pictur e we see it as it shou ld be ;

that is, we see it as the three dimensional thing

i t s i g n i f i e s . We clo the it on wi th ou r o wn es-

thetic appreciation .

In the same way mysticism at fir st comes to

u s in symbol s because ou r mind can co mpr ehend

these. In my ow n experi ence and that of o thers,

how ever , this stage passes into that of d ir ect

pe rcept i o n , o r r a ther int o the aw a reness o f

truths, ideas, and p rinciples withou t the neces-

sity of symbolic representatio n .

The reader shou ld be warned against confu sing

mysticism wi th occultism. The two are qui te d if-

ferent, as d ifferent, fo r example, as white and

black magic . Occultism carries the taint, at least

in the po pu lar mind , of having d abbled i n black

magic, as well as being a pseud o- science. Mysti -

cism is on a different plane. It is fr ee from the



7 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEco mmer cial element . It is essentially religio us

in its nature. It i s recog nized by such mod ern

w r iters as Will iam James, Dean Ing e, Maur ice

Maeterlinck, Evelyn Underhill and others of like

standi ng, especially among the for emost r eli-

gio us and spiri tual author s .

Mysticism is a recog nitio n of the spir itu al

element in the universe and of the psychic factor

in natur e and life . It believes that the intellig i-

ble universe, the universe of mind, can only be

expla ined in ter m s of m in d an d n ot f r o m any

lo wer level of the physical . It is based o n the

id ea o f Divi ne I mmanence . It hold s that this is

a spir itu al universe here and no w , and that Go d

acts, not thro u gh special inter po sitio n, but as

o ne w ith the Co smos, so mew hat as the mind and

bod y act to g ether in man . The tw o are con -

comitant, the different phases of the same unity .

It hold s that life is a breaking thro ug h of spir it

into matter, and that no reality can be explained

o r co mpr ehended asid e fro m the spir itu al ele-ment. This is the active, as matter i s the iner t .

The reason David Hume could not understand

cause and effect, and that no o ther philo sopher

has ever r eally explained it, is that they have ap-

pr o ached it o nly fro m the materi al side. Theyhave sou g ht to po sit actio n withou t an agent .

Spir it is self-acting. It is initiative . We mustr eco g nize this element in the passage o f cau se

into effect .

Recejac po ints ou t that the only cop u la con-

necting the potential w ith the actual is "fiat ."

We cannot say that the po ssible is the actual,



MYSTICISM 7 3

but o nly that it is mad e the actual . We mig ht use

the word becomes except that it is to o in-

definite and lacks the causal o r dynamic element .

It is li ke the pl ay of Hamlet wi th Hamlet left

ou t. An act pr esupp o ses an actor . The bri d g e

from the potential to the real does not build it-

self any mor e than there can be pu r po se and

meaning i n the Universe withou t a mind to p lan

and to compr ehend .

In conclusio n I desire to po int out two things .

In o ur last chapter w e tou ched up o n the pr in-

ciple of po larity and this ru ns not only thro ug h

all natur e, as indicated by electricity, but also

thro ug h the dialectic of thou ght . It, ther efor e,

mu st app ly to the hig hest, to w hat Descar tes

and iSpino za r efer r ed to as tho u g ht and exten-

sio n and which we call spir it and matter, the

synthesis of w hich is the living universe itself .

This sugg ests a solu tion of the wo rld -o ld philo-

sophical pr oblem which is ind icated in the query,can anything be added to the sum total ofthings? This qu estion has been br o u g ht into

the ver y foregr ou nd o f modern philo sophical

tho u g ht by the evo lu tio nary hypo thesis, and

mod er n philo so pher s have, ther efo r e, sou g ht

many deviou s ways to explain it away, or to

answ er i t . Berg son i mpli ed that time in so me

w ay is cumulative and d oes bri ng i n novel fac-

tor s or develo pments . Wil li am James even w ent

to the leng th of ad vocating "Plu r alism" in an

effor t to g et away from the issue raised by this

question of add ition, or of novelty .An adage of the old philosophy was that



7 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEnothing fr om nothing comes, and, therefor e, that

we cannot take o ut of the universe mor e than we

put into it . Another for m of this thou g ht is

that any evo lu tio n must be pr eceded by an equal

involution . I n an absol u te sense no thing new

is possible .

May there not be a rather simple solu tio n to

this o ld pr oblem sug gested by this very idea of

polarity? I have already po inted o u t* that

spir itual things d iffer fro m materi al things in

this respect : Whereas mater ial thing s are di -

minished by divi sio n, spir itu al thing s remain

co nstant how ever mu ch they may be shared . This

is true not only of such spir itual things as ideals,

tru th, love, wisd om, freedom and the like, but it

i s a l s o t r u e o f l i f e i t s e l f , f o r t h e r e i s a s m u c h l i f e

in a cell after su bdivisio n as there previo u sly

was in the pr imary cell, and this is tru e of all

the trillions of cells in an organism, or the al-

most infinite number in all o r ganisms upo n the

earth . As already pointed o ut, the pr imary pr in-

ciple of po lari ty is that what we can posi t of o ne

po le we cannot posit of the other . Therefore, if

the material pole is bo u nd the spir itual pol e is

free. If the material pole is diminished by divi-

sio n that do es not necessarily fo llo w fo r the

spiritu al po le, as we have already seen .

No w to apply this id ea to ou r p r o blem, the

di fficul ty raised by this questio n of add itio n and

of novelty . This difficul ty belongs o nly to the

material pole, to the block universe . The spi r i-

tual fo rever increases. There is ever mor e wi s-

" The Philo sop hy of Jesus .



MYSTICISM 7 5

d o m , more love, mor e beauty, more good.

Gro wth or u nfold ment is a spir itual activity . It

may well be that all of these vital manifestations

in the mater ial w o r ld are only caused by the

breaking throu gh of spir it into w hat we know as

org anic life and in its higher fo rms emerg ing o n

the levels o f r eason, and of conscience . In o ther

wo rd s, gr ow th, add itio n and novelty are of the

very natur e of the spir itual pole of the universe .

It is not w ithout interest, and possible rele-

vance, that the conservation theory d oes not ap-

ply to mind . That is ou tside its circle . It meas-

u res the physical act but no t the will that in-

itiates su ch act . The conservatio n o f energ y is

perfect, so far as we know, in its ow n circle or

f i e l d . Thou ght and w ill ar e o utsid e its bo und a-

r i e s .



CHAPTER VTHE EXTRA CONSCIOUS MIND

THis stu dy is so mething like an adventur e in

tru th, and searching for tru th in tur n is like

searching for anything else. Clues are left about

that we can find i f we know w here to l oo k and

how to lo ok . In ou r lessons up to this time we

have given the backgr o u nd, o r r ather the ap-

pro ach, to ou r real inquir y . And w e have di s-

cover ed a number o f thing s- that man can not

o nly seek intellectually, but he can seek with his

w hole mind, o f w hich the intellect is o nly a

specialized for m . He can seek thro u g h intui -

tio n and in fact many of the philo sop her s have

emplo yed this method . Plato co nsistently u sed

it and called it reminiscence, which wo ul d imply

that there is something native in the mind o f man

of w hich he is not fu lly consciou s ; but he find s

r eminders i n life that br ing him some of this

o rig inal essence of truth that at least potentially

he already know s . We have also f o u nd that man

* It is difficult to find the right wo rd to d esignate the mental processes

that go on o utside the boundaries of or dinary consciousness . The uncon-scious is not qui te accurate for this mind is not wholly unconscious . Theautomatic mind is su bject to o bjections for the conscious o r habit mind,

is, also to an extent, automatic . Subconsciou s o r sub-liminal implies in-

feriori ty or a lower o rd er which is misleading also . Dubois pro tests against

this, for the unconscious is as much super-consciou s as sub-conscious . Forthese reasons and others, I ado pt the term extra-co nscious, using extranot in the sense of more but beyond . My own idea is that the super-consciou s belongs to the sou l while the sub-consciou s pertains to heredityand nature and has to do with the biological mind, if we may use thatterm, or the memory stream from our ancestors . The extra-co nscious

includ es both .

7 6



THE EXTRA CONSCIOUS MIND 77

can contact so mething beyo nd himself . Thi s has

had var io us names . Matthew Arno ld r eferr ed to

it as a "something not o u r selves that makes for

r ig hteou sness." Spinoza named it substance ;

Plato called it an id ea ; Hegel fou nd that the

abso lu te is not in the pheno menal u niverse at

a l l . It is the idea . He follo wed Plato's method

an d r eached Plato's g o al, althou g h mor e than

two thousand years separated them and they

w r o te in co u n t r ies fa r a pa rt and in c u lt u r es

vastly di fferent .

We have di scovered also that pol a ri ty ru ns

thro ug h the univer se ; that it constitu tes the dia-

lectic of thoug ht, for the two po les are but o p-

po site statements o f the same thing and , w hen

caug ht up into unio n or synthesis, they co nsti-

tute a new po le of a higher dialectic, so that by

these method s- so mething l ike Jacob's Lad d er

that led to Heaven- w e can ascend to mor e and

mor e gener al statements and thus can app ro xi-

mate mor e fu lly to the id ea w hich both Plato

and Hegel-the two greatest minds that ever

appeared in philo sop hy-called the absolu te. In

this inquiry so far we have gotten rid of certain

difficulties or , at least, have found the false ele-

ments in the pr oblems sug gesting that, after all,

they are not pr o blems . We discovered, for one

thing, the false infi nite, the phenomenal i nfinite,

the infinite of i mmensity, the infinite r eached by

addition ; that is, the kind o f an infinite that ou r

intellects, constitu ted in the way that they are,

a l wa ys p o s it and p ict u re . And not only thefalse infinite di d w e discover in this way, that



7 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEis, an infinite series which thro u gh this method

of d ivision and add ition, we could never reach ;

but we d iscovered the true infinite which is at

the other po le . We fou nd that exactly w hat w e

can say of matter we cannot say of spir it . Forexample, things d iminish thro ug h division in the

phenomenal wo r ld . If w e have tw o app les and

g ive one away w e have only one left, if we have

two do llar s and spend o ne we have o nly one in

ou r po ssession ; o r, "we cannot eat ou r cake and

have it." That is w hat we say o f the pheno menal

w or ld , bu t we di scover that the thing s of the

spiritual w or ld, o f the other pole, such as love,

tru th, freedo m and the ideal d o not par take of

this li mitation, but that the mor e we g ive of

them the mo r e we have . We discovered that this

is also tru e of life, and I am speaking now not

in the id eal but in the scientific sense, for there

is always enou gh life for all of the org anic cells,

whether there be one of them, or one trillion, or

one w ith a ser ies of cyphers after it extendi ng

across the ro om. This implies that ou r o ld pr ob-

lem that we can not have anything ad d ed to o u r

universe appl ies only to the blo ck universe, to

the phenomenal u niverse, to this p ole of matter .

It d oes not apply to the po le of spir it at all be-

cause the very natu re of spi ri t is alw ays to be

add ing and g iving, always develop ing, g etting

new meanings, new enlargements, new under-

standing s and new p o wer .

These and o ther thing s we have disco vered but

thus far we have only g o tten the formal part o f

kno w led g e o r o f phil os o phy . F r o m thi s p o i n t



THE EXTRA CONSCIOUS MIND 7 9

we are beg inning o u r r eal adventu re-that is, we

are filling in this o utline of the for mal. We aregi ving it a content and not o nly a content, but

a dynamic element that wi ll br ing life into it-

mo vement, actio n .

Now , the o ld philo sop hy, we wi ll say, ended

w ith Hegel. He d ied o ne hundr ed years ago ap-

proximately, and from that point onward we

have had a century rich in scientific d iscovery .

The ol d phil os o p hy d i d n ot s o m uch dea l w ith

science because science, o r rather the special sci -

ences, had to do with the accidental o r the con-

tingent universe, and the ol d philoso phers were

o nly interested in the thou ght u niverse, the ideal

u niverse, in the universe of the necessities of

thou ght . As I have already po inted o u t, it is

not necessary that any par ticu lar event happen

so far as the cosmos is co ncerned . I t w o u l d g o

ri ght on if that event were different or if it were

not to happen at all . Yet there may be a fal se

element in this view . It requi res the whole uni-

verse to function as itself, and if anything were

left ou t, anything either in. sequence or in mani-

festation, it wo uld not be the same universe and

therefor e it wo ul d not be complete, so I suspect

that in the idea of the o ld philo sop her s as to

these things they called co ntingent or accidental

there was a possible erro r . In the mind o f Go d

everything that is, is necessary . It cou ld not be

o therw ise u nless the sequence w ere other w ise .

I n the pheno menal u niver se thing s ar e a bit

bo und , and perhaps it is o nly at the other po le

that the element of fr eedom is r ealized . Ever y-



8 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEthing is as it must be and, as Leibnitz said , onl y

the best po ssible universe can resul t, whatever

the app earance may be .

Now , follo wi ng Hegel, first in philoso phy and

next in science, this content has been fur nished .

Scho penhauer- I d islike his p essimism-g ave the

d ynamic to this o u tlined fo r m that Heg el left

us . He gave it in the for m of will and w ro te his

gr eat wo rk o n the universe as wil l and i dea or

wi ll and r epr esentation . Here was a moto r fac-

tor , if you please . Here was a factor o f action

that Kant had alr eady discovered in his pr actical

philosophy .as par taking o f the noumena instead

o f the pheno mena o f the u niver se . For whenthere is action there must be an actor , and w hen

there is wi ll there must be an incarnatio n of that

will . Following Schopenhauer, Von Hartmanng ave one mor e clue in the Philo sop hy of the Un-

conscious . He d isco vered that no t o nly Scho -

penhauer 's w il l but id eas themselves are fr e-

quently u nconsciou s and that mental p ro cesses

g o o n in man and in the lo wer animals withou t

any appar ent for m of consciou sness accompany-

ing them. He disco vered also that these pr o -

cesses ar e not mechanical . Descartes had d e-

clar ed that animals behave like machines, and

that view was accepted fo r centur ies . It is o nly

when we get to the facts, in the truly scientific

sense, that we d isco ver animals d o not behave

li ke machines . We can g ive so me ver y famili ar

illustrations . For example, all kinds o f birds

incubate their egg s ou tside of the o rg anism but

there is a wid e variety of methods in this incu -




bation . I n most cases, especially i n cold c l i -

mates, the mother bird hovers the eggs, but w ith

the ostr ich and similar species, the father does

it, po ssibly because the eggs are laid so i nfre-

quently and it is almost impo ssible for the mo -

ther bir d to attend both to the egg - laying and

the incubation . In w arm cli mates it i s not nec-

essary to incubate eggs at . a l l , s o t h e y a r e l e f t t o

hatch in the war mth of the envir o nment and i n

some places where it is hot in the day and coo l

at nig ht, the mother o nly hovers the egg s at

night .

No w, Von Har tmann says-I have no t verifi ed

the statement but I think it i s veri fiable-that

if we intro du ce some bir ds into an incubator , or

into any war m inclosu r e w her e it is not neces-

sary that they ho ver the eg g s all o f the time,

they will not do so . If w e foll ow ou t this metho d

of fact finding , we discover o ther p ro ofs that the

instinct in animals is not w holly mechanical, be-

cause if the pr actical needs o f the situ atio n

change, the condu ct of the bir d s o r o f the ani-

mals changes accor d ing ly . But that this is not

a consciou s pur po se wo rked ou t in the minds of

the animals and of the bird s is pr oved by another

circumstance, fo r not o nly the condu ct changes,

but, if left long enou gh in the altered envir on-

ment, the stru ctur e changes also . There is some-

thing at wo r k d eeper than the mer e mind o f the

creatu re i tself .

Now , w e ar e getting at so mething we d iscov-

ered in ou r last chapter o n mysticism . There is

.a marg in o r a backgr ou nd o f mental life that



82 INVADING THE INVISIBLEwe have not known about, so that Von Hart-

mann-and pl ease bear i n mind that Vo n Har t-

mann came befo r e the mod ern d isco very o f the

sublimal or subconscious mind-he was ap-pr o aching this thing philoso phically- Von Hart-

mann finds evid ences o f this unco nscio us mind

thr o u g ho u t natu r e . We shall have occasio n in

different connections to refer to this same factor ,

for it will crop up again and again . When wecome to the humanistic side of o ur subject, we

shall find it quite as much as in the bio lo gical,

for man has instinct, as w ell as the low er ani-

mals, and man sometimes is w iser than himself .

He o ften acts mor e unerr ing ly than he co u ld by

conscio us thou ght pr ocesses . In a sud d en emer-

g ency where li fe is at stake he saves himself

wi thou t know ing qui te how he does it . I su spect

that is the w ay animals act . They d o no t have

time or ability to think ou t what to d o . Theyact, as w e say, auto matically . This actio n is

intellig ent, but i t is of an o rd er o f intellig ence

that is not conscio u s . So , agai n, we have this

tremendo us thing, this universal unco nscio u s,

one phase of which we disco vered in o u r chapter

o n mysticism, and o ther phases o f w hich w ill

appear in evo lu tio n and o ther branches o f ou r

subject .

May we approach this idea from anotherangle? I have already said that natur e is always

like herself, and that everything in the universe

par takes of the essence and the quali ty o f the

whole . That is o nly another way of saying that

man is mad e in the image of God . Bo ehme d is-




covered this when he said he found a "sig nature"

in all things and Tennyson i n po etic fo r m said

the same thing w hen he spo ke of the

"Flow er in the crannied wall,

I plu ck you o ut o f the crannies,

I hold you here, roo t and all, in my hand,

Little flow er -but if I coul d understand

what you are, roo t and all, and all in all,

I should know what God and man is . "

I su spect that if we cou ld r eally know any

pa rt o f the un iverse, insi d e an d o u ts i d e, we

should know the whole.

No w , w hat i s i t that actuates these mother

bir d s to hover their egg s, but to cease do ing so

w hen the incubatio n can take pl ace w itho u t the

hovering , and to hover them o nly to the extent

that is necessary to bring abo u t incubatio n? I

do not say that this varied cond uct o ccur s in

any one bir d . I say it occurs if the envir onment

is changed thr ou gh two o r three generatio ns, so

that the po wer, whatever it is, has time to act .

What is that po wer ? Is it no t w hat Von Har t-

mann r efer s to as the u nconscio u s? Is it not

the universal mind at wo r k everywhere, but ever

emerg in g o n hig her levels o f realization and

p o w er?

No w , coming back to the id ea o f man as a

micr o cosm, o f man being r epresentative o f the

universe, "the measur e of all things ." Some onehas said that man in himself contains al l the

low er fo rms of life. I d o not care how it is put ;

the tru th is o bvio us . If man di d no t contain

within himself the potentialities and the quali-



8 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEties of the universe he co ul d not kno w the uni-

verse . We cannot kno w so mething d ifferent fro m

thou ght . Tho u ght can on ly kn o w tho u ght . Wecan o nly know meaning . No w , if man is r epre-

sentative of the universe ; if man is in miniatur e

what the universe is in larg e, then shall we not

find in the cosmo s, in the universe at larg e, what

we find i n man, althou gh in natur e it w ill be

fou nd, of cou rse, in a gr eater and gr ander d e-

gree? This is the scientific approach we are nowmaking. We begin with man because we knowhim better , or think we do . Perhaps w e d o n ot

know him so w ell as we imagi ne, bu t we know

something abo u t him . We know for example,that he has a conscious and an unconscious

mind . We know also that the boundaries of

the unconscio us mind are very larg e . One ps y-

chol og ist pu ts it that man's consciou s mind com-

par ed wi th his u nconscio u s is like an iceberg

w ith seven- eighths o f its bu lk belo w the water

and o nly o ne- eig hth above . The conscio u s min d

is above the water i n the su nshine and the un-

conscio u s beneath. In other wo rd s, the consciou s

mind i s only o ne-eig hth o f the whole . It do es

not matter what the pro po rti ons but it is tr e-

mendo u sly impo r tant that we reco g nize in all

for ms of life the extra-conscious o r subconsciousmind .

We are getting now a clue to this thing called

instinct . It is not mechanical, yet it is no t con-

sciou sly mental . In o ther wo r ds, there is some-

thing bigg er than the ind ivid u al, which explains

the ind ivid ual, w hich motivates the ind ivid u al,




which pr otects the ind ivid ual and w hich i s a

necessary backgr o und of the individ ual . Someone has pu t it that this something is anterio r to

and superior to the or ganism . That necessar il y

must be tru e becau se it shapes the or g anism,

moves it and i n a way pr esid es over i t . Do weever sto p to think that the unconscio us move-

ments of ou r bod ies must have a psychic element?

Take the beating of the heart-it d oes not always

beat at the same rate ; it is not mechanical ; we

g et excited and the heart beats faster ; if w e need

mor e blo o d the hear t respo nds to that need and

r espo nd s to the mental imp u lse even befor e the

actio n takes place that calls fo r the incr eased

circulation . If w e see a bear in the w o o d s the

circulatio n starts at once, althou gh we have done

nothing, physically speaking . The mind has do ne

so mething , how ever , and the heart, being actu -

ated by this mentality, starts beating at a gr eat

rate. Ag ain, w e see a meal o n the table . Wehave no t tou ched it, yet the mo u th waters and

there are enou gh of the secretions of the whole

alimentary canal started into action to take care

o f that meal . The more we examine the bodythe mo r e we are convi nced that ther e is so me

intellig ent contro l o f every o rg an and cell, for

it behaves intelligently . I have long had a theory

that cancer w as caused by the selfi shness o f a

gr ou p o f cells that had g otten ou t of hand, and

I read in a r ecent newspaper that this has actu-

ally been bor ne o ut by a new d isco very . Fo r t u -

nately ther e was also d iscovered a remed y to

bring abou t ad ju stment. There is a socio lo gical



8 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEanalog y to these cells acting selfishly . Let u s

sup po se a case of central contr ol being l ost in

society or in g overnment, one element of the pop -

ulation getting ou t of hand and begi nning a sel-

fish movement withou t r egar d to the welfare of

the w hol e bo dy po litic . No w , something l ike

that happ ens in the o r g anism . In other w or ds,

the or ganism has to be co- or di nated . It has to

be u nder a central g o ver nment, just as d o es

society .

This bri ngs us to a big ger thoug ht . If man is

a micro cosm o f the universe, then what w e find

in man we shall find in the universe at larg e, in

a g r a nde r and m o r e cosm ical f o r m . If we f ind

in man conscio us and unconsciou s mind, we shall

find the same in natur e . This id ea is fru itful .

It solves many of o ur pro blems . It has already

solved o ne pr oblem, that of i nstinct . Another

pr oblem that it can now solve is that of Pan-

theism . The gr eat r elig io ns have taug ht some-

thing o f the sou l o f the wo rl d . That was the

id ea of the o ld Greek relig io n and w as carr ied

ou t in its polytheism, a multip licity of g od s that

personified the for ces of nature . There w as the

g o d o r g o d s of the w in ds ; the god of the seas ;

the go d of thun d er ; the god s and go d desses of

the fru itful earth ; and other divinities represent-

i n g a l m o s t ever y p o w er d i s co v e r ed i n n at u r e .

We say that was merely superstiti on, or the cre-

ation of the child -mind of an earlier cu ltur e .

Yet it may sug g est a tru th, w hich is that in

the same way the or gans of ou r bod y are pre-sided over by mental powers-subconscious




mental powers-the beating of the heart, the

functio ning o f the kid neys and o f the liver, o f

the g land s, of the nerves, of the pr o cesses o f

gr ow th, of the pro cesses of healing, so cosmical

mind p resid se over the pro cesses of natu re as a

whole .

In the pr oper place in the chapter o n psycho-

therapy, I hop e to po int ou t how a wo und heals,

how every step in the pro cess is intelligent and,

in the same way, how everything in the o r ganism

fro m its birth to its death is intellig ent and is

actuated by mental pr ocesses, but pr ocesses that

in the very necessity o f the case are unconsciou s,

or almost so . If that is tr ue in the or g anism,

then why is it not tru e in the wor ld at larg e?

This id ea is harmo nio u s wi th w hat man has al-

ways believed, that there is a sou l o f the wo rld .

Here we have the so u l o f the wo r ld acting, but

in an extra-co nscio us w ay .

In man, ho w ever , we find not o nly a subcon-

scio us but a consciou s mind . Then, shall we no t

find the same thing i n the cosmo s? The onl y

objectio n to Pantheism, to the id ea that every-

thing is God, to the idea that natur e is ru led by

Go d , is that app ar ently these pro cesses which

go on i n the wo rl d are mechanical w hich is too

lo w a concept to be applied to the free, intelli-

gent, lovin g min d o f God . Here has been the

d i f f ic u l t y . It larg ely d isappears, ho wever , when

w e reflect that this is o nly o ne aspect of the

m in d o f Go d j ust as o u r s u bc on sci o u s m in d is

o nly one aspect of o u r o w n mind . Above that is

ou r consciou s mind . In the same way abo ve the



8 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEsou l of the wo r ld , the unconsciou s mind o f the

universe that is functioning thro ug h org anic life

and thr ou gh natur e, is the free, lovi ng, consciou s

m in d o f Go d that r u l es it . As w e find these

two phases of mi nd i n man, so w e find them in

the cosmo s*

No w , let us take an other a p p r o a ch an d in -

q u i r e w hat this unc o n sci o u s min d i s . In anearl ier day, w hen the whol e subject was new,

the u nconscio u s mind was dealt with as tho ug h

it w ere the mind o f some other entity . That i s

d u a lity, and s o methin g w o r se . I f we inqu i re

closely we .shall find this hypothesis is not at all

satisfactor y o r necessary . There is onl y o ne

mind, but it is one mind functioning in different

ways, for p r actical reaso ns . Let us see if w e

can make this plain . We all kno w what is called

the auto matic mind . A thing that w e have do ne

a suff icient number o f times to have perfected

o u r selves in the ar t beco mes auto matic . Whena baby starts w alking i t is a painfu l pr ocess, but

if the baby has walked a su fficiently lo ng time,

he does not have to think where to put his feet

and how to balance himself . He do es that auto -

matically. Walking beco mes like breathing . Weare consciou s of o ur breathing i f we want to be .

We can still co ntro l our breath to a certain ex-

tent if we want to d o i t, but fo r the most part

we are unconsciou s of o ur breathing . We havedi scovered that we can be consciou s of o ur heart

"Judge Troward in his Edinburgh Lectures refers to the subjectivemind i n nature, but implies that it is without will o r choice, but must

follow sug gestions . In this he leaves out the conscious mind of God,or God Transcendent . I d iscover that he corr ects this omission i n hislater w ritings .




beating , and to a still mo r e limi ted extent we

can contro l that, but for the most part this pro -

cess go es on u nconscio usly . I n the same way,

w hen we get used to w alking, that beco mes u n-

conscious . Why? Because it i s no lo n ger nec-

essary to d evote the conscio us mind to the pr o -

cess, and that leaves the mind free to attend to

other things . So me men say they can think o u t

a problem or a speech better w hile taking a walk .

When I play so litair e that becomes mor e or less

auto matic, to o, and I can think better wi th the

rest of the mind while this inconsequential part

is thus o ccupied . We find the automatic or habit

mind in evid ence in other w ays . In learni ng to

op erate a typewriter, first it is very labori ou s

and p ainstaking . I leave that to any newsp aper

man who has ever been a "o ne fing er ar tist" o n

the typewr iter- I think they call it the "hunt

and p eck" system . At any rate after w e lear n

to op erate a typew ri ter it becomes auto matic .

I have seen many typists who co ul d carr y on a

conversatio n or think about a date or keep their

minds occupied in vario us w ays and still o perate

the machine-I d o no t say perfectly, but as well

as usu al . The same thing is tr ue o f music . It

is very hard to play on a musical instru ment the

first few times, not o nly hard for the operator ,

but hard fo r the hearer s, but that in time be-

comes auto matic and the artist need o nly think

of the music and the playing, we say, does itself .

It becomes then no t o nly an auto matic pr o cess,

bu t I am lead ing you a step far ther - it becomes

in a sense a subconscio u s pr ocess, and the best



9 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEm usicians a re those in wh om the s ubc on sci o u s

emerg es into the conscio us . I am not su r e that

all g eniu s is not to some extent an emer gi ng o f

the subconscio u s above the thresho ld . We d is-

cover, then, this pr o cess of using the unconsciou s

g o in g o n in ou r every d ay lives . We can, bythinking backward , see how the whole gamut o f

w hat w e call the u nconsciou s may at one time

have been consciou s or at least conscious to some

super- intelligence that wor ked it ou t . When thep r o cess wa s c om pleted and n o l o n ge r r eq u i r ed

this laborio us attention, it w as then retired, first

into the automatic and then into the unconsciou s,

w her e it has since remained .

'There has been no d iscovery in mod ern science

that has more po ssibilities or that is mor e sug -

g estive than this very d isco very o f the u ncon-

sciou s mind . Like all new sciences, it has been

gi ven extravagant for ms . Perhaps that sho u ld

not excite ou r wo nder, fo r i t is the histor y of

all novel for ms of know ledge to have a "lunatic

fri nge" and to be fr ow ned on by really respect-

able folk . There w as a ti me when mathemati-

cians were thought not to be exactly responsible

or safe people . That w as back in the d ays o f

St. Aug ustine . There w as a ti me when scien-

tists of any sort were classified w ith soo thsayers,

wi th magicians and wi th for tune-tellers . Anynew science not only contains this element, but

is su bject to mu ch o f the same con d emnatio n .

It is d ifficult to get peop le to think new thou ghts .

Even scientists are wedd ed to the o ld and w e

di scover much of the same do gmatic attitud e in




science that we do in religio n-in certain scien-

tists that we do in certain theolo gians . This d og -

matism do es no t ar ise fro m science o r r eligi o n ;

it ari ses fro m human natur e . It arises fro m ou r

unwillingness to let go of familiar concepts ; from

ou r distru st of novelty . Yet that is not science,

and is not r elig io n, because it is devotio n more

to a p r econceived i d ea than to tr u th, and the

fir st pr inciple of science is that we shall g et rid

of pr econceived notions if they do not cor re-

spo nd to new facts that ar e discovered . If any

theor y is o u t of harm ony w ith any fact, ho w -

ever humble that fact may be, there is something

the matter, not w ith the fact, but w ith the theo ry .

No tr ue scientists, therefor e, will i gnor e any fact .

When we co me to the chapter o n psychic p he-

nomena, we shall perhaps have occasio n to r efer

to this in a more detailed way .

Now , it is no t to be wo ndered at, ther efor e,

that in the science or the psychology of the sub-

conscio u s min d, there shou ld appear extrava-

g ances . I am not at all convi nced that all o f

Freud 's theory of sex and the rest of it is sound

science or sou nd psychol og y . It has at hear t a

basis of tru th, but is carr ied too far . I believe

that mod ern psycho- analysts are to some extent

abando nin g o r mo di fyin g that theor y . I think

also there is in that id ea a tendency to d emo r -

alize human being s . If carried to o far, it may

have a bad so cial effect . That, ho w ever , is no

criticism o f the id ea itself, but o nly a criticism

of the imperfect statement and u se of it .

In the next chapter, w hich w ill be o n evo lu -



9 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEt i o n , w e s h a l l h a v e o c c a s i o n t o s h o w h o w t h i s

s a m e m i n d , t h i s s u b c on s c i o u s m i n d i n t h e c os m o s ,

h a s b e e n a t w o r k s h a p i n g o r g a n i s m s a n d h o w i t

h a s b u i l d e d o r g a n s ; h o w it h a s , n ot o n l y i n t h e

i n d i v i d u a l o r g a n i s m , b u t i n n a t u r e a s a w h o l e ,

t e n d e d t o w a r d p r o g r e s s a n d i n t h e m a i n , t o w a r d s

p r a c t i c a l g o o d . A g a i n i n o u r t r e a t m e n t o f p s y -

chic phenomena and phychotherapy, we shall

f in d t h i s s a m e e l e m e n t . T h a t i s w h y I s a y i t i s

s o f r u i t f u l . T h e r e h a s b e e n n o d i s c o v e r y i n m o d -

e r n t i m e s t h a t c on t a i n s s u c h a w o rl d o f s u g g e s -

t i o n a n d i m p l i c a t i o ns a s t h i s d i s c o v e r y o f t h e u n -

c o n s c i o u s m i n d .

M a y I , i n c o n c l u s i o n , p o i n t o u t w h a t t h i s

m a y m e a n i n t h e b u i l d i n g o f t h e o r g a n i s m , a n d

i n d o i n g t h a t I w a n t t o r e f e r t o on e m o r e w r i t e r

w h o w a s n ot o s t e n s i b l y a s c i e n t i s t o r ph i l o s o p h e r

a t a l l , a n d y e t b e c a u s e o f t h a t v e r y f a c t a n d b e -

c a u s e h e h a d w h a t w e m i g h t c a l l a n o v e l v i e w -

p o i n t , u n a f f e c t e d b y a n y s c h o o l , g a v e , i n m y

o p i n i o n , s o m e e x c e e d i n g l y v a l u a b l e r e f l e c t i o n s

o n t h i s w h o l e s u b j e c t ; a n d t h a t i s S a m u e l B u t

l e r . H e w o r k e d o u t a t h e o r y t h a t w a s t o s o m e

e x t e n t b a s e d o n t h a t o f V o n H a r t m a n n a n d r e -

f e r re d t o e v o l u t i on , t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t a p pa r e n t l y

t h e r e i s a c on t i n u it y o f m i nd i n t h e s p e c i e s ; t h a t

i s , a s t r e a m o f m e m o r y p a s s e s d o w n f r o m p a r e n t

t o c h i l d a n d t h e b u i l d i n g o f t h e f o e t u s o r t h e

e m b r y o f o l l o w s s u c h m e m o r y . W h e n i t r e a c h e s

a n y p a r t i c u l a r s t a g e o f d e v e l o p m e n t i t r e m e m -

b e r s a u t o m a t i c a l l y - n o t c o n s c i o u s l y , p l e a s e b e a r

i n m i n d , u n c o n s c i o u s l y , s u b c o n s c i o u s l y . I t r e -

m e m b e r s w h a t i t d i d a t t h a t p a r t i c u l a r s t a g e o f



9 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEperfected so that they can be passed over r apid -

ly u ntil the new being reaches his ow n place as

an indivi du al . Then he has to d o pi o neer w o r k,

to be, as we say, "on his o wn ." It i s so mething

like buil ding a road . We can travel a ro ad al -

ready made at 60 or 80 mils an hou r . I do n't

kn o w ho w fast au t om o biles tra vel no w , bu t a

fr iend o f mine to ld me that he went fr o m Miami

to Richmond in two days . I said , "You must

have tr aveled abou t sixty miles an hou r . " Hereplied, "Well, sometimes I slow ed do wn to six-

ty." This r o ad that has been comp leted w e pass

over very r apidly ; that is, this recapitulation

lo ng completed . When the individ ual gets to the

end o f the fini shed r o ad w her e he has to make

a ro ad for himself, how ever, his pro gr ess is re-

tard ed . That is the method u sed by the embryo .

Now all o f this ties back iii o what we were

ta lkin g abo u t a m oment ag o . All these thing s

that have been fini shed - the mental pr o cesses-

are retired into the unconsciou s becau se we do

not need to be conscious of them longer, and they

w o u l d i n ter f e r e w i t h o u r a tten d i n g t o o t her

things . Likew ise the auto matic actio n saves

t i m e , i t i s f a s t e r . This is in some sense the or i-

gi n of i nstinct, of u nconsciou s and automatic

mental p r o cesses, and o f the mechanical . It is

well to keep this in mind because in it is another

impo r tant clue that a lot o f scientists and biolo -

g ists have been stumbling o ver fo r a hund r ed

years- the mechanical id ea . They have not been

able to get beyond that, or to see why things be-

co me mechanical .



CHAPTER VIPURPOSIVE EVOLUTION

THE theo r y p o p u l a r l y k no w n as Ev o l u t i o n ,

mor e accur ately d esignated, per haps, by the

term Transfo rmation, has revolu tionized mod ern

thou g ht . It has not o nly gi ven an entirely new

direction to biolo gy, but has pro fou ndly affected

both relig io n and philo sophy . The battle that has

raged over it has already continued for mor e than

half a centur y and is tod ay divid ing the religi ou s

wo rl d i nto two gr eat camps o f the Fund amental-

ists and Mod ernists . Of cou r se, there are o ther

questions invo lved in their contro versy, but

chief is that of evolu tio n, especially the descent

or rather ascent of man fro m low er fo rms o f

l i f e . We ar e not called u po n to take sides in

this battle of o ri gi ns, for tunately, but w hile the

general evolu tio nary hypothesis is u ndo ubtedl y

cor rect and w ill w ithstand all assaults, there is

this to be said fo r o ur Fund amentalist fri ends

They are fighting fo r sp ir itu al values and ag ainst

a materialistic interp retation given to evolu tion

by a certain scho ol , in both of which attitu des

they are right . Further it shou ld be said in all

fair ness that the brand o f "high scho o l evolu -

tio n" by w hich they are fo r the most p art o p-

po sed i s both sup erficial and atheistic and mis-

95



9 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLErepr esents the best and most u p- to- date thou ght

of the real advo cates of the evolutionary philos-

ophy .

The one name that stands o u t above all o thers

in this field is that of Charles Darw in . To su ch

an extent is this tru e that in the pop u lar mind

the term Darw inism has come to stand for evo-

lution . Stri ctly speaking, however, that desig-

natio n do es not stand so much for the evol utio n-

ary theor y itself, as for certain features of it

know n as natural selection and the survi val of

t h e f i t t e s t . Darw in d id not o ri gi nate the theory

of evolution . As alread y remarked, the w hole

philosophy was foreshadowed and implied by

Heg el . Before Charles Darwin came his owng r andfather, Er asmus Dar w in, Bu ffo n, the na-

tur alist, Lamar ck, who by many is r eg ard ed as

the real fo under o f the evolutionary hypothesis,

and Herbert Spencer, the philo so pher . All these

were advo cates of some form o f evolu tion . Co n-

tempor ary w ith Char les Darw in was Alfr ed Ru s-

sel Wallace, w ho p erhaps antedated Darw in i n

for mulating the peculiar features of natural se-

lection w ith which the latter 's name came later

to be associated ; but Pro f . Wallace, as soo n as

he learned o f Darw in's labo rs in the same field

magnanim ously w ithd rew any claims of his ow n

as its discoverer .

In this connection it shou ld be said that none

of these fo r er u n ners and c o - w o r ke rs w ith Mr .

Darw in too k the pecu liar slant w ith r egard to

evolu tio n that has since become so offensive to

the religiou s wor ld . Lamarck n o t on ly r eco g -



PURPOSIVE EVOLUTION 97

nized design bu t made the pu r po si ve or teleo-

lo g ical element pr omi nent in his evolu tio nary

hypo thesis . He also str essed u se and d isu se

wi th which we wil l d eal later . The same wasalso tr u e to so me extent of Spencer . As fo r

Wallace, while he agr eed in the main w ith Dar -

w in o n the scientific phases of natu r al selection,

he was not o nly a relig io u s man but an actu al

believer in mo dern Spi ri tuali sm .

No r w as Darw in himself an extremist in the

advocacy of the views that have since been called

by his name. To o much cannot be said fo r the

painstaking tho ro ug hness w ith which he inves-

tig ated facts or the mod esty wi th which he in-

terpr eted them . C har les Darw in w as a scien-

tist in the best sense of the wo r d . He was atheart a spi r itu al man himself . Only r ecently I

w as stru ck by his w arm d efense o f C hr istian

missio naries in Tahiti, r eco unted i n his very

r eadable bo ok The Voyage o f the Beagle. Healso lamented, later in life, that his stud y of

facts and d evotio n to pu rely scientific and i n-

tellectual pu rsui ts had r obbed him of the appr e-

ciatio n of mu sic and ar t that he had p o ssessed

in his you th . He w as an intense lov er o f the

beauties o f natur e as is sho w n in almost ever y

chapter o f this same Voyage of the Beagle,

which w as wr itten in his you nger manhoo d . Hewas interested not alo ne in biolo g y, but in al-

most every field o f science, and in the humani-

ties as well . He stru g g led thro u g h the later

years o f his life against il l health, but this d id

not pr event the accompl ishment o f his mo nu-



9 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEmental labo r s . C har les Darwin was truly agr eat man and nothing said her e in app ar ent

dero gatio n of Darw inism is meant to cast any

personal reflection on its fo und er . It w a s n ot

Darwin himself that was r esponsible for the ex-

treme attitu de which later so shocked and o ff end-

ed spiritually-minded people, but rather his fol-

lo w ers, su ch as the tw o Germans, Weissmann and

Haeckel . Frequently the disciple ru ns to gr eat-

er lengths than the master .

Perhaps at this po int I may be pard o ned fo r

,a seeming dig ressio n, since it has an important

bearing on this discussio n . I have alr eady re-

ferr ed to thr ee elements in the wo r k o f a cer -

tain school of scientists and philosophers that I

will designate as the accid ental, the mechanical

and the materialistic .

There are at least three o utstanding examples

of the introduction of the accidentalist hypothe-

sis in philoso phy ; fir st the "accidental co ncour se

o f at om s" t o f o r m the un ive rse ad v oca ted by

Demo cri tus and the Epi cur eans ; second , the ac-

cidentalist theor y of the for matio n of the solar

system bro ug ht fo rw ard by C hamberl ain, already

referr ed to ; and thir d, the accidentalist notio n

of the origin of variatio ns advocated by the neo-

Darw inians .

This w hole theory of chance or accid ent, when

analyzed and carr ied to its log ical conclusio ns

becomes so d ifficult and impr obable as to bor der

on the lud icrou s . The w o r st that o ne can wi sh

fo r its ad vo cates is that they had been endo wed

w ith a sense of hum or . It is said that Demo -



PURPOSIVE EVOLUTION 9 9

critu s was know n as the "Laug hing Philo sop her"

and i t can o nly be sup po sed that he was enjo y-

ing , in anticipatio n, the jo ke he was perpetrating

o n humanity by his theor ies o f "the atoms and

the void ," r efer red to in the next chapter, and

o f the "accidental co ncou r se o f ato ms ." These

hypotheses, as impo ssible as they no w seem, be-

came the basis o f the mater iali stic philo sop hy

for mor e than two thou sand years and w ere only

explo d ed near the beginning o f the Tw entieth

C entur y by the d isco very by Madame Cu r ie and

others of radi um and the radio -active pro perties

o f matter . It may be remarked, i n passing , that

not o nly has the idea of "the indivisible and in-

destru ctible" atom thus co llapsed but that "the

voi d " is d ispr oved by three consideratio ns and

inferentially by a fou rth : Fir st, no abso lu te va-

cuum has ever been produced or discovered,

which tr uth has passed into the adage that "na-

tur e abhor s a vacuu m" ; second , the insu rmo unt-

able diffi culty o f conceiving actio n at a distance

wi thou t an intervening medi u m ; t h i r d , t h e w e l l -

known scientific law o f continuity ; and fou rth,

the inferential pro of is, as pointed ou t in a pre-

vio u s chapter, that it is impo ssible fo r the human

mind to think o f absol u te nothingness . As to

the accidental concou r se of atoms to fo r m the

stars and u niverses in space, mod ern mathema-

ticians have fig u r ed o u t tables of chance, by

which it w ou ld appear that the pr obabili ty of

such an "accidental conco u r se" being tru e is

abo u t one to a nu mber so vast that we mig ht as

w e l l c a l l i t i n f i n i t y .



1 0 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEOne other r emark in p assing : This whole ac-

cidentalist hypothesis to a mind like that of the

wr iter seems so g r o tesque and fantastic that he

can accou nt for it o n no o ther basis than that

sug gested by the Biblical text, "The mind of the

natu r a l man is at enm ity w ith Go d , " f o r the

only po ssible reason fo r this d octrine of chance

is, puting it bluntly, to get rid of God and of a

spiritual pu rpose in the universe .

As for the accidental or ig in of the solar sys-

tem, w hich has alr eady been dealt w ith, it need

o nly be add ed that the su pp o siti o n that the

throwing off of the planets was the result of an-

other su n passing too near to o ur ow n, is that

such a suppo sition wo uld requi re a similar ac-

cident to pr od uce the moo ns of each of the plan-

ets, which o n the law o f chance aver ages men-

tioned above wo ul d redu ce the pro bability in

this case also to appr oximately one to infinity .

It has been said that this who le theor y was in-

tro du ced to g et rid of the di fficulti es in the way

o f the familiar nebular hypo thesis o f Kant and

La Pl ace ; but w hy seek to avo id small d ifficulties

by intro du cing g reater o nes? The net r esul t o f

this chance hypo thesis i s to d epri ve all o ther

stars and universes of life, at least inferentially,

and thus to ru le God and pur pose ou t of the cos-

mos, an alter native that is not o nly repu g nant

to relig io us sentiment and to common sense bu t

to r ational and o rd erly thinking .

This brings u s to the accidentalist hypothesis

of the or igin of variations in evolu tion . Ever y-

o ne is so familiar w ith the Darw inian dictu m of



PURPOSIVE EVOLUTION 1 01

natur al selection o r the survival of the fittest,

that the briefest statement mu st su ffice here .

Each living o rg anism is sup po sed to di ffer fr om

its par ents in a nu mber o f w ays, so me o f w hich

d ifferences o r var iations may be beneficial and

some not . Su ch of them as are servi ceable and

better equi p the o r g anism to o btain foo d , to

overco me its enemies, and to sur vive in its strug -

gle for existence are transmitted to its pr og eny

and thus become per manent in the species . Onthe o ther hand those member s o f the famil y not

po ssessing these advantageou s pecu liar ities or de-

pa rtu r es fro m type will disappear . This i n a

g eneral w ay is the theor y . It sou n ds w ell and

fo r the most par t answ ers to the facts fo u nd

i n l i f e ; but there is one larg e difficulty w ith re-

gar d to i t, a difficulty that Mr . Darw in himself,

so far as I know , never tr ied to explain away

or evade :

It only acts after the variations have arisen,

bu t d oes not accou nt for the var iatio ns them-

selves .

In other w or ds it is an ex post facto proposi-

tion . Darw in recog nized this and fo und no satis-

factor y solu tio n of the pr oblem . The most hecou ld say was that the differentiation is fo r-

tuitous ; these variations just happen . Here is

w her e the accid entalist element enters . Var ia-

tio ns ar e chance affair s, co ming w ithou t rhyme

or r eason . Like To psy, they "ju st gr o w ed ." But

having once arisen, natur al selection, like a d ens

ex machin a, steps i nto the pictur e and takes

charg e . Perhaps the phrase, "Natur al Selec-



1 0 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEtion," shou ld be capitalized f o r in some mys-

terio us way it seems to have been perso nified, to

have been clothed on wi th initiative and p o w er .

It is one of the hypostatized abstractions I have

been talking abo u t . Natur al Selectio n is no t

only erected into so me sor t of a d eity but is

made the gener al manag er o f the lif e pro cess .

That is the way wi th these materiali stic philo -

sop her s . No soo ner have they ru led Go d o u t of

the u niver se than they beg in cr eating a number

of l itle go ds to take His place . One o f these

they call Natur al Selectio n, another Chance, and

still o ther s Natu r e, Law, Mechanism and the

l i k e . Bu t they do not explain the o r ig in o f

bio log ical variations . No t o ne of them has ever

d one that . It is left to the great god, Accident .

I crave pard on for di scussing this seri ou s

pr o blem in what may seem a fri vo lo u s manner ,

but, as I view it, the particular phase of the sub-

ject here consid ered is hard ly w o r thy o f any

other kind o f discussion . Species vary accor d -

ing to need, accor ding to change of envir onment,

accord ing to use or disuse of o rg ans and facul-

t i e s . I am aware that this last is a moo t po int

and I w ill refer to it mor e fully later . The po int

I am here making is that these pr ocesses are not

all blind . The variatio ns are not all hit-o r-miss

and haphazard . In some way we do not yetunderstand they come, at least some of them, be-

cause necessar y for the preservatio n and pr og -

ress of the species . There is, there must be, a

psychic facto r i nvolved . It may be, and pr o b-

ably is, unconsciou s . The d isco very o f the sub-



PURPOSIVE EVOLUTION 1 0 3

conscious mind, dealt with in a previous chapter,

is thro wing a floo d of new light over this whole

subject. *

Her e we come once mo r e to the consid er ation

of mechanism which is peculiar ly bo und up wi th

the habit mind and w ith instinct, and w hich

thus has an intimate relatio n wi th one phase of

evolution . For habit becomes function and fu nc-

tio n beco mes or gan . Habit, instinct, functio n

are in a way mechanical and thus build the tools

thro ug h which they operate .

This entir e subject o f mechanism may be ap-

pr oached fro m another angl e. Man makes ma-chines . In a gener al w ay bo th the pur po se and

the pr o cess involved in the build ing o f human

machines cor respond to the like activities in na-

ture . This is r easoning by analog y, it is tru e,

but the analog y is legitimate, nay more, it is co n-

vincing and compelling . Man is a par t o f Na-

tur e and par takes of her characteristics . Natur e

build s atomic, stellar and organic machines . Man

foll o ws her as well as he may, consid eri ng his

limitatio ns and stag e of d evelopment. He build s

materi al machines . I n both cases the machine

is no t an end but a means . And in bo th cases,

we are compelled to believe, by the very nature

of the case, that the machine do es not d esig n or

ru n itself ; that its orig in, its function, its con-

tro l and its pur po se are all beyond it ; i n other

w or d s that there is something anter io r to and

sup erio r to the machine which explai ns it . I n

the case o f human machines w e know this to be

*Dr. Jung discusses at some length this subject of the psychic factor

in evolution .



1 0 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEtrue . Man bu il d s and o perates his machines for

functions and purposes which the machinekn o w s n othing abo u t . In other wo r ds, the ma-

chines are onl y extensio ns of man . Now Na-tur e's machines are still mor e wo nderfu l than

tho se of man, and this is tr u e whether w e co n-

sid er them as laws and str u ctur es in the o r -

ganic, or as instinct and or ganism in the wo rld

o f l i f e . They too serve a pur po se and perf o r m

a functio n . Are we not, therefore, justified in

conclud ing, nay are we not in tru th compelled to

conclud e, that bo th this fu nctio n and p ur po se

ar e beyond them, that they do no t and canno t

contr ive or run themselves and that they are ex-

tensio ns of so me Pow er both anteri or to and su-

perio r to them? Only mind can ho ld a pu rp o se,

only mind can initiate, only mind can operate to

a g iven end . These pr o cesses, bo th hu man and

cosmic, are intelligent . We cannot g et ri d of

God , for if w e do, w e must erect lesser go ds to

do His w o r k and take His place, even if w e call

them "mind stuff" as di d Cl iffo rd and Haeckel,

or mechanism as do o thers o f the same schoo l .

There is yet another ap pr o ach, sug g ested by

Berg so n . Man no t only buil ds machines but he

has an intellect pecu liar ly fitted, and app arently

designed, for that purpose . Therefore, he should

be do ubly on his gu ard against interp reting the

u niverse in the mechanistic w ay to w hich su ch

an intellect wo u ld be pr o ne . Also be looks o n

things fr o m the ou tside and takes them apart i n

o r de r t o kno w them . Therefor e he shou ld he o n

his guard against the partial and superficial .



10 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEby removal into a d ifferent climate o r envir o n-

ment, and that, often, within one or tw o g enera-

tions . This br ing s u s again to Lamarck and the

question o f use and . disuse . The denial o f the

transmission o f acquir ed characteri stics wo ul d

natur ally bar o ut also the inheriting o f better

muscles or brains du e to the education and train-

ing o f the parent, also o f the redu ced po wer o f

or g ans diminished thro u gh lack o f emplo yment .

This is no t only i n conflict w ith common sense

but w ith the experi ence o f stock breeders . It

a ls o g o es c o u n ter t o human expe r ience . Forexample, sup po se I co me fro m a race of farmers,

living fo r the most part in the o pen . Farmersuse their muscles and because of that, in time,

their mod e o f life affects their child r en and

gr andchildren until finally the tillers of the soi l

take on a character different fro m city dw ellers .

That is t r u e in a m o r e ma rke d w a y of pe o p le

who live in certain climates . If people live in

hot climates where there must be a larg e degr ee

of pig mentation in the skin to r esist the dir ect

rays of the sun, that characteristic will be passed

do wn, and it is w ell- know n that after a few gen-

er ations p eo ple livi ng in hot cli mates become

d a rker skinned, and change in cer tain other

characteristics . Now , this in itself is a pr o of o f

use and di suse . The theor y o f d isu se is that

if w e cease to emplo y any or g an, that o r g an be-

gi ns to d iminish and g rad ually atrop hies .

Evolu tion is a slow pr ocess . It d oes not oc-

c u r in mere g enera t i o n s as we kno w them, o r

even centuries . It o ften requ ir es ages to wo rk




o u t these transfor matio ns . Man has in his bod y

vestig ial o r g ans that have no t been used for

thou sands o f years . He has a muscle to w ig g le

his ears . Well, very few human beings w ig g le

their ears . Also he has an o r g an to shake his

scalp . That was pr o bably useful at o ne time

in getting ri d o f flies, or for other pu rp oses, but

man has been wearing a hat for lo ng g enerations,

and d oes not no w u se the muscle to shake his

scalp . Therefo r e that mus cle has atr o phied .

There are vestig ial muscles and o r gans thro u gh-

o u t the hu man bo d y that we can o nly conjectur e

the u se of . For example, the appendi x . It do es

not seem now to be o f very much pro fit, except

to the medical fraternity . It is p ossible that is

one of the org ans passing o ut o f use .

So that w hen the neo ; Darw inians went to the

length of denying the doctrine of use and disuse,

they wer e simply r edu cin g to absur d ity their

whole departure from the true evolutionary

theor y . The latest d evelo pments in evo lu tio n,

however, have taken a different turn . De Vri es

has discovered and w ri tten a larg e boo k o n the

subject of mutatio ns . He di sco vered that ther e

are not only variatio ns of the slig ht degree that

Darw in d ealt w ith, bu t that there ar e r ad ical

variations. They do not appear regu larly . Theycro p u p app arently at long intervals, but they

are characteristic both of the vegetable and ani-

mal wo rl d . They come wi thou t any par ticu la r

w a rnin g , but almost in one singl e gener ation

there w ill be a variatio n suffi cient, practically,

to fo und a species . I am not saying that any one



1 0 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEm u t a t i o n w o u l d b e s u f f i c i e n t t o f o u n d a n e w

s p e c i e s - n o t t h a t , b u t t h a t t h e y a r e m u c h m o r e

r a d i c a l t h a n h a d p r e v i o u s l y b e e n s u p p o s e d a n d

t h a t o n e m u t a t i o n m i g h t s t a r t a c h a n g e w h i c h i n

a f e w g e n e r a t i o n s w ou l d r e s u l t i n a n e w s p e c i e s .

A n o t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t o f m o r e r e c e n t t i m e s i s

w h a t i s k n o w n a s e m e r g e n t e v o l u t i o n . St i l l a n -

o t h e r , a n d t h i s i s p e r h a p s t h e m o s t r e c e n t d e -

v e l o p m e n t , h a s t o d o w i t h m a n . There was an

a r t i c l e i n t h e d a i l y p re s s v e r y r e c e n t l y wi t h r e -

g a r d t o t h e s u b j e c t . I t c o n c e r n e d a t a l k g i v e n

b e f o r e o n e o f t h e n a t i o n a l s c i e n t i f i c b o d i e s i n

t h i s c o u nt r y b y it s p r e s i d e n t , a n d i t i s , i n b r i e f ,

t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t m a n h a s b e e n o n t h i s p l a n e t

v e r y m u c h l o n g e r t h a n e v e n t h e b i o l o g i s t s h a v e

s u p p o s e d ; t h a t h e h a s b e e n h e r e p r o b a b l y a t

l e a s t a m i l l i o n y e a r s o r a m i l l i o n a n d a h a l f

y e a r s ; t h a t h e h a s b e e n m a n p r a c t i c a l l y a l l o f

t h a t t i m e ; t h a t h e i s n o t i n a n y s e n s e d e r i v e d

f r o m t h e a p e s o r f r o m a n y o t h e r s i n g l e g r o u p

t h a t i s n o w o n t h i s e a r t h , a l t h o u g h i t i s t r u e ,

p e r h a p s , t h a t t h e r e i s a c o m m o n a n c e s t o r . T h i s ,

i n s o m e d e g r e e , w o u l d t e n d t o c o n f i r m t h e c o n -

t e n t i o n o f o u r F u n d a m e n t a l i s t f r i e n d s . I t i s

p u r e l y a s c i e n t i f ic d e v e l o p m e n t , h o w e v e r , a n d i s

m o r e g e n e r a l l y a c c e p t e d , I t h i nk , in t h e s c i e n t i -

f i c w o r l d n o w t h a n a n y o t h e r t h e o r y o f m a n ' s

o r i g i n . S c i e n t i s t s h a v e n e v e r f o u n d a m i s s i n g

l i n k . Wherever man is found he is man . He

m a y h a v e b e e n a v e r y m u c h l o w e r o r d e r o f m a n ,

b u t h e h a s b e e n u n m i s t a k a b l y h u m a n . T h a t i s

t h e f a c t . And the fundamental principle of

s c i e n c e i s r e g a r d f or fa c t s .



1 1 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEand w herever there is movement, there is a mov-

i n g p o w er . Ther e can be no action w ithou t an

actor . And w her ever ther e is appar ent a g en-

eral tr end to develo p, to ad vance, to p ro gr ess,

ther e mu st be so me impu lse that cau ses that

g eneral mo vement . That, in a sense, is Berg -

son's id ea, and he gave an illu stratio n of i t that

I think is r ather interesting . He likened life to

a str eam . He said that if a str eam start, w e

wi ll sup po se, in a virg in country w here there

has never been a river befor e, the water breaks

thro ug h and fi nds a channel fo r itself . It ad-

vances, but here and there meets an obstr uctio n .

It feels its w ay and gets aro und that obstru c-

tion, or if it cannot pass arou nd, sur mounts it insome way. It g oes past or over it and seeks a

channel, starti ng here and meeting an obstacle

and co ming back, darting o ut i n another d ir ec-

tio n to meet another o bstacle and again tu rn-

ing back as a stream wo uld do in passing throu gh

a new co untry . He likens this clan v i t a l to the

gr avitational for ce moving that stream . It is

finding its way thro ug h matter, we will say, and

it meets obstru ction . It pu shes ou t and tur ns

back, pushes out a little farther in another d i-

rectio n and again tur ns back, until it fi nds o r

makes an o pen channel .and go es on to its go al .

Well, now , strang ely enou gh, life has behaved

in so me such gener al way as that, for in its early

stages we find that the devolp ment was to war d

g reat reptilian creatures, immensely larger than

anything w e have on the earth to d ay, and that

these gr eat creatur es flo u rished fo r ages, but sud -




d enly disapp ear ed . We do not know how sud-denly, but they all d isappeared utterly from the

earth . In o ther w or d s, that develo pment of life

had n ot g o tten anyw here . I t r eached the end .

It had g o tten into a p o cket because the or g an-

ism was too large . Ther e was not enou g h br ain .

There was not the po ssibility of developi ng the

brain, perhaps . Then, at a much earli er stag e,

life develo ped the insect wo r ld . The i nsect

wo rl d w as first, perhaps, or the fish wo rld , in

the oceans . In the insect wo rl d the develo pment

only reached a certain stage . It reached perfec-

tio n in that stag e, but it w as a perfectio n of

instinct, of the mechanical and cou ld not g o

farther in that d ir ection . The bee and ant hav e

apparently changed little in long ages, and while

these and o ther insect for ms have remained o n

earth to serve their pu rpo se, this vital impu lse

had to seek ano ther channel .* Thus throughtrial and err or and thro ug h eons of time so g reat

that w e cannot even imag ine them, it held itsway. It wo rked o ut u ntil at last man appeared .

Of co u r se, that is o nly a ver y g eneral and

vague descri ptio n of the thing that actually hap-

pened . To retur n to this fo rce that is in u s, this

vital i mpu lse, that causes these variatio ns, I can-

not think that it is a blind fo rce, and that is

where I w ou ld di ffer p erhaps, fro m some of the

physical scientists and evol u tionists . I say it is

not a blind for ce . I d o not mean that it is a

• Physically, the insect is very highly evolved, but its co nsciou sness is

very gr eatly in arr ear. The exclusive predominance of instinct has putthe brake on its pro gr ess tow ard co nsciou sness . There has, in this case,been what looks like spurring nature on a wrong road .F r o m t h e Un-

consciou s to the Conscious-Geley .



1 1 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEc on s c i ou s l y i n t e l l i g e n t f or ce . I t i s t h e s a m e k in d

o f f or ce I t a l k e d a b o u t i n t h e l a s t c h a p t e r , a n

u n co ns c i o u s l y i nt e l l i g e n t f or ce . I n a l l o f t h e s e

s t e p s w e h a v e s e e n t h i s i d e a g r a d u a l l y e m e r g e -

t h i s e v i d e n c e o f a P r e s e n c e - o f a t r e m e n d o u s

s o m e t h i ng - t h a t i s b e h i n d l i f e a n d t h a t i s w o r k -

i n g o u t t h r o u g h l i f e . O u r re l i g io u s f r ie n d s c a l l

i t G o d . I wo u l d c a l l i t t h a t m y s e l f . I t i s a g o od

t e r m , b u t I a m t r y i ng t o d e a l w it h t h i s t h i ng i n

a p h i l o s o p h i c a n d s c ie n t i f i c w a y , s o I a m l e a v i ng

o u t t h e s e f a m i l i a r c o nc e p t s a n d d e s c ri p t i o n s a n d

t r y i n g t o a p pr o a c h t h e s u b j e c t d e n o v o , a s i f w e

h a d n e v e r h a d t h e s e c o n c e p t s , b u t w e r e b u i l d i n g

a n e w f r o m t h e f a c t s a s t h e y d e v e l o p . H e r e i s

o n e i m p o r t a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n : W e f i n d f o r t h e

m o s t p a r t , t h a t t h e s e v a r ia t i o n s a r e u s e f u l. T a k e

t h e c a s e o f ra b b i t s : S u p p o s e w e r e m o v e t h e r a b -

b i t f ro m a n o r t h e r n c l i m a t e t o a s o u t h e r n . D a r -

w i n h i m s e l f g i v e s t h i s e x a m p l e . He mentions a

s o u t h e r n i s l a n d a s t h e n e w h a b i t a t , w h e r e t h e

c l i m a t i c co nd i t i o n s a r e d i ff e r e n t . I n o n l y a f e w

g e n e r a t i o n s , t h e s e r a b b i t s a r e g r e a t l y m o d i f i e d .

T h e y c h a n g e i n c o l o r . They change somewhat

i n h a b i t s . S i nc e t h e y h a v e n o t t h e s a m e e n e m i e s

a s b e f o r e , t h e y c h a n g e t o m e e t t h a t c o n d i t i o n .

T h i s h a p p e n s , I r e p e a t , i n a f e w g e n e r a t i o n s .

A r e w e t o s u p p o s e t h a t a n i n f i n i t e n u m b e r o f

v a r i a t i o n s h a p p e n e d b y a c c i d e n t a n d t h a t t h o s e

w h i c h r e s u l t e d i n a r m i n g t h e i r p o s s e s s o r s t o

m e e t t h e s e n e w e n v i r o n m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s a l o n e

w e r e t r a n s m i t t e d ? T h a t s e e m s a s l o w a n d c u m -

b e r s o m e m e t h o d a n d i s n o t i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h

t h e o b s e r v e d f a c t s . I t c o u l d n o t h a v e a c t e d s o




q u i c k l y f o r o n e t h i n g . I f w e e x a m i n e t h i s c a s e ,

e v e n s u p e r f ic ia l l y , w e s e e t h e a b s u r d i t y of t h a t

p os i t i on a t o n ce . I t i s a n i m po s s i b il i t y . Some-

t h i n g e l s e h a s h a p p e n e d , a n d t h i s i s t h e f a c t w e

a r e t r yi ng t o g e t a t . I t i s a f a c t t h a t c a n n o t b e

n e g l e c t e d i f we a r e t o a r ri v e a t t r u t h . In some

w a y t h e r e i s a r e s p o n s e i n t h e o r g a n i s m t o t h e

n e w c o n d i t i o n s . T h e s e v a r i a t i o n s d o n o t a r i s e

h a p h a z a r d l y b u t t h e y r a t h e r d e f i n i t e l y m e e t

t h e s e n e w c i rc u m s t a n c e s . T h a t i s t h e p o i nt I a m

g e t t i n g a t , a n d i t i s a m o s t i m p or t a n t p oi n t , i f

w e g e t i t s i m p l i c a t i on s . N o r i s i t w h o l l y h y p o -

t h e s i s . T h e r e i s n o t t i m e n or s p a c e i n t h i s c h a p -

t e r t o g i v e m o r e i n s t a n c e s b u t t h e p r o o f s a r e

f a m i l i a r a n d a r e a l l a b o u t u s . T h e r e s p o n s e o f

t h e o r g a n i s m i s p r o b a b l y a n u n c o n s c i o u s r e c o g -

n it i o n, a s a b o v e r e m a r k e d , b e c a u s e m o s t o f t h e s e

v i t a l p ro c e s s e s s e e m t o g o on u nc on s c io u s l y , b u t

t h e y a r e , n e v e r t h e l e s s , i nt e l l i g e n t , a n d t h e r e i s

i n t h i s u n c o n s c i o u s m i n d - c a l l i t w h a t w e m a y

- a n d a p p a r e n t l y i n t h e w h o l e c o s m o s t h r o u g h -

o u t a l l o r g a n i c cr e a t i o n , s o m e t h i n g t h a t r e c o g -

n i z e s c h a n g e d e n v i r o n m e n t a n d m o d i f i e s t h e o r -

g a n i s m a c c o r d i n g l y . Without that fact being

r e c o g n i z e d t h e r e i s n o a d e q u a t e e x p l a n a t i o n o f

e v o l u t i o n . O n t h a t g r o u n d I t h i n k t h e s p i r i t u a l

f or ce s o f t h e w o r l d s h o u l d t a k e t h e i r s t a n d .

N o w , I c a n n o t f o re g o a t t h i s p o in t m e n t i o n in g

a t h i n g t h a t t o m y m i n d i s a l s o of v i t a l i m p or -

t a n c e . I t u s e d t o b e s u p p o s e d b y t h e p h y s i o l o -

g i c a l p s y c h o l o g i s t s t h a t w h e r e v e r t h e r e i s m i n d

a c t i on t h e r e i s a l s o b ra i n a c t i on . Someone went

s o f a r a s t o s a y t h a t m e n t a l a c t i o n , c o n s c i o u s -



1 14 INVADING THE INVISIBLEness, is apparently a secretion of the brain just

as the bile is a secretion of the liver . That i s

the way ou r human intellects are alw ays jump-

ing at conclusi ons and making sw eeping g ener -

alizations that are o nly appro ximations tow ard s

the tr u th, if they are even that . As a matter o f

fact, it has been discovered by laborator y tests

that at least one form of mind action is not ac-

companied by cor respon d in g brain actio n, but

that subconscio u s mind actio n is gr eatest when

brain actio n is least . So this offsets the entire

materialistic, or, rather, the physiological-psy-

chol og y theory o f an earlier d ay . We find these

two facts not only sug gestive, but they may dove-

tail together . I have told you before that we are

o n an adventur e in tru th . We are somethinglike detectives . We are lo oking fo r clues . Rig ht

here we have, perhaps, a clu e . First, in the fact

that these variatio ns are useful and, to some ex-

tent, are not only the result of some primary im-

pu lse, like Bergson's clan v it a l , bu t that they

unconscio usly seek to satisfy a need and r espond

t o env i r o n ment . Seco nd , is the fact that the

su bco nsciou s mind is no t dependent o n the phy-

sical brain . These are two impo r tant facts that

we want to bear in mind as we go along in these

investigations . Please observe that I am fo llo w -

ing the scientific method as clo sely as I can ;

that I accept it, but I want it to be a fu ll scien-

tific method , and the full scientific method con-

siders all facts without r egard to pr eviou s pre-

jud ice or preconception .

May I say in this connectio n that I r egard




psychic metho ds as coming u nder this head, i f

they are facts . They ar e ju st as mu ch entit led

to co nsideratio n in the scientific wo r ld as any

o ther facts, and i f they are ru led o u t as they

have been to so me extent in cer tain qu arter s,

that is as much dogmatism as the religious

wo rld was ever g ui lty of in all its history . I n

time such an attitud e will be rated at its tru e

wo rth-it will be ascribed to pr eju dice and noth-

i ng mo r e .

So i n this adventur e of o u rs w e are go ing to

take into consideratio n all tru th, but we are go -

ing to scrutinize it carefully and d etermine its

credentials and valid ity . I accept the evolution-

ary hypothesis, but I insist on all the facts and

this one fact of the apparent response of the or-

ganism to enviro nment, reaching o ut to adapt and

adj ust itself to that envir onment, cannot be ne-

glected . Yet it has been ig nored in the past and

if not left ou t of the theory of most of the evolu -

tio nists, has at least been minimi zed and p ut into

the backgr o u n d .

Now, Dr. Gustave Geley, in his very readableand su g g estive boo k From the Unconscio us to

the Co nscio us, has dealt with this question, and

has co me to the conclu sio n that there is so me-

thing in the invisi ble, something anter io r and

sup er io r to the or ganism, that go ver ns . It has

been su pp o sed that the cells themselves g o vern

their own development, that is, that the germi-

nal cell, in the starting o f a new o rg anism, in

some way that nobod y coul d ever find o ut o r ac-

cou nt for , has the comp lete specificatio ns for the



11 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEnew embryo and knows just how to build it,

w h i c h i s a r a t h e r l a r g e c on t r a c t f o r o n e d i m in u -

t i v e c e l l . I t u s e d t o b e s u p p o s e d a l s o t h a t t h e

e m b r y o i s a n e x a c t p i c t u r e o f t h e m a t u r e d o r -

ganism . O f c o u r s e , t h a t i s n o t o n l y i n c o r r e c t ,

b u t i s t h e f a r t h e s t t h i n g f r o m t h e t r u t h , a s I

h a v e a l r e a d y p o in t e d o u t . I n t h e b e g i n n in g o f t h e

f oe t a l s t a g e , t h e e m b r y o o f a m a n m a y l o o k l i k e

t h a t o f a n y o t h e r a n im a l o r o f a f is h. We cannot

d i s t i n g u i s h t h e t w o a t f i rs t . A t a l i t t l e l a t e r

s t a g e , t h e y b e g in t o d iff e re n t i a t e , s o t h a t w e g e t

s o m e f e w d i s t i nc t i on s a n d , s t i l l l a t e r , t h e d i f f e r -

e n t i a t i o n g r o w s m o r e p r o n o u n c e d . I n t h i s w a y

e a c h i n d i v i d u a l r e c a p i t u l a t e s t h e w h o l e e v o l u -

t i o n a r y h i s t o r y u p t o i t s o w n p l a c e . I t i s a

m e n t a l p r o c e s s , b e c a u s e i t i n v o l v e s m e m o r y . I

h a v e a l r e a d y m e n t i o n e d S a m u e l B u t l e r o n t h i s

p o i n t , a n d S a m u e l B u t l e r w a s n o t a s p i r i t u a l

t e a c h e r a t a l l i n t h e o r d i na r y s e n s e . B u t l e r s a y s

h e c a n n ot a c co u nt f o r t h e f a c t t h a t t h e o rg a n i s m

r e c a p i t u l a t e s t h e h i s t o r y o f i t s p a r e n t s , i t s

g r a n d p a r e n t s , e t c . , b a c k a l o n g t h e w h o l e e v o l u -

t i o n a r y p r oc e s s t h a t l e d u p t o m a n u n l e s s i t r e -

members . W h e n i t h a s r e a c h e d a c e r t a i n s t a g e

t h a t i t s p r o g e n i t o r s h a d r e a c h e d b e f o r e , i t r e -

members what they did and fo llo ws the same

c o u r s e . T h e r e a s o n h y b r i d s d o n o t r e p r o d u c e

i s t h a t t h e r e i s a c o n f u s i o n of m e m o r y a n d t h e y

d o n o t k n o w w h i c h w a y t o g o .

N ow , i t i s c l a i m e d t h a t t h i s m i c r o s c o p i c c e l l

- t h i s g e r m i n a l c e l l - c o n t a i n s a l l t h a t h i s t o r y

and memor y . H o w c a n t h a t b e ? I t i s t h e d i f -

f ic u l t y s u c h a t h e o r y p r e s e n t s t h a t c a u s e s G e l e y




to s u p p o s e there i s so mething in the invisible

that go verns, something su perio r and anteri or to

the or ganism . In other w or d s, somewhere ther e

is a spiritual or etheric entity carr ying the whole

race histor y of that or ganism, and also its ow n

par ticu lar psychic content, that shapes the o r -

ganism for its use. This is tru e not only of man

but o f all f o r ms of life, to the extent that there

is a psychic co ntent . The organism can only

contain w hat there is to contain, w hether that

be simple consciou sness or self-consciou sness . I n

either event there is so mewher e in the back-

g r ou nd and i n the invisible beyond the rang e of

o u r senses this so mething that not o nly d eter-

mines the or g anism but that motivates it, that

gives it its full power . This is not entir ely a

new i d ea . We or di narily call this thing i n the

backgr o un d sou l . We cannot accou nt for it, but

w e say that Go d makes the embryo . We expl ain

it by familiar concepts and generalizations with-

ou t inqui ring fu rther . We see child ren g r o w ,

and say it is their natur e . That do es no t say

anything at all . Nature is just a big wo rd un-

der w hich we hid e ou r ig nor ance . What arethese pr o cesses? What ar e these facto r s? What

is it that makes an or ganism repeat itself, w ith

variatio ns, in the offspr ing? We see a child. Weperceive its likeness to the parent . Yet it has

its own differentiations . What is this wo n der -

ful fo rce that accou nts for all o f these? Why is

it that the child hold s tru e to type? We can

always tell an oak fr om any other kind of a tree .

We seld o m mistake one animal sp ecies fo r an-



1 1 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEother, or one insect species . There is so me lit-

tle variation . In the same w ay w e meet a mil-

lio n men ; many of them wil l have faces mu ch

alike, but there is always something to d istin-

gu ish each individ ual fr om every o ther . Whatis this?

Someone has said that each cell of the or g an-

ism co ntains the histo r y, the pictu r e, and the

po tency o f the whole or ganism . We can likenthat to a social or ganism . That is, we will say,

each man in a nati o n, each Ameri can, fo r exam-

ple, is the pictur e of his nation, mor e o r less

perfectly ; he has the general characteristics of

his cou ntry ; and as a cell o f that particular so-

cial o r g anism he contains the histo r y, the pic-

tur e, and the po tency of the o r g anism ; t h a t i s ,

he has the Ameri can spi r it . So w e find these

analog ies . In the same way each of the cells o f

the bod ily o r ganism contains the pictur e, the

po tency and the histo r y of that or ganism, which

id ea w o u ld seem to be bor ne o u t by this o ne-

cell beg inning o f a new o rg anism so mu ch like

the o ld . Yet that cannot expl ain all o f the

pr ocess, because, returning to the analog y of the

social or ganism, I do not know of any Ameri can,

if he were left alo ne in some new envir o nment,who could reproduce another America . Hewo ul d need a multitu de of helpers . Even if w e

say he had the histor y, pictu r e and p o tency of

the whole nation, he w o u ld have them so i mper-

fectly, so sketchily, that he wo u ld leave ou t a

multitud e of factor s . He co u l d n o t r e p r o d u c e



PURPOSIVE EVOLUTION - 119

a l l the machinery fo r o ne thing . I coul d not

begin to repr od uce mor e than an infinitesimal

fraction of i t, and I d o no t know of any other

individual who could d o it alone. I shou ld think

there would be the same difficu lty in starting o ut

with this one biolo gi cal cell . So I fancy we may

be compelled, soo ner or later, to conclud e that we

have to g o to the invisible to account for this em-

bryonic pr ocess, that is, that there is something

-so mew here-call it an etheri c wo rl d, call i t a

psychic wo rld , call it w hat you wi ll- there is

somewher e, as Plato said , but in a mor e vital

way than Plato ever d reamed, the specifications

and the archetype, a so mething g r eater than

the o r ganism that determines it .

Witho u t that we have not g o tten even an ap-

ro ach tow ard a philo sop hic co mprehension of

this theor y of evolutio n . Yo u know , the philo s-

op hy of a thing is the why of it, and to g et the

why of it, of course, we have to fo rm an hypothe-

sis, which in this case is difficult . The only

way a science goes for war d is to for m hypotheses

in its o wn special field . These ar e wo r king hy-

po theses . Scientists get a fact here and a fact

there and by relating these facts they build an

hypothesis . If that hypothesis is fr uitful, that

is, if it wo rks in o btaining new facts and in

making progress, then, in that special science it

is used . No w , philo so phy do es exactly this same

thing fo r all o f the special sciences, that is, it

r elates them to each other and ar r ives at gen-

era l la w s and c oncl us i on s . It takes physics,

chemistr y, biol o g y and the rest, gener alizes



12 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEthem, and fo llo w s exactly the same pr ocess on a

larg er scale . It makes hypo theses that will ex-

plain them, by which we can g o fo r war d into a

higher synthesis and a hig her g eneralizatio n .

That is what we are attempting to d o in this

case . We can make hypotheses but we cannot

get anywhere in the visible w o rl d w ithou t re-

cou rse to the invisible. We cannot determinethe nexus between the will, which is a mental im-

pu lse, and the lifting o f the arm, for example,

w hich is a p hysical pr o cess-w e cannot estab-

li sh the connectio n between these tw o w ithou t

recou rse to the invisible . We cannot accountfor the gro wth of the embryo wi thou t recou rse

to the invi sible. We canno t expl ain the attrac-

tion o f gr avitation w ithou t recou rse to the in-

v i s i b l e . We cannot explai n the tr ansmissio n o f

lig ht wi thou t recour se to the invisible. We can-not explain energ y w ithou t r ecou rse to the in-

v i s i b l e ; i n fact, we have only made pr o gr ess in

science by ou r invasion o f the invisible . This

invasion has go ne on in w ays that are perfectly

apparent . When we invented the micr o scop e,

we invaded the invisible, that is, w e invaded the

w o r ld that was to o i nfinitesimal to be seen by

our natural eyes, and brought that into the field

of vision . When w e invented the X- r ay, w e in-

vaded the invisible, that is we invaded a, range

o f fr equ encies above the r ange of l ig ht . Webro u g ht them into the field o f visio n, so that

thing s that wer e o paqu e became tr anspar ent .

When we invented the telesco pe, w e invad ed the

invisible, and stars that had been in the heavens




f or mi l l i on s a n d b i l l i on s o f y e a r s , b u t h a d n e v e r

b e f o r e b e e n k n o w n b y m a n , s w a m i n t o t h e f i e l d

o f o u r k e n . A n d , i n t h e s a m e w a y , e v e r y s t e p

o f p r o g r e s s w e h a v e m a d e i n e x p l a i n i n g t h e v i s -

i b l e u n i v e r s e h a s b e e n m a d e t h r o u g h t h e i n v a -

s i o n of t h e i n v i s i b l e . N o w , w e h a v e t o g o a s t e p

f a r t h e r , i n t h i s c a s e , b e c a u s e h e r e w e a r e n o t

a b l e t o i n v a d e t h e i nv i s i b l e t h r ou g h m i c ro s c o pe s

a n d X - r a y m a c h i n e s a n d t e l e s c o p e s , b u t w e h a v e

t o d o i t t h r o u g h h y po t h e s e s , w h i c h i s a l e g i t i -

mate way so long as we keep o ur hypotheses

a s n e a r t o t h e f a c t s a s w e c a n , a n d k e e p t h e m

i n h a r m o n y w i t h t h e f a c t s . T h a t i s t h e o n l y

w a y s c i e n c e o r p h i l o s o p h y m a k e s p r o g r e s s .

S o, a s a f i n a l t h o u g h t I s u g g e s t t h i s : T h e r e i s

a n u n c o n s c i o u s i n t e l l i g e n c e i n t h e o r g a n i s m

w h i c h g o v e r n s i t s f u n c t i o n i n g a n d i n t r o d u c e s

v a r i a t i on s t o b e t t e r a d a p t i t a n d i t s p ro g e n y t o

e n v i r o n m e n t .



CHAPTER VIITHE NEW PHYSICAL THEORY

IN ou r last chapter we d iscovered that pro g-

ress has been made in science by the invasion of

the invisible . This invasi o n has been br o u g ht

abo ut in mor e than one way . The mod er n scien-

tifi c method has been thro u g h exper iment and

the u se o f impr o ved equi pment . Through the

micr o scop e w e have invaded the infini tesimal ;

thro u g h the telescop e we have invaded the im-

mensities ; thro u gh the laborato r y we have in-

vaded the physical and chemical ; thr o u gh

vari o u s means w e have d isco ver ed o ther fi elds .

Now , this not o nly has wid ened the bou ndary o f

know ledg e but has given us increased facili ties

in fur ther investigations. Befor e this invasi o n

star ted the earth was fiat and, so far as we know ,

o utsid e of a few ancient philo sop hers, nobo dy

questio ned that fact . Befor e this invasion st ar t -

ed we believed in atoms as the ultimate units of

matter . There had been no ad vance in the atom-

ic theo r y since the days o f Democr itu s w hen he

po stul ated the theo r y of the atom and the vo id ;

that is, that the material u niverse is mad e up

o f atoms that were indestru ctible and of which

ther e was alw ays a fixed nu mber i n existence .

These atoms, accor d ing to the theo r y of Demo-

1 2 2



THE NEW PHYSICAL THEORY 1 2 3

c r i t u s , came to g ether accidentally . There is a

certain schoo l i n science that seems to favor the

fortuito us or the accid ental, evid ently with the

id ea of escaping d esign . These have been no t

only materialists but fo r the most part atheists,

because design means a d esig ner and, if we o nce

admit pu r po se, or final causes in the universe,

w e must admit some mind i n which the pu r po se

and the final causes can ari se .

The atomic theo r y, as pr o po u n ded by Democ-

r itu s and d evelo ped by the Epicu reans, w as held

thr o u gh o u t the Mi d d l e Ages and u p u n t il the

time almost o f the beg inning o f the Twentieth

Century. It w as held by Newto n, and yet New-

ton cou ld never u nderstand how action cou ld

come abou t at a d istance becau se that meant

action thro ug h a void . Newton di d not attempt to

explain that ; he said he cou ld not explain it .

Now, wi thin thir ty years, that whole theor y has

been revo lu tio nized - abando ned fo rever . Thiscame abo ut pr imari ly thro ug h the di scovery of

radi o-active substances . It w as fou nd, for ex-

ample, that radium-and since that time the

same pr o perty has been discovered in some other

elements-not only g ives off electro ns, but that

the character o f the element changes, so that

w e have Rad iu m- One, Rad iu m-Tw o , etc . Final-

ly, after ag es, that pro cess continuing , rad iu m

beco mes lead ; that is what is know n as a satis-

fied element ; ther e is an equi li briu m betw een

the po sitive and the neg ative electro ns in the

atom o f lead w hich makes it inert and static .

Ato ms are something like peopl e . There ar e



1 2 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEsatisfied peop le, bu t I w ou ld be lo ath to think of

peop le being as i ner t and satisfied as an element .

C hemical action as w ell as electr ical actio n

takes place in the unsatisfied elements, and if

all the elements were content in that sense, we

shou ld have no pheno mena in the physical u ni-

verse . Bo th chemical combinatio ns and elec-

tri cal phenomena wo ul d be well- nig h impo ssible .

With the demo liti o n of the o ld mater iali stic

theor y of the atom and the void , cer tain other

changes have taken pl ace that have been qu ite

as revolu tionary . I d o not want to bor e the

r ead er by sketching o u t what is know n as the

electro nic theor y of matter . It is familiar to

ever ybod y and yet, perhaps, we cannot qu ite

cover o ur subject unless we refer to i t bri efly .

The electro nic theory is, in a few words, this

That in some pr imar y substance- call i t ether

o r w hat w e may-ther e are electr ical char g es .

It i s not yet know n whether w hat w e call the

electro n and the pr o ton- the pr o ton being the

po sitive electro n-are matter in the or dinary ac-

ceptatio n o f the ter m o r w hether they ar e mere

charg es of electrical fo rce, but it is suspected

by most scientists that they are charges . What-ever they are, the pr oton has an immensely gr eat-

er mass than the electro n, and it is no t know n

why this is tru e . My ow n view is that it is a

pr actical arr angement to keep the nucleus stable

so that the negative electrons revolve about it .

Other w ise the pr oto ns and electro ns w o ul d r e-

v o lve abo u t each o ther and the atom, as no w

constituted, w ou ld be impossible .




May I d ig r ess in this connectio n to say that

the late Pro f. Ed g ar Lucian Lar kin o f Mt . Wil-

son Obser vator y called the pr o ton a "mentor s,"

and i mpli ed by the name that it co ntained a

psychic facto r . It is no t wi thou t interest in

this connection that the Hindo o s say that every

atom contains something of the spirit, something

of min d. Prof. Cliffor d talked of "Mind Stuff,"and li e implied that this mind stuff may be in

the ato m . P r o f . Er nest Haeckel had the same

id ea, altho u gh he did not express it in exactly

the same w ay . What the pr oton is, science d oes

not know, except that it d raws to itself the neg-

ative electro n . The hydr o g en atom is co mpo sed

o f a pair - and, by the way, this hydr o g en atom

constitutes all the elements, in this w ay, that

ever y element is a multi pl e of the hydr o g enatom .

The ascending scale of the elements is deter-

mined by the nu mber o f pr o tons and electro ns

in the atom, and is a r eg ul ar nu meri cal series .

The heavier elements, su ch as rad iu m and o ne

o r two others at the to p o f the scale, that ru n

into the nineties, are the ones that shoot off their

electrons . Apparently, they are so heavilypacked that they beco me unstable . Ther e are

abou t ninety, I think that it is eighty-eight elec-

tro ns in r adi u m, and there are some elements

above that . No w , the atomic weig ht cor r espo nds

a lm ost exactly t o the number of p r o t on s an d

electro ns in the atom . There are several gr o ups,

that is, there are several elements that were notknown when this discovery was made, but



1 2 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEthrough this table, this series, that was estab-

li shed mathematically, cer tain new elements

were discovered in the places that they ou ght to

be, in the same way that the aberr atio ns of Nep-

tune sug gested to the astro nomers that there was

another planet o u t beyond , and they fo u nd the

planet in the place where it ought to be because

o f these aberr atio ns .* In the same way, thro u g h

mathematics, these new elements w ere d isco v-

ered i n the places wher e they belo ng ed in this

numerical series . That was a fur ther verifi ca-

tio n of the theory .

It is not only the number of pr oto ns and elec-

tro ns, however, in the atom that determines its

atomic weight and its place in the scale, but the

excess or deficiency of the negative electrons fur -

ther d eter mines the character o f the ato m . If

the atom has too few electro ns, it is alw ays

hu n t in g f o r m o r e, and i t therefo r e r o bs any

other substance that it comes in contact with of

its extra electrons . If it cannot take them aw ay

altog ether, it fo rms a u nion and satisfies its ap-

petite fo r mor e electro ns by sharing w ith an-

other atom . That makes a compound . Thushydr o g en and oxyg en unite to for m water, and

o ther elements unite to make o ther comp o u nds .

There is no end to the comp o u nds that ar e made

in this way . Not only that, but if there is an

excess of electro ns over the pr oto ns-and this

excess o r deficiency may run as hig h as three in

an atom i n the heavier su bstances- ther e is an

"An astro nomer r ecently ascribed the find ing of the new planet to ac-

cid ent, but admi tted that it was fo und where the late Perci val Lowell

p r e d i c t e d . At least Neptu ne was mathematically l ocated i n advance which

wo uld make good the illustration .



1 28 INVADING THE INVISIBLEo ther, and that gives off a wave mo tio n, which

is the sou rce of lig ht-the lig ht o f the universe .

Ret u r n i ng f o r a mo m ent t o o u r i n v as i o n o f

the invi sible : That invasion has only g o ne, ap-

parently, a little way . There are several g aps

that it has not covered . The fir st gap is between

p r im o r d ia l s ubstance-ether, o r whatever y o u

w ill - and matter , and the second is betw een in-

or ganic matter and o rg anic matter, that is, liv-

ing matter .

I n the mid d le o f the Nineteenth Centur y,

w hen the evolu tio na ry theo r y was new, there

were a gr eat many scientists who believed in the

spo ntaneo u s g eneration of li fe and they expect-

ed, with the great strides being made in science,

to d iscover this in shor t or der . That belief, so

far as I know , is no lo nger held . It w as ver y

tho ro ug hly shattered by Pasteu r . Up to the time

o f Pasteu r i t was g enerally thou g ht that the

fung i and mo ld s that for med on d ecaying matter

were the result of spo ntaneou s generation of life

and that co r ru ptio n, gener ally speaking , br ed

these things, no bod y knew ho w . Pasteu r ga ve

o u t a d efinite statement that there is no li fe

withou t antecedent life, and, thro ug h a long life

of investigation, proved it . So that the theo r y

o f spo ntaneo u s g eneratio n has never been held

since Pasteur's time, and the resultant gap, r e-

lating to the genesis of life fr om matter, has not

yet been filled and probably w ill never be filled

until there is a fu rther invasio n of the invisible ;

we have to d iscover mo re facto r s .

There is ano ther hiatus between the plant ,and




the animal , becau se the animal enter s ano ther

di mension . The plant i s fixed , but the animal

is fr ee in a new d imensio n of space . It go es

fro m place to place . Ther e is a fur ther unex-

pl ained i nterval between the animal and man ;

that is, between bio lo gical pr ocesses and psycho-

lo gi cal pr ocesses . No t o nly can man think and

speak, but there are certain new facto rs in man

that do not app ear , even in embryo, d o w n the

scale . I am not referr in g to reason, because

animals do show some sign o f reason . I am not

talking o f lang u age, because animals have cer -

tain cries that mean certain things, and that is

a primary for m of langu a ge ; but there are hig h-

er factor s that, so far as I can di scover, the

animal d oes not po ssess . I r efer especially to

self- conscio usness . We d o no t di scover self-

conscio usness as we know it, in any animal ;,and

a further thing is value . You may say that an

animal do es value foo d . If the term is u sed in

that sense, you may say that, but I think it is a

vio lation of meaning to apply it in that way, be-

cause what is o r d inari ly meant by valu es are

esthetic values, ethical values, life values, reli-

gi ou s values ; all the things that go to make up

hu man life . Then again man forms concepts .

He has invaded still another d imensio n . He is

time-binding,* just as the animal is space-bind-

ing . Man is time-binding and all of his pro gr ess,

if w e analyze it, comes to this : He can accu mu -

late his experiences, make a recor d of them, and

• Credit should b e given t o C o u nt Horzybski, for t h i s i d e a , which t o

so well expressed in his M a n h o o d o f H u m a n i t y .



1 3 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEthro ug h compar ison he can di scover their law s,

relationships and qualities . He thinks, and by

means o f know ledg e and tho u g ht he can mod ify

his envir o nment, which is another thing no ani-

mal can do . I t is said that a monkey can be

taught to u se a stick to knock frui t off a tree,

but it has to be taught . So far as I kno w, i t d oes

not do this of its ow n volition . Asid e fro m that,

I d o not know of any animal that uses a tool

o utsid e of the or ganism, especially if it has to

fashio n the too l . There is ano ther facto r be-

cause man not o nly is time-bindi ng and accumu-

lates his experiences until he makes pr og ress in

geometri cal ratio w ith the accumulatio n, but he

uses tools outside of the organism, which is best

evidenced by ou r who le mechanical civi lizatio n,

the machine age w e have hear d so much abou t .

Machines are o nly to o ls . All o f that is paren-

thetical .

Ret u r n in g t o o u r i d ea : These g aps have no t

yet been filled and I suspect they will not be filled

until there is a much mor e radical invasion o f

the invisible than has been possible so far . Be-

tw een pr imo r d ial su bstance and matter , between

the inor g anic and o r g anic, betw een plant and

animal, and between animal and man are nodo ubt connections, but w e do not yet know what

they are. Each step in the series brings us to a

new and hig her level .

I have called attentio n to the Hermetic phil-

o s o p h y . That is o ne of the o ld est o f w hich we

have know ledg e . It is so o ld that we do not

exactly know the or ig in of it . There w ere six




or seven fu ndamental id eas of the Her metic

philoso phy . I have already g iven two . Now Iam go ing to intro du ce a thir d . The first of these

fund amental ideas is polar ity ; the seco nd i s

what I call likeness, the third i s rhythm . Please

und erstand that these postu lates were given ou t

long befor e the modern scientific age, and every-

one of them has been proved true in rather start-

ling w ays . Polari ty is the whole basis of atom

build ing, the pro ton being one po le and the elec-

tro n the other, and i t is thro ug h the union o f

these two p oles that the physical u niverse is at

all possible . We discovered i n ou r philosophy of

the absolu te, with Hegel, that this exact process

is used in thou ght . That is the basis of the fa-

mou s di alectic- the two po les and the synthesis

- the u nio n of the po les in a synthesis . Thethesis, antithesis and synthesis w ere u sed by

Fichte, and were the basis of Hegel's philo sophy .

We d o not need ag ain to r efer to them in de-

tail, but so me o f these famou s tri ads by which

Hegel ascended to higher thou g ht levels have a

bear ing . One synthesis beco mes the po le o f an-

o ther tr iad , and so he ascended step by step,

much as life ascends fro m level to level . I have

already mentio ned what to me is o ne of the most

illuminative of these triads, that is the univer-

sal as one po le-land the particular as the other .

The union is the ind ivid u al, such an ind ivid ual

as you o r I . We find in o u r selves the unio n of

both of these po les . We wo u ld not be man wi th-

o u t the universal element . It is that which en-

ables us to r eason, to or ganize ou r percepts into



1 32 INVADING THE INVISIBLEconcepts . It is the basis of all r easoning . It is

that which g ives us lang u age, because langu age

is a series of symbols applied to concepts . Lan-

g u age is a mor e fund amental thing than we have

imagi ned . It gr ow s ou t of ou r ability to think ;

that is the r easo n man has langu ag e and no

o ther fo r m of l ife has it in that way . Whileanimals have cr ies that ind icate cer tain app e-

tites, so far as is know n there is no animal that

has any sor t of a cry or a sign that indicates con-

cepts . The animal is incapable of fo rming a con-

cept . This is another factor, and it is distinct-

ive. It arises fro m a form o f po larity-what we

might call the po larity o f thou ght .

We find o ther pr o ofs of the fundamental ideas

o f the Her metic philo so phy . The second is like-

ness or cor respond ence . That is stated in this

way : As above, so belo w ; as in the little, so in

the great ; as in the microcosm, so in the macro-

cosm ; so, as someone else has put it, nature is

alw ays like herself . This pr incip le has been ver i-

fied in like startling w ays, and I po int to this

significant thing : We are dealing in this chapter

wi th the atom w hich is a miniatur e solar sys-

tem. As in the little, so in the gr eat ; as in the

atom, so in the sol ar system . This is the sec-

on d fun d amental po int .

The thir d factor is r hythm, and that has been

pr o ved by modern scientific discovery in quite

as startling a way . With that id ea we take up

another par t of the new p hysical theor y . Noto nly d oes this nu mer ical series id ea, that is

P y tha g o r a s' o l d i d e a o f n u m ber , r u n thr o u g h




this entir e gamu t of the elements we call mat-

ter , but the phenomenal u niverse is made u p o n

the basis of r hythm . So u nd i s a rhythm, bu t a

rhythm in a very low range of matter itself, that

is, in bou nd ether, w e mig ht call it . Then, there

is a wi de range above sou n d o f which we know

little, but we are begi nning to di scover some-

thing abou t it, for electrical and magnetic fre-

quencies, rad io waves, etc ., occur in this r ange,

and then far u p the scale, we find another r ange

to w hich another o ne o f o u r senses reacts, and

that is the heat range . We feel heat . Clo sely

associated w ith that, ru nning above it, and in

part o verlapping it, is light . Ou r eyes r eact to

light . On beyo nd the li g ht rang e, we have di s-

covered so me others . One is the X-r ay . I have

already po inted o u t ho w that changes o ur con-

ception o f color values . In fact, it abolishes col-

o r alto gether . Not only that, it banishes opac-

ity. With it, w e can see thr o u g h a wall ; w e can

see thro ug h our bod ies ; w e can see thr o u gh many

substances that are or di narily o paque ; t h a t i s ,

w e see thro u g h ever ything w hose frequ encies we

tr anscend . Ther e are so me thing s o paqu e, even

to the X-ray, but if we cou ld go u p the scale far

enou g h, we mig ht tr anscend them, so they also

would become transparent . If we went fareno u g h beyo nd, they wo u ld perhaps not be there

a t a l l ; the who le phenomena wo u ld be go ne . Atleast this i s a p ossible inference. This rhythmd iscovered by mod er n physics striking ly paral-

lels the ideas and the w ays in w hich the Her-

metic philoso phy invaded the invisible, but d id it



13 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEby a di fferent method-through mysticism, o r

intuition . The Hindoos have d o ne something

alo ng the same line. Their s is another fo r m of

know ing , but has reached similar resu lts, at least

in a g ener al w ay . All o f this has a meaning fo r

us, a greater meaning, perhaps, than ou r g enera-

tion will succeed in extracting and making avail-

able. Yet even so new as we are in this science,

we can get some meaning o ut o f it ; w e begin to

see whither it is leading .

We all l o ve m us ic but I w o n de r if w e kn o wwhy. Mu sic is the lang u a ge o f the cosmi cal

pr ocesses ; it is analogous to the cosmicalrhythm. It cor responds to what is go ing o n inplanet bui ld ing, in life bui ld ing ; i n ma k i ng a

pheno menal u niverse, in w hich sentient beings

can be o r g anized, can kno w , and co me to them-

selves . This new science of o u r s means mo r e

than that. I t means that ther e is so mew here a

substance back of what we call the visible ; that

is, back of matter .

That is the second g reat lesson w e are to learn .

The Hind o o s say that ther e is mo r e than one

ether . Let u s analyze that statement . In o r d er

that there may be mo r e than o ne substance oc-

cup ying a g iven space, o ne of the su bstances

must be g r an ula r ; that is, we can have air and

ether in the same space because air is g ranular ;

is made up of mo lecu les and ato ms, electro ns,

e t c ., wid ely separ ated, so that there is plenty of

room between ; it is not continuo us . Now, it

there be mor e than one ether, all of them except

one must be granular, else they cou ld not occupy



THE NEW PHYSICAL THEORY 1 35

the same space at the same time . We cannothave two continu o u s substances ; that is obviou s .

Well, that su g gests ano ther thou ght : What i s a

g r anular substance? A g r anular substance is a

state of so me other substance, that is ,all - a con-

ditio n . It is not a thing o f itself . It is a cond i-

tio n of something else . Ther e is no vacuu m in

the universe . There is continu o u s substance ;

ther e must be. This is necessary so that there

can be actio n at a distance . No t o nly d o es the

ra d i o wa ve t ra vel but it m ust have a med i um

thr ou g h which to tr avel . Lig ht is tr ansmitted

betw een the pl anets thr o u g h w hat was su pp o sed

to be empty space . There must be a mediumthro ug h which it is tr ansmitted . I w i l l c o me

come back to that thou ght later .

In o ther w o r d s, what we call matter , then,

is a state, a conditio n, an or ganization of some-

thin g m o r e p r im a ry . What that more primarysubstance is, w e d o no t know . It is generally

called the ether o f space, but the theory o f the

ether has been attacked, and science teaches us

little mor e than that there is so mething - weknow not what . We have little co ncept o f its

natur e . At one time it was said that the ether of

space must be not o nly contin uo u s but so lid ;

that is, in or der that it should manifest itself

with all of its physical attributes, all of its ener-

gy, all o f its r esistance, it had to be substance,

in a ver y real way . But then, if that be tru e,

how is it that there can be motio n thr ou gh this

s o l i d s ubstance? Ho w can w e thin k of m ot i o n

thro ug h solid substance? That has been a co -



1 36 INVADING THE INVISIBLEnundrum for science, that science has never

solved. We are almost for ced, wi th that fur -

ther consid eration, to the id ea that the visible

u niverse is a state- w hat w e call matter is a

state of that pr imar y substance ; a state that is

movable and gi ves us what we call mo tio n . Theearth revolves aro u n d the sun ; and the so lar

system has a general mo tio n that appar ently in-

clu des the whole stellar universe, and all w ith-

ou t friction . We cannot co nceive o f anything

passing thr o u g h a mater ial su bstance su ch as

air w ithout friction, and high rates of velocity

create a ver y consid erable fri ction . Aviatio n

has to meet that pr o blem ; even railw ay trai ns

have to meet it, and auto mobiles . That is the

r eason for the stream- line au tomo bile bod y ; i t

is necessary to have as little air -resisting sur -

face as possible . Just the same thing is true, to

a gr eater d egr ee, in water . That i s the reason

for the shape of a fish, po inted w ith ro u nded

sid es, because these encounter the least resist-

ance in the medium through which the fishpasses . Evid ently, ether is no t that kind o f a

med iu m because not o nly the ear th, which is a

ro un d bod y, but any other fo rm o f a materi al

bod y, can pass thr o u g h ether w ith app arently

no r esistance whatever and no fr ictio n . I amonly mentioning these facts to su ggest that this

is no t as simple a pr o blem as w e imagine, and

we are far fr om having r eached any solu tio n as

yet . We are still g ro ping i n ou r adventur e in

truth ; w e are still hunting fo r clues, and we find

some here and there, but they are only clues . We




have not yet discovered anything like a solu tion .

This su g g ests ano ther question . What is i t

that hold s the planets in their orbits? The gen-

eral suppositio n is that it is a nice counterbal-

ancing of the centrifugal and centripetal forces,

of the tendency to fly o ff into space as against

the attractio n of the sun . Bu t wi ll this theor y

hold ? Not if space is empty, fo r then the bal-

ance wo u ld have to be so perfect as to be d is-

tur bed by a hair . Ind eed it wo ul d have to be

absolute, which is a practical impossibility . The

slightest thing w ou ld di sturb the equilibriu m

w ith the resul t that even if the balance were

vari ed by the smallest deviatio n such as might

be caused by a severe earthquake or by the at-

tractio n of o ther bod ies such as a stray comet,

the result w ou ld inevitably be to destro y this

hair line equi libri u m and to cause the planet to

fly off i nto space, or to g o crashing into the sun .

It is r eflections such as these that sug gest the

necessity o f the theory that each planet is car-

ried in an ether stream or an ether vortex .

We cannot do without an ether of space .

Scientists were practically agreed o n this po int

until the time of Einstein and in the next chap-

ter I shall tr y to show how the Einstein hypo -

thesis has been misinterpr eted o n this point and

ho w it d oes not necessarily di spr o ve the exist-

ence of an ether, o r ethers as the Hind o os wo uld

have it. By the w ay, some o f o u r Western math-

ematical p hysicists are now inclining to this

same view that there may be more than oneether , or as I have alr ead y made plain, mor e



13 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEthan one different state of ether . One of these

states might very w ell be an ether that wo u ld

beco me the med i u m f o r the v o r t ic ia l m ot i o n s

necessary to the physical u niverse, the smaller

vor tices being the atoms and the larger the solar

systems, or the ether str eams necessary to carr y

the planets safely in their orbits . May I sayhere that this is not alone my id ea. It w a s p u t

for w ard by Descar tes, by Sir William Thomp son

and others, and is again brou ght into pr ominence

by so me o f the latest investigatio ns recou nted

by Eddington in one of his books on the physical

universe .

The latest statement o f the electro nic theor y

of matter is that the ultimate unit o f matter is

id entical w ith the ultimate unit o f electrical en-

erg y . Now , a unit o f electrical energy is merely

an electri cal charg e and r equ ir es some med iu m

to carry the charg e. We canno t charg e no thing

or a void . These charg es ar e supp o sed to be in

rapid r evolution . What is that bu t a vo r tex

in a mediu m o r substance?

May I app r o ach this subject fr o m another an-

gl e? I have mentioned this p o int befor e bu t

want to dr ive it home . Man's intellect is so made

that it d eals in abstractions . What we call mat-

ter is such an abstraction ; that is, we gather to-

g ether a lar g e nu mber o f exper iences, of sense

impressions and percepts-all o f these that have

to d o wi th bod ies in space ; w e l um p them t o -

gather and p ut a label o n them, in the way that

our intellects do, and call it matter . Now, thefir st thing to consid er abou t an abstraction is




this : It i s o nly a convenience of thou g ht, and

has no reality outside of thoug ht . I w ant us to

get that clear ly, because withou t it w e are not

in a positio n to make any advance in philo sop hy .

I su pp o se Berkeley has been laug hed at by mo r e

people who did not understand him than any

man who ever w ro te on philo sop hy . When `Bish-

op Berkeley said `There is no matter' and proved

it, 'tw as no matter what he said ."* As a matter

o f fact Berkeley d id pr o ve his hypothesis . No-bod y has gainsaid him fro m his d ay to this. They

tried but gave it up . No w , Berkeley, when he

said "There is no matter" said only this, and he

explained i t w ith painstaking care, but someho w

nobod y could get the point . "There is no r eality

in an abstraction ." That is all he said . He did

not deny vision o r sense impressions . He assert-

ed these things more definitely than almost any-

bod y else. It i s the habit o f man to make ab-

stractio ns, and the big g er the abstractio n the

more he stresses it, labels it, gives it a name, and

to so me extent perso nifies it . He may do thisunconsciou sly, but lie hypostatizes or actualizes

it and clo thes it w ith pow er . He makes hi s ab-

straction an entity . That is the reason there is

aSanta Claus ; that is the reason there is an Un-

cle Sam ; that is the reason there is matter ; t h a t

is the reason there are many of these personified

generalizations . We get an abstracti o n, set it

apart, put a label on it, and to some extent make

it a thing in and fo r tiself . Ther e is valu e in

that, per haps. It i s an aid to thinking. I am* Byro n .



1 40 INVADING THE INVISIBLEnot minimizing this valu e . I am only trying to

show its limits . Berkeley saw tho se li mits, and

said that w hen we ascr ibe to matter ; t o t h i s a b -

straction ; to this thing that is only .a convenien-

ce of thou ght, to this thing that has no r eal ex-

istence, when we ascri be reality to matter and

say that it do es things, we are talking abou t a

mer e appearance that is relative to o u r w ay of

seeing . That was all o f Berkeley's phil oso phy,

and that is the basis o f C hristian Science . Inthe fu ndamental sense it is absol u tely tru e .

These generalizatio ns, these abstractio ns, these

perso nified things have no real existence except

in human tho u g ht and have no p o w er except as

human thought gives them power . They are

ghosts-philo sophic and scientific ghosts .

I call attention to a fu rther reflection along

this line : Mo d ern science deals w ith symbo ls,

and fo r the mo st par t they ar e symbo ls having

numeri cal equ ivalents, w eight, measur e, fre-

quency, etc . The scientific u niverse is nothing

like ou r famili ar u niverse of sense perception .

It has har dl y anything that we can reco gnize incommon. The scientist does not talk abou t thew or ld of appearances any mor e. He talks abou t

relationship ; he talks about qualities ; he talks

abo ut atomic w eig hts ; he talks abou t electrical

equivalents ; he talks about atoms ; he talks

about electrons ; he talks abou t protons ; h e t a l k s

abou t fields o f fo rce ; he talks abou t relativities .

This universe in which you and I live ou r every-

day lives has well-nigh disappeared as a scienti-

fic, and as a philo sophic reality . As soo n as we



THE NEW PHYSICAL THEORY 14 1

d isco ver how w e think w e r each the po int where

w e can transcend o u r limitatio ns and see what

is beyond them . That is ano ther thi ng that

science has been do ing . It has been transcend -

ing all these limitations in this invasion of the

i n v i s i b l e ; i t has been g etting aw ay fro m these

sense limitatio ns-and thro ug h that pro cess it

has been disco vering the real universe, the uni-

verse of cosmic forces, and energy values, and it

may be that in that pr ocess, it has been disco v-

eri ng the spiri tual u niverse .

The new physical theo r y, therefor e, not o nly

has a philo sophic value but it has a value for us

as truth stud ents . We are only at the begi nning .

The hu man r ace up to this ti me has never been

in a position to go any distance in the empir ical

or scientific d iscovery of the finer forces. I have

alr eady mentio ned the statement of H . G . Wells,

made a few years ag o , that du ri ng the last cen-

t u r y mankind has ma de t remen d o u s p r o g r ess in

the physical sciences, that is, i n d isco vering en-

vir o nment, but that in the next centur y o r two ,

in his o p in i o n , w e w o u l d make equa l o r even

g r eater p r o g r ess in the internal sciences . In-

stead of discovering for ces without, we will dis-

cover the forces within, and he said o u r p resent

position compared to ou r attainment after a cen-

tury o r tw o o f that sort o f pro gr ess will be as

the Eskim o's ig lo o to the Woo lw o r th Bui ld in g

or as an Ind ian's du go u t cano e compared to the

mod er n o cean liner . That is an ambitio u s pr o -

gr am and yet anyone who do u bts ou r ability to

r eali ze it, and mo r e, has only to lo o k back at



1 4 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEwhat we have actually d o n e in the last o ne

hund red or one hund red and fifty years in phys-

ical science . In the old d ays ou r fastest mod e

of loco motio n was the hor se and coach . Weknew nothing about steam . All we knew ofsteam was when we saw it spo u t ou t of a tea-

kettle . We knew nothing abo u t electri city ex-

cept that w e had thun d er and lig htnin g . Weknew n othin g o f the f o r ces l o cked u p in the

atom ; in fact, we di d not think there were any

fo rces in the atom . We thought the atom hadlasted and wo uld last thro ug h all eternity ; we

knew little of chemistry o r o f physics or of any

of the things no w of most familiar use that go

to make u p human life. Man has accomp li shed

all of this. Why can't he know himself? Whycan't he kno w his r eal internal po w ers? Why

can't he learn how to utilize the power of

thou ght? Thou ght is the or ig inal pow er of the

universe. Positive thou ght is the gr eatest con-

stru ctive for ce we know .

The new physical theor y is gi ving u s add ed

lig ht as to matter and is revealing to u s that it

is no t mater ial at all i n the w ay that w e have

used that term but that it is o r ganized energ y,

and that this energy has been organized by

tho u ght just as ener gy in hig her w ays is o rg an-

ized by thou ght in or ganic bod ies .

The Hind o o s call the physical u niverse Maya

or Illusion . C o u nt Her mann Keyser ling find s

its u lti mate r ealities are tensio n and r hythm

in so me pr imar y substance or ether . Our ownscience d eter mines it to be energ y char g es and




stresses in this same ultimate ether ic su bstra-tum. Man sees it as an appearance, du e to hisow n reactio ns . Relativity still fur ther appr oves

this id ealistic viewpo int and shows that matter,

moti o n and space-time are not u ltimate but are

relative to the observer's frame of r eference. All

o f these tend mor e and mo re to r end er matter

"an insubstantial pageant," and to bring us near-

er to the views of Bishop Berkeley and i dealism .

There is another viewp o int, how ever , held by

Leibnitz, that matter is merely the mode of com-

munio n, of o bjectivity and o f activity o f themonads.

This bri ngs to mind the mod ern Monistic for -

mula which, as nearly as I remember it, r uns as

follows

M a t t e r t o i t s e l f i s m i n d . M i n d a s i t e x p r e s s e s

i t s e l f t o a n y o t h e r m i n d , i s m a t t e r .

Perhaps, that is a bit o bscu re and needs com-ment. "Matter to itself is mind ." If matter isanything to i self it must be mind , because mind

alone is consciou s . "Mind, as it expr esses itself

to any other mind, i s matter ." The w ay I com-

municate wi th you is thro ug h materi al symbol s,

signs, sounds . Yo u d o not see me, bu t my bo d y .

The eg o I experi ence as myself is behind and

beyo nd this, an elu sive so mething that even I

myself d o n o t kno w . Ho w , then, can you know

i t ? The o nly w ay, or at least the customa r y

way, in which I co ntact you is thro u gh this me-

d iu m called matter .



144 INVADING THE INVISIBLEWe are spir its clad in veils

Soul by soul was never seen .

Al l o u r d eep c omm un i n g fai l s

To remove the shadowy screen .

P r o f . W. K . Cli ffor d p uts it in this wayThe universe, then, consi sts entir ely of mind -

s t u f f . Matter is a mental p ictur e in w hich

mind -stu ff is the thing represented .

On the abo ve stat ement Dr . Paul Car us com-

mentsThe thing in itself is the inner, i . e . , s u b j e c t i v e

reality, which appears (so as to become percep-

tible, as motions or-o uter, i . e . , objective reality . *

In c oncl us i on may I a p pen d my o w n def in i -

tion

The so u l is an emanatio n of God , bu t only as

latent or po tential . Matter is the objective mod e

by which also it completes itself thro ug h evolu -

tio n, expr essio n and know ledg e of the universe,

o f which it is representative .

" T h e S o u l o f M a n , by Dr . Pau l C ar us . Open C o u r t Publishing Co.



CHAPTER VIIIRELATIVITY

Follo wing o ut ou r thoug ht of the invasion of

the invisible, we have disco vered that there are

sever al w ays in which we do this . First, there

is the method of reason w hich takes up ou r sense

im p ressi o n s and o r g a n izes them, ga in in g f r o m

them infer ences and impli catio ns and u nitin g

them into co ncepts, co mpa ri n g them, and thu s

getting their relatio nships and d iscoveri ng the

law s that go vern their phenomena .

There is another method to which we have

had r efer ence and w hich w e call i ntui tio n that

seems to r elate back to so me pr ima ry mo de o f

mental actio n that is both anterio r to and sup e-

rio r to o ur specialized intellectual fo rms . It ap-

pears to be a universal intelli gence thr o ug hou t

natur e .

Then there is a thir d w ay in w hich w e invade

the invisible, and that is thro u gh experimenta-

tio n by which we find ou t ho w things act in all

po ssible ways, and thu s try to d iscover their

real nature .

There is a fo u r th w ay, and that is thro u g h

mathematics . We have to d eal w ith that w aynow. The var io u s new d isco veri es w e have beentou ching here are r evolu tionary : They are of

fir st impo rtance, and I have classified them to-

145



14 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEgether as co nstitu ting the new facto rs in phil .

o s o phy . The chief o f these has been the extr a-

conscio us min d ; the second i s evolu tion ; t h i r d ,

the new physical theo ry ; and, fou rth, relativity .

Relativity is not a new term in phil o so phy .

Befo r e the time of Einstein there w as ano ther

philo sop hy o f r elativity advanced by Sir Wil-

liam Hamilto n chiefly, and this r eferred to the

evident fact that man know s the universe as it

relates to himself and cannot g o beyond that re-

lationship . It i s another phase of id ealism .

We have alr eady disco vered that the universe we

see we at least in par t create, in this w ay : C olo r,

f o r example, is d u e t o o u r react i on s . So i s

l i g h t i t s e l f . We loo k at certain lar ge agg regates .

We d o not see infinitesimals yet all natur e is

made u p o f infinitesimals . We lump these to-

gether . In o ther w o r d s , the phen omena l u n i -

verse is an appearance caused by the reactio n of

o u r o r ganisms, and that is the reason there has

always been this question of d uali ty and of the

u nreality of w hat we see . It is not u nreal in

o ne sense but it has an appearance relative to u s,

the beholders . Not only d o we see it in accor dance

wi th the reactions of o ur sense o rg ans, but w e

clo the it o n w ith the meanings that it has for

us d ue to ou r p eculiar o rg anizatio n and expe-

rience . That is only a sug g estion o f the old er

relativity theory of philo sophy .

Now, the Einstein theory is different althou gh

it has some of the same suggestio ns and implica-

tions. It is that our universe is du e to ou r frame

o f r eference . There is no absol u te motio n in



RELATIVITY 1 4 7

the sense we have talked abou t, because there is

no reference to determine it . Ther e is no thing

that is absolu tely static . There is no fixed po int

to w hich we can refer any given motio n, bu t

thing s move r elatively to each o ther , and this

r elative moti o n deter mines the constitu tio n of

things in a peculiar way . I can perhaps best

illu strate that by mass . Mass is d ependent on

motion ; mass inc reases w ith m ot i o n ; the in-

crease is only slight if the motion is relatively

slo w, but if the increase approaches the velocity

of lig ht, the cur ve is much sharper, that is, the

mass beco mes gr eater ; and if the motion reaches

the velocity of light the mass becomes infinite .

Einstein has bro u g ht one new fact befor e the

physicists of the wo rl d that is not no w qu es-

tioned, so far as I know , which is that the ulti-

mate velocity is the velocity of light . There i s

no g reater velocity . It is a p p r o x im ately one

hund red and eighty-six thou sand miles per sec-

o nd . That w o u ld impl y this to be the rate of

moti on o f the free ether . The Einstein theo r y

o f relativity is based o n the d iscovery o f Pro f .

Albert Michaelso n and Pr o f . Mo r ley . The ex-

peri ment was r epeated by other s . It w as con -

d ucted by means of mir r or s and a suffi ciently

sensitive apparatus to get the velocity of lig ht,

fir st, in the d ir ectio n of the earth's moti o n, and

then transversely to that di rectio n. It w as ex-

pected that there wo uld be a difference but- to

the astoni shment o f the experi menter s and the

whole scientific wo rl d, there w as no d ifference .

In other wo rd s, the motio n of lig ht is not only



1 4 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEthe highest rate of mo tio n in the universe, but

it is constant without r egard to the motio n of its

apparent sou rce or of the behold er .

As a result o f this experiment, Pro f. Einstein

w o r ked o u t his famo u s theor ems that have be-

come the basis o f w hat is kno w n as relativity,

and he also wo rked ou t still fur ther a pr op osi-

tio n that had been advanced by the mathemati-

cian Minkowski with regard to time as thefou r th di mension of space . It is difficult for

anyo ne to u n derstand r elativity who i s not a

higher mathematician . There is scarcely lan-

guage to expr ess it and there are few intellects

that can co mpr ehend it, w ithou t mathematics .

It has been wo r ked o u t mathematically, how -

ever , to the po int w her e the dimensions o f the

u niver se have been co nfid ently stated . These

d imensio ns are so immense that w e cannot even

think o f them . They can o nly be expr essed i n

lig ht years, and there are u niverses up on u ni-

verses invo lved . The near est island u niver se to

o u r o w n is s u p p o se d t o be almost one milli o n

lig ht years aw ay. Whatever the d istance, it i s

almost immeasurable-beyond our comprehen-sion, and there are other, and still other island

u niverses beyond that .

No w , the theor y of the fo u r th d imensio n is

philoso phically impor tant for several reasons .

First, it gets us away fro m the static method of

i n t e l l e c t . We have been thinking as three- d imen-

sional beings . The kind o f a u niverse we have

been pictur ing is a three-d imensio nal u niverse .

So tru e is this that w e cannot even think of a



RELATIVITY 1 4 9

fo u r - d imensi onal universe and can o nly arrive

at it mathematically . We cannot pictur e it, but,

using the simple method that I have used before,

in illu strating this, I w ill appr oach it in this

way : One d imensio n, leng th, is ar r ived at by

taking the lo w est mathematical po int, a mere

po sition, and mo ving that point . That makes aline. That is o ne d imensio n . The second d i-

mensio n is mad e in exactly the same w ay . Wetake the line and mo ve it at right angles to it-

s e l f. That makes a pl ane, leng th and br ead th .

The thir d d imension i s reached by a simil a r

pr ocess . We take the plane and mo ve it at r ig ht

angles to itself . That makes a so lid , length,

breadth, and thickness .

Now , how w ou ld w e reach the fou rth dimen-

sio n? App arently, by fol lo w ing the same method .

we take the solid and move it . We cannot think

of mo ving a soli d at r ig ht angles to itself, but if

we could think of it, the result wo uld be du ra-

tio n, that is, time . Now, time answers every

mathematical r equir ement of the fo u r th d imen-

sion, and not o nly that, it is necessary in order

that we may have movement. Ther e canno t bemovement without time-succession, in which

that movement may take place, and from the

aspect I mentio n, that itself is a d imension .

In o ther w o r d s, w e have been thinkin g three-

d imensio nally, that is, w e have been think-

ing statically . In order to think we had tocut a thing u p, kil l i t, that we mig ht beho ld

it . I have said that there is no fixed thing

in the u niverse, except o u r min ds, and i t is



1 50 INVADING THE INVISIBLEfor that r eason w e have been tr yin g to g et a

living, moving, develop ing u niverse-a spir itual

u niver se-fr o m the standpo int o f the materi al,

that is, the blo ck universe-the three dimensio n-

al universe a nd w e c o u l d n o t d o i t . That is

the impor tant aspect of this subject fro m a phil-

oso phical view . The w hole develop ment of mo d -

ern philo sop hy has been aw ay fr o m the static

and toward a living, moving and becominguniverse . That is the philo sop hy of Ber g son .

That was the philo sop hy implied but not stated

by Kant and the German id eali stic schoo l end-

ing in Heg el, and that is the u niverse of Ein-

stein . For pr actical pu rp oses Einstein's cor -

r ectio ns of New to n in measur able di stances are

negl ig ible . It is o nly in almost infinite di s-

tances and i n thinking beyo nd o r d inary limi ts

that they become imp o r tant, and that is exactly

the po int at which o u r o ld l imited three-d imen-

sional, fixed, static view of things broke do wn .

May I d ig r ess at this po int to mentio n some

rather interesting things that are su g gested by

this new appr oach? We never cou ld think o f

the infinite, and o ur failu re to d o that, at least

in part, grew o ut o f this very di fficul ty I have

mentio ned ; in o ther wo rd s, there is so mething

false in ou r method o f arr ivin g at the whol e

thr o u g h its par ts, because the par t is nothing

except in its incor po ratio n in the whole . That is

the difficulty I have pointed ou t in that old pr ob-

lem of Achilles and the tortoise . It is a simple

eno u g h pro blem, if w e loo k at the distance be-

tween Achilles and the tor toise as a whole, but



RELATIVITY 1 5 1

the minute we try to g et at it thro ug h an infinite

series, we are in tro uble because that is an in-

finite series of par ts, and involves this very thing

I have been talking about-our intellectual

m etho d o f c u t t i ng thi n g s u p , o f m a k i ng u p a

whole fro m an agg regatio n of its parts . Thewhole is an entity in itself, and because of its

integr ation, it emerges on a higher level . The

whol e is mor e than the sum of its par ts ; i t i s

i t s e l f ; it cannot be di vid ed into p arts in that

sense. If we really g et that viewpo int it so lves

a number o f ou r o ld pr oblems, philo sophical and

s c i e n t i f ic . I d o no t know ju st how I can make

this plain and yet it is, in my view, su pr emely

impo rtant . If we take this tr ue infinite series

a s a w h o l e we transcend it easily just as Achilles,

fro m a pr actical standpo int, transcends it and

catches the tortoise in a definite time . Ever y

infinite series is of like nature and is reached

thro u g h the same method . That is the one w ay

we think of i nfinity . It is a negative pr ocess and

we appr oach it thro ug h a seri es . We think a dis-

tance in sp ace, fo r example, and then, o f the

d istance beyo nd that . Thinki n g i n this w ay,

w hich is the method o f a seri es, we can never

reach the end . Yet the universe is a w hole thing .

It must be, in the nature of the case, and God 's

tho u g ht tr anscend s it because He deals w ith it

as a whol e .

Einstein has su g g ested mathematicall y what

this w hole is . As I say, w e cannot think o f it

thro u gh the intellectual appr oach of an infinite

series . We can onl y app r o ach it mathematical-



1 52 INVADING THE INVISIBLEly . Nevertheless I am convinced that relativity

has made a new d evelo pment and a new d epart-

u re in scientific pro gr ess as great, perhaps, as

that of C op ernicus o r Newto n .

That w e may even appr o ach a comp r ehensio n

o f Einstein it i s necessary to clear the gr ou nd of

o ne or two misconceptio ns . First, as to the ether

of space . I t has been sai d by some that Mr .

Einstein rejected the theory of an ether and that

the Michelso n-Mor ley experiment d ispr o ved its

existence . Neither statement is tr ue . The facts

ar e these : The Michelson- Mo r ley experi ment

seemed to d isp r o ve a statio nary ether , bu t was

harmo nio u s w ith the theor y o f an ether stream

movi ng w ith the earth, such as was advo cated

by Descartes and Lord Kelvin and which wehave alr eady fou nd to be necessary .

As fo r Einstein, he ignor ed the ether theo ry

in his special r elativity treatise but ap pr oved it

in his later general relativity hypothesis, as he

did also, at least by implication, in his still more

r ecent paper o n fields of fo rce, in w hich he iden-

tifi es electri cal ener g y with energ y generally .

The conception o f a field o f force is impossible in

empty space. There must be a substance o r me-

diu m in which the field of force manifests .

This view is pr o ved cor r ect by ano ther con-

sideration . Mr. Einstein speaks of a cu r vatur eof space and pro ves that there is a slight curva-

tur e of lig ht rays in a gravitational field . Nowspace, as has already been po inted o ut, is an ab-

straction and i s in that aspect unr eal . There

cou ld not be a curved abstraction . Su ch a ter m



RELATIVITY 1 5 3

has no meaning . What actually exists is sp ace

and its co ntents whatever these may be . Tosuppo se a curvatur e of empty space is to sup -

po se a cur vatur e of nothing, fo r that is exactly

what empty space w o ul d be . Thus w e find that

Einstein's cu r vatur e o f space amou nts to this-

a cur vature in the contents of space, in the ple-

n um, which wo ul d be a vo r tex in the ether . This

pr o ves the vor tex theory valid fr om another ap-

p r o a ch .

We have d i sc o vere d f r o m va r i o u s c on s i de ra -

tio ns that an empty vo id is u nthinkable and im-

po ssible . What exists is the universe, continu -

ou s and r elated i n all its parts . The o nly r eason

the human mind ever enter tained su ch an er r o r

tho u ght as empty space is d ue, fir st, to its meth-

o d o f abstraction and, second , to the fact that

the ether o f space is invi sible and u ndi scoverable

by any of o ur senses. Mr. Einstein's famou s cur -vatur e of space, and especially that for m of i t

which he invokes to explain gravitation, resolves

itself into a vor tex in the content of space ; and

the "w arp" o r d istor tio n of space by w hich he

accou nts for gr avity is only a special vor tex or

tension in a g ravitational field, w hich is not only

in accor d w ith the vor tex theo r ies of Descartes

an d Lo r d Kelv in but ha rm on izes w ith a ll the

know n facts of the stellar universe .

One of the most r eadable books on this su bject

is by Char les No r d man, astro nomer o f the Pari s

Obser vator y .* P r o f . No r d man go es into this

*Einstein and the Univer se b y Charles Nordman . Trans . by JosephMcCabe . Henry Holt & Co. , New York .



1 5 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEmatter so l uci d ly that I am quo ting him at some

length . He says

The phenomenon o f s t e l l a r aberr atio n pro ves that the

medi um w hich transmits the lig ht of the stars to o ur eyes

d oes not share the mo tio n of the earth as it revo lves

ro und the sun. This medi um is kno wn to physicists as

ether . Lo r d Kel v i n, wh o w as hon o re d by bein g bu r ie d i nWestminster Abbey not far from the tomb of Newton,ri ghtly r egar d ed the existence o f interstellar ether as

pr o ved as fu lly as the existence of the air we breathe ;

for wi thou t this mediu m the heat of the sun, mo ther and

nur se of all terrestrial life, wou ld never r each us .

In the history of S pe c i a l R e l a t i v it y , Einstein, as we saw ,

interp rets phenomena without i ntro d u cing the ether, or

at least withou t intro du cing the kinematic pr op erties

which are usually attributed to it . In o ther w or ds, Special

Relativi ty neither confir ms nor denies the existence of the

classic ether . It ig nores it .

But this ind ifference to o r di sdain o f the ether di sap-

pears in the theor y of General Relativity . We saw in aprevio us chapter that the trajector ies of g ravitating bod ies

and o f lig ht are d irectly du e, on this theory, to a special

cur vature and the non-Euclidean character of the mediu m

which lies close to massive bodi es in the void -that is to

say, ether. This, therefo re, tho u gh Einstein d oes not g ive

it the same kinematic properties as classic science di d, be-

comes the substr atum o f all the events in the univer se . I t

resu mes its impo r tance, its objective reality . It is the

continuo us medi u m in which spati otempor al facts evolve .

Hence in its g eneral for m, and in sp ite of the new kine-

matic attitud e which is ascribed to i t, Einstein's general

theory admits the objective existence of ether .

Stellar aberr atio n show s that this mediu m is statio nary

relative to the or bital mo tion o f the earth . The negati ve

result of Michelson's experiment tends, o n the contrar y,

to p rove that it shares the earth's motio n . The Fitzgerald -

Lor entz hpyothesis solves this antinomy by admitting that

the ether d oes no t really share the earth's motio n, but

saying that all bod ies sud denly displ aced i n it are con-

tracted in the dir ectio n of the movement . This contr ac-



RELATIVITY 155

ti o n incr eases with velocity in the ether, which explains

the negati ve resul t of the Michelso n experiment .

Lor entz's explanation seemed to Einstein inadmissible

on accou nt of certain imp r obabilities which we pointed

o u t, and especially because it assu mes that there is in

the universe a system o f pr ivileged references which re-

calls Newto n's "absolu te space ." Einstein taking his stand

on the principle that all po ints of view are equally relative,

do es not admit that there are in the universe pr ivileged

spectator s-- spectator s who ar e stationar y in the ether-

who cou ld see things as they are, whereas these things

wo uld be defor med fo r every o ther observer .

Then, w hile preservi ng the Lor entz contr actio n and the

for mulae in which it is expressed, Einstein says that this

contraction, while it really exists, is only an appearance, a

sor t of o ptical illu sion, d ue to the fact that the light

w hich show s us objects do es not tr avel instantaneo usl y,

but w ith a finite velocity. This spread o f li g ht foll o ws

laws o f such a nature that appar ent space and time are

changed in p recise accor dance with the for mulae of Lor -

entz. This is the fo und atio n of Einstein's Special Rela-

tivity .

Hence the two immedi ate possible explanatio ns of the

negative resul t o f the Michelso n experiment are :

1 . Moving objects are contracted in the stationary

ether, the fixed substratum o f all p henomena . This con-

traction is r eal, and it increases with the velocity o f the

body r elatively to the ether . That is Lor entz's explana -

tion .

2 . Movi ng o bjects are contracted relatively to any o b-

server whatso ever . This contractio n is only app arent, and

is du e to the laws of the pro pagation of lig ht. It increases

wi th the velo city of the moving bod y relatively to the ob-

server. That is Einstein's explanatio n .

But there is at least one other p ossible explanatio n . It

intr od uces new and strang e hypo theses, but they are by

no means absur d . Indeed, it is especially in physics that

truth may at times seem improbable. This explana tio n

wi ll show how we may accou nt for the resul t of the Michel-

son experiment apart fr om either Lor entz or Einstein .

This third explanator y hypo thesis is as fo llo ws . Everymateri al body bears alo ng w ith it, as a sor t of atmos-



156 INVADING THE INVISIBLEphere, the ether that is bou nd u p w ith it . There i s , i n

add itio n, a stationary ether in the interstellar spaces ; an

ether i nsensible to the motio n o f the material bod ies that

move it, and which we may, to d istingu ish it fro m the

ether bou nd u p w ith bod ies, call the "su per- ether ." This

sup er- ether occu pies the w hole of the interstellar sp ace,

and near the heavenly bodi es it is superimp osed u po n the

ether w hich they bear al o ng . The ether an d the su per -

ether i nterp enetrate each other ju st as they penetrate

matter, and the vibrations they transmit spr ead independ-

ently . When a mater ial bod y sends o ut seri es of w aves

in the ether w hich sur ro und s it, these mo ve relatively to

it w ith the constant velocity of lig ht . But when theyhave traver sed the relativ ely thin str atum o f ether bou nd

up wi th the material bod y, which merges gr adu ally in the

super-ether, they spread in the latter, and i t is relatively

to this that they pr og ressively take their velocity .

It i s like a boat cr ossi ng the Lake of Geneva at a cer-

tain sp eed . Abo u t the mid d le of the lake it has this

speed relatively to the narr ow cur rent which the River

Rhone makes there, and then it r esumes it r elatively to

the stationar y lake .

In the same w ay the lumino us r ays of the stars, al-

thou gh they come fro m bod ies which are appro aching or

r eced ing fr o m us, have the same velo city when they reach

u s, and this wi ll be the commo n velocity w hich the sup er-

ether imp oses up on them . Thus, also , on the other hand,

the stellar rays that reach our telescope w ill be transmit-

ted to us by the super- ether, wi thou t the very thin stra-

t um o f mobile ether bound up wi th the earth being able

to d istur b their pro pagation .

These hypo theses explai n and r econci le all the facts :

(1) the fact of stellar aberratio n, because the rays w hich

reach us fr om the stars ar e transmitted to u s unaltered by

the sup er- ether ; (2) the negati ve resul t of the Michelson

exper iment, because the lig ht which we pr od u ce in the

labor ator y travels in the ether that is bor ne alo ng by

the earth, where it o ri gi nates ; (3) the fact that, in spite

of the app ro ach or recession o f the stars, their li g ht

r eaches u s wi th the common velo city w hich it had ac-

qui red i n the super-ether, shortly after it started .

Prof. Nordman speaks of the earth carrying



RELATIVITY 1 5 7

the ether str eam when as a matter of fact it is

pr obably the ether str eam that carries the earth .

He also confi r ms the conjectur e that there is

mor e than one ether, o r rather d iffer ent states of

one ether .

It w ill be noted that not o nly is motion rela-

tive but space also . The space measu r ements ar e

sho r tened in the d ir ectio n of mo vement . Theamo unt o f the shor tening is neglig ible for all

o r di nary speeds but increases w ith their accel-

eratio n and w o u ld become absol u te if the speed

of light were attained, in the same way that mass

wo ul d become infinite und er like cond itio ns. Toa person traveling o n a planet, let us say, this

shortening w ould not be observed, because every-

thing wo ul d change in exact ratio includ ing his

foot- ru le and vision . To make plain Mr. Nor d -man's allusio ns to the d iffer ences between Lor -

entz and Einstein on this subject, it shou ld be

said that Lo r entz co ntend s that the shor tening

is absolu te, while to Einstein it is only appar ent,

that is, it is shor tened compared to another sys-

tem moving in an op po site dir ection and there-

for e having a d ifferent frame of reference .

It i s not o nly space- valu es that change thu s

but time-va l u es a lso - n o t on ly f o o t - r u les but

clocks . If a tr aveler attains a speed appr o ach-

ing that of lig ht his time is very different fro m

that of o ne remaining relatively stationary, and

if this speed actually reaches that of li ght, time

becomes static or stands still . The velocity of

lig ht, which is the velocity of waves in the free

ether, thu s is no t only the ultimate velocity, but



1 5 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEi s a factor in the curvatur e of the uni verse,

w hose di mensio nal fr ame is the space- time con-

tinuum. To amplify this statement it is evidentthat the speed of li ght is the frequency rate in

the free ether of i nter - stellar space and that the

three factor s in o ur equatio n to determine the

cur ve are space, time and this velocity .

To illu strate the relativity of time, some fami-

li ar examples may be cited, su ch as dr eams in

which long episodes are experienced by the

d r eamer in the instant betw een sleepin g and

waking; the recalli ng o f the memo r ies of a li fe-

time in moments preceding or threateningd eath ; the feats of mathematical pr o d ig ies who

see their whole pr oblem in one act, and o f chess

players w ho visu alize their entir e game in the

same fashio n ; o r Mozart's well-know n statement

that a sympho ny came into his mind as a whol e

with no time-interval or sequence .

A yet better example is the life of so me insects

which lasts for a few days or at best a season .

Yet so rapi d ly d o these minu te fo r ms act that

appar ently their time-valu e is on an entir ely d if-

ferent basis from o ur ow n, so that it is possible

their lives seem as long to them as ou rs d o to u s .

Kant mad e time and sp ace su bjective . Theywe re o u r a priori or necessary frame for percep-

tion and thou ght .

To Leibnitz space was merely the or der o f co -

existences while time w as the or d er o f su cces-

sions . Bo th w ere relative . Einstein confir ms

these id ealisti c views but d o es it as a mathe-

matical physicist . In fact Einstein's entir e theo-



RELATIVITY 1 59

r y is a confir mation of the ol der i dealism . Onthis po int H . Wild o n Carr * of the University of

Lond on says

It seems to me, therefore, that the principle of relativity

is a philosop hical pri nciple which is not o nly called for

by the need o f mathematical and physical science for

gr eater pr ecisio n in the new field of electro -magnetic theo-

ry in w hich it is continu ally advancing, but is d estined to

g i ve us a new w o r l d - v ie w . It will be fou nd, as it has al-

ways been fo und , that the po ets with their mythical inter-

pr etatio ns, and the philo sop hers w ith their speculative

hypo theses, have led the way in this new ad vance. Thecontinuity o f the universe can only be a continu ity o f

consciou sness, and the mod e of this continu ity is imagin-

atively pr esented to u s in the ol d eastern myth of the

t ransmi g r at i on o f the s o u l an d (may we n ot al s o say? )

in the Chr istian mystery o f the Incarnatio n .

I co nclud e, then, that in every reflection o n ou r actu al

experience we are d i r ectly consciou s of an objectivity

which we disting ui sh fro m ou r su bjective activity ofknowing. Whether w e appr o ach the pr o blem of that ob-jectivity fro m the abstract standpo int o f physical science

or fro m the concrete standpo int of philo sophy, the result

is the same. Ultimately, in spite o f its claim to ind e-

pendence, all that an object or event is in substance or i n

for m, it derives from the activity of the life or mind fo rwhich alone it possesses the meaning which makes itan object or event. This is no t a mystical do ctri ne,

nor ' is it esoteric . If we adopt in mathematics andphysics the principle of relativity (and have we any

choi ce?) the obstinate, r esistant fo r m o f the objectivity

o f the phys i cal w o r l d d i s s o l ves to thin ai r an d d i s ap -

pears . Space and time, its rigid framework, sink toshadow s . Co ncrete fou r- di mensio nal space-time becomes

a system of wo rld -l ines, infinitely deformable . And thesewo rld -li nes, do no t they at last bri ng u s in sight of an ir-

red uci ble minimum o f self-su bsistent objectivity? No .

The wo rl d- lines are not things- in-themselves, they are only

an expressi on fo r w hat is or may become common to d if -

ferent observers i n the r elations between their stand -

* The General Principle of R e l a t i v i t y b y H . W i l d o n O a r r . Macmillan .



160 INVADING THE INVISIBLEpoints . Carr ied to its log ical conclusion the principle of

relativity leaves us wi thout the image or the concept o f

a pu re o bjectivity . The u ltimate reality o f the universe,

as philosophy appr ehends it, is the activity w hich is mani-

fested in life and mind, and the objectivity of the universe

is not a d ead core serving as the substratum o f this activi-

ty, but the perception- actions of infinite indi vid ual crea-

tive centres in mutual relation .

A closing il lu stratio n wil l perhaps serve better than ar-

gu ment to bring home to the reader the philo sophical

meaning o f the principle. On a frosty morning we maysee the w atery vapo u r i n the air w e breathe cond ense into

a small clou d and then rapi dl y disappear, r eabsor bed i nto

the atmo spher e . Imagine that at such a moment wesho u l d un d er g o a s u d d en t ransf o r mati on of al l o u r p r o -

po rtio ns so that our new d imensio ns become infinitesimal

in comparison w ith our p resent state . Would it appearto u s that we ou rselves had changed? The pr incip le of

relativ ity declar es that the change cou ld no t possi bly be

experi enced by us as chang e in ou rselves because wi th

the alteration in p ro por tions the ratios r emain constant .

The change wo uld expr ess itself in the new d imensio ns of

objects . The little globules of water which composed

the clou d w ou l d no w appear as stars and planets at im-

mense distances from one - another, u nderg oing a slow

age-lo ng evolu tion and obeying the law o f the inverse

square. The change would be a new space and a newtime .

Thus the new d iscoveries in science are pro v-

ing the id eali stic philo so phies whether these

or ig inated in Hindo o intuitio n or wi th Plato,

Her mes, Leibnitz o r Berkeley . It i s only the

mater iali stic p hilo so phies that have been ex-

plo ded, and that once and fo rever .

Another phase of the relativity theory is that

the universe is fou r - di mensional and that there

are not static things in a static space, but that

there are movi ng events in a space-time conti-nuum ; that there is nothing at r est, but that



RELATIVITY 1 6 1

ever ything is mo ving relatively to ever ything

else .

There is no straig ht line in natur e . We getou r idea of a straight line fro m a ray of lig ht,

but a ray of lig ht has been proved to cu rve in a

gr avitational field . We also d eri ve ou r id ea of a

straight line from our eye in what we call

"sig hting," w hich is o nly ano ther for m of the

light ray. Our id ea of rest arises fro m the fact

that we sometimes move at the same rate as ou r

envir o nment, also fr o m the coar seness of o u r

visio n which do es not r eveal the motio n of elec-

tro ns, atoms, etc .

Mo tio n may be r apid eno u g h to g ive the sense

of solidity . F o r example, we may fall s w i f t ly

and strike the su rface of a bod y of w ater wi th

sufficient for ce to make it seem solid , or in hy-

d r a u l i c m in in g, a str eam may be hu r le d w ith

such velocity that one cannot cu t it with an axe ;

or , again, a soft candl e or a frag ile straw may be

shot i nto o r even thro u gh a boar d .

We d o n ot kn o w matter but o n ly o u r i dea of

i t ; w e do not even sense matter but sense ou r

neu r al r eactio ns to certain fr equencies and

energy resistances . What w e call matter i s an

abstractio n der ived fr o m these sense r eactio ns

and massed app ear ances . All these thing s ar e

relative to u s, the behold ers . A d ifferently o r -

g anized being, o r o ne w ith a d ifferent frame of

refer ence wo u ld beho ld di fferent phenomena .

Our id ea of infinity is also r elative. There i s

no space- line or time-li ne as such but a line in a

space-time continuu m that if follo wed to its ul-



RELATIVITY 16 3

We have now cleared the gr o u n d fo r what is

to follow

The uni verse, or cosmos, i s a clo sed system

w hich is self- sustaining and self- renew ing . I t

kno w s itself which is pr o ved by the fact that

man kn o w s it . Man is only a part of it and the

part cannot be gr eater than the whole . Man only

know s it in part, but the universe, being w ho le

and complete in itself, must know itself wholly

and completely .

Finally, the universe know s itself as mind,

w hich is p r o ved by the fact that only mi nd canknow. We have alr ead y d emonstr ated that theuniverse know s because man know s and no w w e

d emo nstrate that it must kno w itself as mind .

Therefor e, if man knew the u niverse who lly and

completely, he w ou ld know it as mind . Manonly thinks of it as matter because his ideas are

confu sed and i ncomplete . In other w o r d s , man

is in p r ocess and as fast as he evolves o r expand s

he finds his universe evol vin g and expand in g

w ith him . The goal of this pr og ress is complete

spir itual realizatio n .



CHAPTER IXPSYCHICAL RESEARCH

Herber t Spencer, in his F i r s t Principl es, said

in effect that any id ea that has been held by

larg e numbers of people over a considerable pe-

ri od of time must contain some reality, and this

is especially tru e if it is p erennial and well-nig h

universal .

Psychic p henomena co me und er that descrip -

tion . The follo wers of practically all relig io ns

in the histor y of the w or ld , and, p resumably,

even before the dawn o f histor y, as well as most

philo sop her s, have believed in i mmor tality .

Among civilized and even pr imitive peoples, it

is safe to say that ninety-five per cent have held

to so me fo rm o f this belief . Not onl y so but there

have been pheno mena thro u g hou t the ag es that

sug gested so me such inter pr etation . Only w ith-

in r ecent times, however, has there been any at-

tempt to make a scientific stud y of these pheno-

mena. In ancient d ays there g r ew u p w hat wer ecalled the occult sciences, but in those days near-

ly every science was occult . Chemistr y w as then

alchemy ; astro nomy was astrolo gy ; even mathe-

* "And thus it i s wi th human beliefs in general . Entirely wrong asthey may appear, the implication is that they germinated out of actual

experience-originally contained, and perhaps still contain, some smallamount of verity. More especially may we safely assume this, in thecase of beliefs that have long existed and ar e wid ely diffu sed, and most

of all so , in the case of beliefs that are perennial and nearly o r qu ite

universal." Herbert Spencer-First Principles .

164



PSYCHICAL RESEARCH 1 6 5

matics was lo o ked at a bit askance, and psychic

pheno mena natur ally had abo u t the same scien-

tific standing in those times as the other "o c-

cult" sciences .

What I mig ht call a systematized effor t to in-

vestigate this subject pr obably began with Eman-

u el Sw ed enbor g , who , himself, was a scientist .

He spent the first fifty years o f his life in varied

activities ; as a metallu rgist, and as a scientist in

other kind red lines, and w as a man of note in

that field. Not o nly so, but he was in cou rt cir -

cles and an adviso r, to so me extent, to the King .

It w as only at the advanced age of nearly sixty

years that Swedenbo r g had an ,aw akening o f his

spiritu al natur e. He lived to be nearl y eighty,

and d ur ing the last twenty years o f his life de-

vo ted himself almost w ho lly to- we cannot call

it exactly a scientific investiag tio n of this sub-

ject because it w ent beyo n d that- to w hat he

termed revelatio ns on the psychic and spi r itu al

pl ane . So larg e a stir d id he make in the wor ld

that he attracted the attentio n o f I mmanu al

Kant, w ho w r ote o ne brief treatise concer ning

him, and I am tol d he also attracted the atten-

tio n of Hegel, the g reatest philo sop her o f that

ag e .

The fir st bo o k to w hich I call attentio n-and

it preceded the Fox Sisters and the rise of what

is known as modern Spiritualism-is that of

Rober t Dale Ow en . In fact, he w r o te mor e than

one boo k, but one especially I have read, Foo t-

falls on the Bowndaries o f Another World, in

w hich he r eco u nts the experi ences o r , r ather,



1 6 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLEpsychic pheno mena that w ere not at that time

susceptible to scientific investigation, yet he gath-

ered the facts as carefully as he could and threw

abou t them as much of the scientific atmosphere

and safegu ard s as it was possible to do und er

the cir cu mstances . These inci d ents concer ned

appari tio ns and p sychic experiences of vario us

w ell- know n peop le that wer e authenticated and

were generally o f wi despread noto ri ety, at least

in the sections of the world in which they occur -

r ed , and so me o f them w er e inter nationally

knownI have already mentioned that this seri es of

lessons concerns modern scientific develo pments,

especially su ch develo pments as have a bear ing

o n philo sop hy, and p sychic pheno mena cer tainly

have a ver y inti mate beari ng o n this su bject .

The scientific i nvestig atio n o f su ch phenomena

has go ne on now fo r mo re than fifty years, start-

ing in Engl and and spreading to the continent,

to Fr ance, Germany, Italy, and o ther cou ntri es

in Eur o pe and to the United States . These in-

vestig atio ns have been carr ied o n by men that

w er e w id ely know n in other fi elds o f science,

u nder the most ri g id cond itio ns and subjected

to the same tests to w hich other scientifi c inves-

tig ations ar e co mmonly subjected .

I am not attempting to g ive any larg e num-

ber of instances. For this I refer the reader to

the annals of the Society fo r Psychical Research

in Eng land , in Ameri ca, and o n the co ntinent,

and to boo ks giving d ig ests of su ch investiga-

tions . There is a lar ge literatu re on the subject .




May I say in connection w ith Spi ri tuali sm it-

self that none of these investig ator s was, in the

beg inning , a Spi r itu alist in the commo n accep-

tation o f that ter m . Practically ever y one of

them was a skeptic and almost w ithou t excep-

tio n he was converted befo re the end of his re-

searches . Unqu estio nably there was frau d , a

gr eat deal of fr aud , in connectio n with Spir itual-

ism . I, myself, years ago , was prejud iced against

this whole subject as a result of attending a few

seances in my you th, most o f w hich, I w as con-

vinced then and am co nvinced now , contain ele-

ments of fr a ud . That is not sur pr ising, how-

ever, in so obscu re a subject where the tempta-

tio ns tow ard chicaner y wer e so evid ent as they

w ere, and are, in p sychic p henomena . F o r ex-

ample, a medium might have genuine psychic

po wer, but this do es not come on command . It

is not always pr esent ; it is a rare thing, and

since these med iu ms, unfo r tu nately, w ent into

this as a matter of busi ness and since the phe-

nomena w ere not alw ays, for thcomi ng, the temp-

tatio n to simulate them was o bvio us .

I call attentio n to o ne fact, ho w ever , that

there is never a cou nter feit u nless there is a

g enuine co in . In the fir st place, there is no in-

centive to make a counterfeit if it is to have no

value, and, second, if there is no g enuine, there

is no model the counterfeiter can imitate .

So much inter est w as aro used by tho se early

Spiritualistic phenomena that first one scientist

and then another w as challeng ed . Here was anew set of facts, and the pro vince of science is



1 6 8 INVADING THE INVISIBLEto i nvesti gate facts . Finally a society wasfor med of some of the leading scientists of Eng-

land . Among them were the two Balfours and

many mor e of almo st equal fame . One was acler g yman o f the C hu r ch of England w ho had

been very o r th o d o x . His name was StaintonMoses and he, through a long series of years, ob-

tained tru ly r emarkable results . Another wasSir Will iam Cr o o kes whose investig ations An

other fields o f science had attracted the atten-

tion of the wo rl d and w ho g ot r esults equally

r emarkable, not o nly in p hysical p henomena,

such as movement of o bjects withou t contact, or

withou t sufficient contact to effect the results

by physical means, but also a celebrated case of

alleged materialization .

Some of the most impo rtant scientists of mo d -

ern ti mes have d ealt wi th psychi c pheno mena

and, almost w ithou t exceptio n, they appr o ached

it in a skeptical, if no t a hostile, frame of mind

and also, almost w ithou t exceptio n, were co n-

verted . Many names mig ht be menti o ned . Su ch

men as Sir Oliver Lo d ge, Sir Will iam F . Bar-

r ett, Camille Flammar io n, Cesar e Lo mbr o so,

Van Schrenck- No tzing , and o ther German scien-

tists of almo st equal standing ; Richard H . Hod g-

son and Will iam James, w ho w as interested but

who never to ok so pr on o unced a stand as per-

haps so me of the o ther s, w hich statement also

appli es to Henri Ber gso n, the prince of philo s-

op hers . Ano ther w as J. H . Hyslop w ho w as pr o-

fessor of psycholo gy i n Co lumbia University and

a man of hig h standing in the scientific wo r ld .




In o ther fields o f hu man tho u g ht w er e names

a lmost equa lly ill u st r i o u s - Willia m T. Stead,

the British jou rnalist, Editor of the Lond on Re-

view o f Reviews ; Pro f. Alfr ed Russell Wallace,

co-d iscoverer o f evolutio n ; Sir Arthur ConanDoyle, one of the greatest novelists and writers

o f his d ay, and many mor e .

Of cou rse, no theory and no system of philo so-

phy is p r o ved by the character o f the men w ho

espouse it .and yet this array is impressive . I t

is all the mo r e impr essive to me since I have

stud ied w ith co nsiderable care their w or k and

w hat led them to their conclu sio ns . Ther e are

several develo pments in this field that I cannot

g o i nto in this brief review . The conclu sio n

fro m all of it is still more difficult to state . Tomy mind it verifies what I alr eady believed, and

what I therefor e was predisposed to believe, the

immor tality of the individu al soul . I d o believe

that most tho ro ug hly, bu t I believed it befor e .

I think I had no t r eached, how ever , the intel-

lectual assent to it that I have arr ived at now .

Intellectually, I was not alw ays sur e, but I can

say now w ith my whol e mind I believe . As to

t o the m o d e I am not s o , s u r e. We have ourfamiliar concepts of Heaven, among w hich are

that of g o ld en streets, angels that are constru ct-

ed something o n the plan of bir ds- ju st why, I

do not know-playing upon harps. Accordingto that theory peop le who cou ld not play a Jew's

har p here beco me perfo r mer s befo r e Go d and all

the hierarchy o f the angelic hosts, which wo u ld

be a most d isting u ished aud ience, come to think




One thing seems fair ly su re : There is an ethe-

r eal bod y as well as a mater ial bod y . That i s

called by different names, in d ifferent systems .

St. Paul called it a spir itual body, the Theoso-

phists speak of an astral bo dy, althou gh they

also posit several di fferent bod ies, or shall we say

states? An etheri c bod y is necessary fr o m va-

ri ou s standpo ints and fits in wi th some of the

o ther d isco veries we have made . It gives a nex-

u s between mind and matter, a contact po int, if

you please . In actual l abo rator y experiments it

has been disco vered that tho u g ht creates fo r ms

in mater ial called ectop lasm . I am talkingabou t labor ator y exper iments, especially con-

du cted in France and o n the continent . It has

been d iscovered in these that tho ug ht for ms are

created . This g ives us a clue not o nly to the

bu i l d in g o f the embry o f r o m the i dea o r the

tho u ght for ce that shapes it, but su g gests a meth-

o d of healing by means of the etheric bod y . As-

sert the superior ity of the etheric body over the

material and l et its perfection shine thr ou g h .

This i s the permanent bo d y- the hou se no t made

w ith hands . It i s here that mind , not o nly is

creative, but mind is permanently incarnated .

No w l et u s retur n to psychic phenomena . I n

this co nnection I want to cite certain instances

that I r emember o u t of this w hole mass o f evi-

d ence and to g iv e these fr o m scientists that

w ere unbelievers .

First, I refer to Pro f . Theodo re Flou rno y, a

psycholog ist of wo rld -w ide repute, a follower o f

William James, and a native of Sw itzer land .



1 7 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEFlou r noy d evelo ped o ne o f the most remarkable

med iu ms the wo r ld has ever seen . He called her

Mademoi selle Smith . She not o nly was a w o n -

der ful med iu m but her r esu lts covered both com-

m unicatio ns fro m the dead and memor y of pr e-

viou s incarnations ; and so me o f her phenomena

concerned, or seemed to concern, another planet .Mr. Flou rnoy was as admirable a repo rter as she

was a med iu m, and while he did not believe that

these were actual communications from thedead, o r actual memor ies, or actual interp lanet-

ary tr ansmissio n of i ntelli g ence, he w as frank

eno u g h to say that so me of the phenomena he

cou ld not explain, on his theor y o r any other .

His theor y was a d r amatizatio n by the su bco n-

sciou s of the medi um ; that is, the very fact of

her d evel o pm in g med i u m ship w a s a su g gest i on

to her subconsciou s to bri ng fo rth communica-

tions, and so fo rth .

As to these communicatio ns, there is at least

one to w hich I direct especial attention . It w as

from two Frenchmen, one of whom had been a

magistr ate in o ne of the smaller pr o vinces in

France to which province the medium, Made-

moi selle Smith, so- called, had never g o ne, nor

had Mr. Flou r noy, nor anybo d y co nnected w iththe gr o u p . These co mmunicator s, w hile they

w er e know n locally, w er e not know n beyond the

pro vince . One of them gav e his name, and said

he had been a magistr ate o r some minor o fficial

of similar du ties in that pro vince . He o ffered

other facts w hich were afterw ard s verified . Acommunication fr om a fr iend of his bor e this




o ut and the id entity of this fr iend was also veri -

f i e d . Mr. Flou rno y, very fr ankly, after g iving

this accou nt, said he cou ld not explain i t .

As to the memor ies, this Mademoi selle Smith,

in her pr evio u s incarnatio n, claimed to have

been Marie Antoinette and not only did she

assu me the char acter and show ed so me o f the

manner isms, so far as cou ld be di scovered, of

the character, but knew people Mari e Antoi nette

had unquestionably known . Back o f that she

went to another incarnation i n Indi a . She wasthe wife of a certain small r eig ning p ri nce in o ne

of the Hindu pr ovinces, and there was a verifica-

tion of that also . This place w as finally fo u nd

after months of searching . The language was

similar and the incidents, so far as they can be

deter mined , had o ccur r ed very much as she re-

membered them or clai med to have r emember ed

them.Concerning her communications from theplanet Mars- this boo k is called From Indi a to

the Planet Mars, there is no way in whichscience or any o rd inary human investigation can

ver i f y o r r ef ute s uch c omm un icat i on s, s o we

shall have to leave them ou t of o u r account .

The second w itness I am go ing to call is also

adverse, and that is Thomson J . Hud son, o ne o f

the best known psycholo gical wr iters of America .

P r o f . Hu d son w r o te a bo o k in w hich he advanced

the gr ou nds o n w hich he believed in immor tali-

ty . First, he .di scovered the pow ers of the sub-

conscio u s mind, and w ro te several bo oks o n that

subject, among w hich his best known is The Law



17 4 INVADING THE INVISIBLEo f Psychic Phenomena . He d isc o vere d p o we rs

in the subconscio us mind, su ch as perfect memo-

r y and perfect dedu ctive reasoning. We do notd e pen d o n o u r s u bco n s c i o u s m em o r y - n o t o f t en

-i n common everyd ay affairs ; w e d o no t need

to do so .

No w , he said , there is never a faculty o r an

o r g an develo ped that d o es not have some use,

either past, present, or pr ospective, and that if

there is a perf ect memor y in the subconscio u s-

w hich is not do u bted no w by any psycho lo g ist-

that perfect memor y must have some u se no w , o r

after a while. He cou ld not d iscover any such

use for it in this life, and that to him was pr oo f

that there mu st be ano ther li fe in w hich that

perfect memory-that perfect subconsciou s

memor y-w ill be of u tility .

He also believed thor o u ghly in telepathy. Hewas a scientist and to ok a rig id scientific atti-

tud e, and o ne o f the thing s he laid d ow n as a

pr imary pr inciple of science is that w e shoul d

never seek to expl ain a thing by remo te o r u n-

known causes when it could be explained by

r easons better kno w n-r easo ns that are simpl e .

In other wo rd s, we shou ld no t attempt to explain

pheno mena by commu nicatio ns or by the activi -

t ies of an o ther an d u n kn o w n w o r l d w hen they

mig ht be explai ned by the activi ties of this w o r ld

which is know n . Hu dson, as I say, believed in

telepathy . He gave vario us reasons for that be-

l i e f . He said that ju st as ther e must be a use

somewher e for the perfect memor y o f the sub-

conscio u s, so there must be a use for the pow er




to communicate wi tho ut physical means of co m-

m un icat i on . That is w hat telepathy amou nts to .

We d o not need telepathy in this life. We cantalk, write, make sig ns or , in these days, we can

telegraph, use the radio-we have abundantmeans of commu nicatio n withou t resor t to this

r ather o bscur e and u ncer tain metho d know n as

telepathy . Therefo r e, r easons Dr . Hud son, the

existence of telepathy sho w s that somew her e

there is a purp ose for it or it wo uld not have

been develo ped i n the or g anism ; and since there

is no u se in this life for it-no practical pur pose

-it must be used i n another life .Dr. Hud son, how ever, r ejected ou trig ht occultpsychic phenomena o r inter- commu nication be-

tween the dead and the living . Now, he left what

seems to me a w id e g ap in his reasoning , and I

want to po int that ou t . I have never seen it

poi nted ou t befor e . Therefo re, it seems neces-

sary and entirely ju stified to show exactly what

this gap is. Dr. Hu d so n said that he had r eadall about Spiritualism in his day-that was

pr obably fifty years ago - that he had r ead abou t

psychic pheno mena, and he was no t co nvinced

by the facts brought to his notice of any genuine

co mmuni catio n between the d ead and the li ving .

Yet he believed in immor tality, and believed in

it for the reasons I have cited, among others . He

also believed - and this was a necessary par t of

his whole theory, that telepathy is the method of

commu nicatio n between di scarnate entities- be-

tw een one d iscar nate entity and another . If

this is a faculty of o ur subconsciou s minds, like



1 78 INVADING THE INVISIBLEI think I sho ul d say in this co nnection that

one of the ways in which the skeptics have tried

to co mbat the theo r y of co mmuni catio n between

the dead and the living is to say that it is all

due to telepathy between the living, a po wer that

most of the do ubters never admitted at all until

d r iven to the necessity o f so me alternative by

the overw helming evidence piled u p in favor of

the commu nicatio n theo r y . If they wo uld in -

clu de telepathy between the dead and the living,

they w o u ld have a better case . Bu t ther e are

many pheno mena that telepathy between the li v-

ing alone will not explain . There ar e instances

cited by Rev . Mino t J . Savag e, another celeb-

r ated Amer ican, w ho became co nvinced by his

o w n researches along this li ne . Prof. Hyslo p

g ives a number o f cases that cou ld not be ex-

plai ned by telepathy, wher e no li ving perso n

pr esent knew o f the facts and in some instances

w her e no p erso n livi ng anywhere knew o f them .

I cannot remember all o f these incidents offhand

and I wo ul d not w eary the reader wi th them if I

cou ld - I am cover ing the g eneral subject .

May I also say that no less a man than Luther

Bu r bank, the plant wi zard , w as a believer in

telepathy and p ublished his experiences in this

connection bro a dcast in magazines and news-

papers thro u g hou t the cou ntry . He said the

members o f his family d epend ed o n this metho d

habitu ally to commu nicate w hen o ther means

w ere not avail able or even w hen they w ere and

that they had so tr ained themselves in this

method that they got sur e results .




Retur nin g to o u r i mmed iate subject of psy-

chical research : There are also a few o bjections

to the theor y of co mmunication between the dead

and the living that I think shou ld be mentioned .

In a s o cia l cl ub o ne d a y we ha d as a g u est,

Ho u di ni, and at that time he w as in a contro -

versy with the Spir itualists of the City of Wash-

ington . He was ful l o f his subject and o ffered

at this lu ncheo n, at which only the member s of

the C lu b w ere present, ten tho u sand d o llar s to

any psychical p henomenist, o r to anyo ne else

w ho w o u l d p r o d u ce a psychic phen omenon that

he cou ld not r epr od u ce by natur al means . Thato ffer, I u nder stand , has been repeated in so me

magazine by another man in Hou d ini' s same pr o -

fession, and i t was repeated by Hou di ni du ri ng

his lifetime on vari o us o ccasions . Now, such athing as that is rather staggering to the average

beli ever in p sychic pheno mena . It w as to me .

After I had had time to think it o ver, how ever,

and had co nsidered the remar kable things Ho u-

di ni had accomplished, I cou ld understand how

no o ne wo uld ri sk ten thou sand d ollars against

his r epr o d ucin g anything of any kin d i n that

spher e o r any o ther . Some of Hou di ni's feats

have never yet been expl ained, and fo r a mere

layman to g o "u p against" these things requir es

mo r e temer ity than the averag e layman po s-

sesses .

There are certain other consid eratio ns-e r -

tain other o bjections- that I think we sho ul d

take into consideratio n also . One is that mo st

o f these communications have slight valu e. They



1 8 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEare such as people on earth could not only repro-

duce, but in most cases in better for m, with mor e

evidences of a cultur al backgr ou nd, and o f mor e

innate wo rth . Yet we have to admit this : Manyo f them are ju st such co mmunications as w e

wo uld get fro m our fri ends as contacted in

every-d ay life, and o n the theor y that peop le

o ver there are like peop le here, perhaps the char-

acter of these communicatio ns in many instances

is mor e convincing than wo u ld be mor e poli shed

and better for mulated messages that wo ul d show

the result of midnig ht oil and of careful pr epara-

tion . I mentio n these o bjectio ns to g et the

whole subject before us .

Now , I am go in g to refer to one other co n -

sid eratio n that to me is fund amental . Whilether e have been cr o ss- r efer ences ; while there

have been evid ences o f id entity that w ere con-

vincing , and these in numberless instances, there

is so mething abou t the whol e su bject that im-

pr esses every investigator wi thout exceptio n, so

far as I have r ead and so far as I know in my

o wn experience, and that one facto r is the only

d o u btfu l thing i n my ow n mind at the pr esent

time . I cannot explain i t in any w ay except

this, that after death people are in a mor e sub-

jective state than they ar e here . That is o ne

conclusion . I !am deser tin g now the realm o f

fact for the realm of hypothesis ; I am trying to

explain this elusive factor. In connection w ith

it attention i s d ir ected to the later testimony

o f C o l . DeRochas and others regarding the"gaps" between the lives of hypnotized su bjects .



18 2 INVADING THE INVISIBLEwould not o nly live over the life he remembered,

but d o u btless var y it i n the ways that might

have been. He cou ld thu s wo r k over the mate-

rials left by the last earth life and extract fr om

them all their po ssible lessons and essence of

wi sdo m, which cou ld thu s be taken into the

thought textur e of the sou l as an immor tal herit-

ag e .

Another view I find shared by most investiga-

tors is that the subconsciou sness of the mediu m,

to some extent, go verns the co mmunicatio n. Inother words, we can get a communicationthro ug h an or ganism only such as it is p repared

to transmit . We are her e dealing, not w ith a

mer e mechanism, bu t w ith a thinki n g perso n,

u sing l angu age and co ncepts o n a cer tain level

of conscio usness . Obviously, we cannot getthrough such an organism, through such atho u g ht content, messages that very much tr an-

scend it .*

To return to ou r evidences : We co me next to

o ne o f the most r emarkable do cuments o n this

subject I have ever r ead . It is fr o m the pen ofWilliam T. Stead and is entitled, How I KnowThat the Dead Return . Mr. Stead, himself,was an automatic wr iter, and most o f his mess-

ages came through his own hand-not all ofthem. He g iv es here many instances of co mmu -

• By the very fact of co mmunicating, the communicator experiences apsychic di stur bance ; a fact which has been specially noted by Englishand American investigator s . In borrowing substance from the medium,the being takes on li mitations as it d oes at birth by taking o n a bod y

of the substance of his mother. By the fact of communication on thematerial plane he underg oes a kind o f relative and momentary r eincarna-

tion ; accompanied, as in nor mal reincarnation, by oblivion of his real

situation and by the suppr ession of the gr eater part o f his conscious ac-

quisitions. From the Unco nsci ou s to the C onsci ou s.-Geley .




nicatio n both from the living and the dead . The

communications fro m the living w er e verifiable .

In many instances the living subject was not con-

sciou s of the communication, and yet it related

to events in his o r her life that pr oved tru e . One

instance he gives of an especially intimate char-

acter . It w a s of a la dy wh o w a s on a ra il wa y

jo u rney in which she was subject to insu lt . She

decided to tell no bod y abou t it, but Mr . Stead

go t the whole story i n an au tomatic communica-

tion fro m this lady, g iving incidents, every o ne

of w hich w as veri fied w ith one trifl ing exceptio n .

She said she bro ke the man's u mbrella o ver his

head , and i t tur ned ou t to be her o wn u mbr ella .

With that one vari atio n, the cir cumstances were

veri fied in absolu te detail . He g ives o ther cases .

I mention this because it do vetails so perfectly

into this theor y of Thomson J . Hud son, of which

I have already spo ken this telepathic co mmuni-

cation betw een the living and the living - the

subconscio us minds o f these living p er sons and

the su bco nsciou s mind o f Mr . Stead w ho w ro te

it ou t withou t any conscious direction of his own

hand in do in g so . I w ant to get the scientific

sid e of this befo re us .

I n the same w ay, Stead r eceived co mmuni ca-

tio ns fro m the dead, o ne of which I r efer to in

detail. He had heard of spir it photo gr aphy, in

which he conceded there are all so rts o f o ppo r-

tunities for fraud . These are the cou nterfeits,

but he beli eved there are also so me genui ne cases .

One spi r it ph ot o g r a pher, w a s an o l d man w ho

w as almo st in p o verty because he had this me-



1 84 INVADING THE INVISIBLEd i u m ist ic p o we r and l e t it interfere with his

business and yet wou ld not tur n it to commer-

cial accou nt . Mr. Stead so u g ht ou t this pho-

tog rapher w ho said there was a very fierce-l oo k-

ing man, a beard ed man, w ho had come into the

stud io the day befor e brandi shing a gu n, until

the medium cried, "I don't want you around

here ; I do n't like gu ns." The appar iti on there-

u po n departed, but w hen Mr . Stead came in the

photographer said, "There is that same man

again, but he has not the gun this time ; he came

in with you ." Mr. Stead sat for his photo g raphand w hen the neg ative was d evelo ped, there was

this beard ed war ri or standing by his sid e, a man

he had never befo re seen. Stead sai d , "Ask him

his name . " The photographer did this inthou g ht, and the answer came "Piet Bo tha ." Mr .

Stead, w ho had kno w n vari o u s men by the name

o f Botha, had never heard o f Piet Botha . Hehad so me questio n abo ut the matter but kept the

photog raph, and fo r some years had no verifi-

catio n . Finally some Bo er p eo ple fro m So u th

Africa came to London and Mr. Stead show edone of them his photo g r aph . The man almostju mped o ut o f his seat . He said , "Where di d

you get that? I did not know you knew PietBotha." Mr. Stead said he di d not know him,

and told how this incident occur red . The man was

skeptical ; he wanted the real accou nt of it . Mr .

Stead to ld him that was the real accou nt . This

man departed in so me anger, but he referr ed the

matter to o thers o f his gr ou p w ho verifi ed the

occur rence in every particular . This was a pie-




tr u e of Pi et Bo tha that they had kno w n . Hewas one of the first commanders o f the Boers and

fell i n the Battle of Kimber ly ; his name w as

Pietru s Jo hannes Botha ; this was a pictur e of

him, but u n like any kn o wn p hot o g r a ph .

As a thir d instance, Mr . Stead had a steno g -

r apher o r secretary to, w hom he r efer r ed asE.M., and w ho was so p ecu lia r he thou g ht o fdi smissing her . Hi s w el l - k no w n c o r r e s p o n d e nt

fro m the other side was a wo man he called Julia,

and it happened that Julia was a friend ofE.M . She u sed Stead' s hand to w r ite "Do not

di scharg e E .M . ; she means well , and she wi ll

o nly be with you a year ; she is coming over

her e." Under the cir cu mstances, Mr . Stead r e-

tained her . Every few d ays Juli a wo ul d repeat,

in o ther co mmunicatio ns, "Please remember thatE.M. is coming over this year ." It happened inthe summer that E.M . had a very serio us acci-dent, and Stead thought this a fulfillment of the

pr o phecy, but Juli a wr o te, "No, she is not co m-

ing now. " E.M. r ecovered to the sur pr ise ofever yo ne, and several mo nths passed . The year

was almost up when E.M. fell i ll w ith pneumo -nia and Stead ag ain thought this the fulfillment

ment of pr op hecy, but once mo re Julia tol d him,

"No, she is coming not fr o m illness." Withintwo days of the end of the year, E.M . , i n a d e l i -

ri um, threw herself ou t of the wi n do w o f the

hospi tal and w as kill ed instantly . No w , this

do es not g o o n Mr . Stead's word alone . He called

the attentio n of his other secretari es to these

pr o phecies as they were mad e thr o u g h his hand ,




came to Minerva." I pr otested that the message was ab-

surd . My hand persi sted and said that her fr iend w ou l d

und erstand it I felt so chagr ined at the absur di ty of the

message that for a long time I refused to d eliver it. Whenat last I di d so her fr iend exclaimed, "Did she actually

wr ite that? Then it was Ju lia herself, and no mistake . "

"How ," I asked, bewildered, "cou ld you come to Minerva?"

"Oh," she rep l ied, " o f c o u r se, yo u d o n ' t kn o w anythin g

abou t that. Juli a shor tly befo re her d eath had besto wed

the pet name of Minerva u p o n Miss Willard , the fou nderof the Woman's Christian Temperance Union, and hadgi ven her a bro och w ith a cameo o f Minerv a . She never

afterw ard s called her anything but Minerva, and the mes-

sage which she wro te wi th you r hand w as substantially the

same that she gave to me on the last time w hen Minerva

and I came to bid her g oo d- by on her d eathbed . "

Her e again ther e was a slig ht mistake . Minerva hadcome to her instead o f Julia g oing to Minerva, but o ther-

wi se the message was co rr ect .

Mr . Stea d says he then p r o p o sed t o t ry f o r

mo re messages, and asked Julia, as another test

of her id entity, if she cou ld use his hand to call

to her fr iend 's memor y some incid ent in their

m utu al li ves o f w hich he knew no thing . Hereis his accou nt

My hand wrote : "Ask her i f she can remember w hen w ewere going home together when she fell and hurt herspine ." "That fills the bill," I remarked, as I read o ut the

message, "for I never knew that you had met with such an

accident ." Loo king acro ss the table, I saw that my friend

was utterl y bewil dered . "But, Julia," she objected, "I never

hurt my spi ne in my life ." "There," said I , add r essing

my hand r epro achful ly, "a nice mess you have made of it .

I o nly asked you for one ou t of th thousand little incidents

you both must have been thro ug h together , and yo u have

go ne and wr itten what never happened . "

Impertu rbably, my hand w ro te, "I am quite rig ht ; she

has for go tten ." "Anybod y can say that," I r etor ted ; "can



188 INVADING THE INVISIBLEyou bring it back to her memor y?" "Yes," w as the reply .

"Go ahead," I answered ; " when was it?" Answer : "Seven

years ago ." Where was i t?" "At Streator , in Illino is . "

"How di d it happen?" "She and I w ere going home from

the office one Satur day afternoo n . There was snow on the

gro un d . When we came opposite Mrs. Buell' s hou se sheslipp ed o n the cu rbstone and fell and hur t her back . "

When I r ead these messages alo u d her fr iend exclaimed,

"Oh, that's what you mean, Jul ia . I remember that qu ite

well . I w as in bed for two or three days with a bad back ;

but I never knew it was my spine that was hurt."

These are little things, but such as happen be-

tween people in li fe as w e kno w it . Mr. Steadsays he never w ou ld pu blish any of this until

some member o f his ow n family had p assed o ver .

When his son d ied, w hom he had trai ned to take

his place in the wor ld and take up his w o r k,

o ne w ho w as closer to him per haps than son and

father usually are-when this son died, Mr .

Stead w o u ld not tr u st his o w n hand because he

thou ght too much of his own personality wo uld

enter into the messages, bu t thro u g h other s he

go t communications so characteristic of the boy,

so evidential in minor details, that he wrote

After this I can dou bt no mor e . For me the pr oblem is

solved, the tru th is established, and I am glad to have this

opp or tunity of testifying publicly to all the wor ld that, so

far as I am concerned , no d o ubt on this subject is hence-

for th impossible .

I can only echo w hat Mr . Stead has said, that

to any o pen-min d ed man who stud ies this su b-

ject really and honestly, do ubt will become im-

po ssible . I have already mentio ned that when

I entered this stud y I was pr ejud iced against



19 0 INVADING THE INVISIBLEis the wi nning factor in life? Again it is per-

sonality . One of the Hindoos that StanleyJones encou ntered i n his missionary w o rk said ,

in effect, "I have no u se fo r the C hristi an

C hur ch, bu t there is something w inso me abo u t

Jesu s that dr a ws me to him ." Now, winsome-ness is a mark o f personality .

Per sonality is the hig hest pro du ct of evolu -

tio n-the flo w er on the tree o f life. I am notnow speaking of you r particu lar personality, ormine. I a m r e f er r i n g t o thi s thi n g th r o u g h

which spir it manifests itself in all o f its di ffer-

entiations and all o f its infinity of forms . Is the

universe to travail throu gh eons of time, to d e-

velop thro u gh the evol u tio nary pr o cesses ever

higher fo rms of life, finally culminating in man,

o nly to annihilate them? Is su ch a tho u g ht ra-

tio nal? Fu r thermor e, I d o no t believe Mr . Hal-

d ane or others who talk in his vein have really

thou ght this thing o ut . What i s my i d entity?

Is it n o t my hist o r y, my mem o r y? I wa s bo r n

in a certain p lace that I have been tol d abo u t .

I w as reared i n certain surr ou ndings, wi th cer-

tain parents, certain members o f a family ; w ent

thr ou gh certain schoo ls ; had certain affairs of

the heart and exper iences that were peculi ar tome. Now, thro u gh all these memor ies, I id entifymyself as myself . That constitutes my con-sciousness ; that and the other id entifying aw are-

ness-i f I may use the w o r d - that I have in my

conscio u sness. Mr. Haldane impl ies, and cer -tain other author s have said expr essly, "It may

be that all o f these memo r ies go into a com-



PSYCHICAL RESEARCH 191

mon storehouse." My answer is that any com-

mon storehouse that receives my experiences, my

memory, all these identifying marks of my in-

dividuality, becomes one with me, is identical

with me, and is myself.

What is God? Is he not in all things and all

things in Him? Does not His universe partake

of His nature? Is man, the highest product

and, so far as we know, the only rational crea-

ture in this universe, excluded from such par-

ticipation? Are we not taught in all religions

and all philosophies worthy the name that God

is in us? Yet, says Mr. Haldane, God is im-

mortal. Then is not the God in us immortal?

It may be that only the Godlike of us lives on,

or that we are immortal in the degree that we

are Godlike; but to place personality beyond

the divine pale would seem to involve a very

distorted and peculiar view of what personality

is. Perhaps Mr. Haldane objects: to the wordand would prefer, with some others, the term

individuality. But, whatever we call it, there

is a core of reality in man, and this core of reali-

ty belongs to God and is necessarily eternal.

Now, in conclusion : Immortality is proved by

two considerations; first, continuity. That isfound everywhere in nature. We may not seeit, but that is because of a defect in our senses

.

Continuity is discernible; there is no break .

Everything proceeds out of something else. Iam a fact. Shakespeare is a fact, or Plato, or

Jesus. They were facts before me. If they are

facts, they are facts before birth and facts after



192 INVADING THE INVISIBLE

death, because the continuity cannot be broken.

Not only so, they were very conspicuous and

tremendous facts in the intelligible universe,

and the intelligible universe is quite as real as

the phenomenal universe, perhaps more so, for

it partakes more of the divine nature.

That is the first convincing proof of immor-

tality The second is conservation . As far as

we can discover in the physical universe, there

is perfect conservation. That is reasonable be-

cause nothing can disappear. There is nowhere

for it to go. It cannot get out of the universe.

That is a closed system. The universe itself is

all of it, all the time. Therefore, there can be

no real loss. Nothing can get out of this closed

system It is all there; it was all there from

eternity. It must be so in the nature of things

Now, experience is a thing It is the highest

thing in the human world and, so far as we

know, the highest thing in any world. Likepersonality, it is a flower on the tree of evolu-

tion.* Science believes in the conservation of

energy. It cannot prove that because it could

only be proved empirically, that is, it could only

be proved through examining all the energy in

the universe, and that is impossible. But it is

reasonable, and it works well. The theory of the

conservation of energy has been very fruitful in

the scientific world. It has never failed. It has

enabled science to find more facts and, therefore,

it is used and held true. Very well; I believe

* Mr . F. H Bradley concludes that the universe as we know itconsists of experience.



PSYCHICAL RESEARCH 19 3

in the conservation of experience. I cannot

prove it, but it is reasonable and works well. The

only way there can be conservation of experience

is through personal immortality. If you say I

transmit my experience through books or

through talks, newspapers, or conversation, I

say I transmit only a very small fractionof it in that way If you say I transmitit through my children, the answer is, Itransmit only a very small fraction in that

way also, and that, indirectly and not conscious-

ly. Even if I have transmited all of it in that

and other ways, however, science teaches that

some day the world becomes uninhabitable ; it

freezes up; it becomes too cold to sustain life ;

therefore, it becomes a dead world as the Moon

is now and as Mars is on the way to becoming .

Very well, then; if I transmit all my experience,

it is only for a brief time ; finally it dies out and

all is lost. Such a thing is unthinkable.

Intellect is proving what intuition always

knew-man's immortalityThis brings us to the final, or pragmatic, argu-

ment. A belief in immortality is inferentiallyand morally proved valid because it is best for

man. That is again inferentially proved by thefact that most men hold it. Conversely anyone

who seeks to undermine it, through mere pride

of intellect, is an enemy of truth and good, as

well as of human happiness

Those materialists and atheists who interfere

with the natural faith and hope of the young in

our colleges are insofar anti-social and enemies




of man. They adulterate and infect the humanmind with the negative elements of doubt and

despair. After all Reality consists of experience

and of human values and these exist only in a

person. Hereafter Philosophy must occupy this

high ground of Humanism in an effort to con-

serve experience and values. There is a will to

believe as William James discovered . He whodisturbs and defeats this will is to that extent an

enemy of God and Man, and he does it all for

a negative purpose. In other words he is doing

the devil's work of destroying hopes and ideals,

especially in the young The occultists tell us

that the forces of darkness thus endeavor to con-

found and confuse human ideas and progress .

And we are told on a better and higher authority

that it were better for him who thus offends that

a millstone were tied about his neck and he were

sunk in the midst of the sea .

For the good of man we must hold aloft the

banner of God and Immortality.



CHAPTER XMETAPSYCHICS

The study of psychic phenomena is becoming

a special science, or, to be more exact, a group

of special sciences. These have to do with the

inner forces of man, the powers of the soul itself.

They include clairvoyance, clairaudience, tele-

pathy, psychometry, the creation of thought

forms in ectoplasm, materialization, soul memo-

ry of past lives, communion with the dead, etc .

In Paris there is already in existence an Inter-

national Metapsychic Institute devoted to the

study of these and kindred subjects It was

founded by such well-known scientists as the late

Dr. Gustave Geley ,and Prof. Charles Richet andcounts among its supporters other scientists

equally celebrated, members- of the nobility and

some of the most noted men in France. It has

now devoted many years to the investigation of

clairvoyance, materialization, psychometry and

especially the creation of living organisms and

other thought forms out of ectoplasm. These

researches have been carried on in truly scientific

spirit, carefully safeguarded, and whenever pos-

sible, the materializations and ectoplastic formshave been photographed. Similar work has been

done in Warsaw and also in Germany by VonSchrenck-Notzing and others . Several large

195



19 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLE

books giving the records of these experiments

have already been published in French and Ger-

man and some of them have been translated into

English.

It is impossible longer to ignore these activi-

ties . They are being carried on all over the

world. They indicate that mankind is on the

borderland of a new knowledge. They consti-

tute one more approach to the spiritual universe,

which we have already been nearing through the

new physics and relativity. In past ages men

have depended on religion, and faith, on poetry

and indealistic philosophy to tell them about

the things of the spirit. Now these surmises and

dreams are to be placed on a more secure basis.

The things of the soul are to be as definitely

known as the objective world of matter and of

sense-reactions

There are certain other facts that have been

developed along a slightly different line. I have

already referred to memory of other lives. Mae-terlinck writes of investigations carried on by

Col. A. DeRochas. Among other things, ColDeRochas hypnotized several people, and one of

his experiments was to carry back the subject

to his past life, to the memory of details . In

this way he carried one subject back to infancy,

but did not stop there, and the things remem-

bered antedated even his objective memory. Most

people do not remember objectively until two or

three years of age, but these memories went back

into babyhood, and back of that. Then, there was

a gap . I call especial attention to this : There



METAPSYCHICS 1 9 7

was a gap, and then the subject awakened in a

new incarnation and spoke, in one case, the same

language, but it was a different personality of,

say, a century or more before . It went back

through that life, after which there was another

gap, and the subject went back through a third

life. Col. DeRochas did this, not only with one

subject, but with at least two, and I think more.

Maeterlinck, as I remember, gives two or three.

They were duplicated by experiments carried on

in this country. These were in New York, and

I believe have been published . I have heard

something like them, but I heard of these as a

result of a private conversation with an army

officer, somewhat well-known, who participated.

Again, through hypnotism the same thing was

done, as by Col. DeRochas. In the instance here

mentioned, a man bridged the gap to another life

and awakened, speaking a different language-

speaking French. He was a soldier in Napoleon's

army and had been killed in a certain action .

He especially mentioned a lieutenant of his com-

pany and the incident of this lieutenant's death .

He described the scene ; he described the build-

ings; he gave the lieutenant's name, as I recall,

and other incidents, which were afterwards veri-

fied in detail. Now, I mention these cases be-

cause they have a bearing on the subject of re-

incarnation. That is not, perhaps, in the or-

dinary acceptation of the term, a branch of psy-

chic phenomena, but it has a relation thereto .

I have given three instances, and these were all

developed by scientific investigation. First, that



METAPSYCHICS 1 9 9

in continuity of consciousness beyond the grave .

In other words, we carry our identity over. Not

only so, but most of us believe that the state

after death is more desirable than the one here .

We call it heaven, and the very connotation of

that term, heaven or paradise, means everything

that the soul can desire, as a recompense for all

we have suffered or lost or sorrowed over here.

Now, I want the reader to follow me : Rebirthmeans, therefore, another death with a loss of

continuity or identity, and a passage into a less

desirable state. That would be infinitely worse

than death ! Let us be honest; think it out ;

face it; image it. We can only get truth by

facing all facts

There is one other difficulty about this doc-

trine of reincarnation, and this is a sociological

reflection. I point it out in the introduction. Abelief in reincarnation, like ancestor worship,

turns men's faces to the past, the result of which

is a static civilization. As a proof of that, con-

sider the Orient . Under ancestor worship,China has stood still for five thousand years ;

India has done practically the same thing. Theprogress of the world has taken place in the Oc-

cidental nations . China and India were flour-

ishing civilizations when Europe was populated

by savages, yet today the civilization of Europe

has gone far in science and philosophy, in art, in

literature, in discovery, in invention, in socio-

logical and scientific progress. In two thousand

years the Occidental nations have progressed

more than the Orient has done in ten thousand




years "Better fifty years of Europe than a

cycle of Cathay."

I only mention these things to get all the facts

before us. I am sympathetic with the idea of

reincarnation; it appeals to me in many ways

and yet, in a philosophical study of this or any

other subject we must have no pre-conceptions,

no prejudices, but must seek only for truth.

That is the spirit in which this whole study is

being made .

If reincarnation is true and we do return to

earth in other bodies, then it must be that we

are: unconscious of our past lives for practical

reasons; that memory would distract our minds

and interfere with the purposes of our being

here; that such memory, when it comes, is in a

way a gift of God and a divine awakening ; and

that in consequence there should be no attempt

to force it before its time.

There is one more obstacle in our way, as sin-

cere truth seekers, in this whole idea. It grows

out of the fact that most of those who claim to re-

member past lives, are seemingly only content

to identify themselves with illustrious people.

That might not be surprising, for fame is a re-

ward of service and only those who have greatly

served, we might say, would have gained im-

mortal memory. Yet there is a further difficulty

Many of those who claim to remember, think

themselves the same person. Very many, forexample, think themselves Napoleon . This is

evidently illusion in which both the ego and sub-

conscious are involved .



METAPSYCHICS 2 0 1

Swedenborg says somewhere that he beheld

spirits of the great giving off emanations of

themselves which were later incarnated in the

new-born on earth. At least, that is my memory

of the passage, although it has been years since

I read it and I am not now in position to verify

the reference. This idea might be regarded as at

least plausible for four reasons : First, these

emanations would be like those the older reli-gions suppose God to give out ; second, they

would be analogous to the influences radiating

from the lives of great men on earth ; third, they

would correspond to earthly parentage, which

may involve a number of offspring; and fourth,

they would account for these folk who think they

remember themselves to have been the same fa-

mous personage. Swedenborg's idea, as far as I

remember it, is that each of these emanations is

in a way a reincarnation and yet, after the na-

ture of emanations, does not diminish the soul

from whom it proceeds, who remains with his

complete identity in the other world .

This does not necessarily represent thewriter's view which will be developed later, but

it does indicate something of the difficulties sur-

rounding this entire subject ; and, also suggests

the practical wisdom of the Christian, Moham-

medan and Hebrew religions in leaving out this

factor, at least until the final "unrolling of the

scrolls" when the divine mystery is made plain .

The consideration in favor of reincarnation

are that it coincides with the rythmical move-

ment we behold throughout nature; that it fur-




nishes a logical and understandable scheme for

immortality; that it is based on essential jus-

tice ; that it accounts for seeming inequalities,

as well as for great souls; and that it har-

monizes with what many regard as their own

soul memories.

Here is another consideration. The supposed

memories of these hypnotized subjects of Col .

DeRochas and the New York group, as well as

those of "Mademoiselle Smith" would indicate

that the length of the period between death and

birth is about equal to that between birth and

death, which is what we should expect in a regu-

lar rhythmic movement, and would correspond

to the rhythms of nature such as winter and

summer, sleep and waking, etc. The subjective

state would also dull the terrors of rebirth, if it

did not blot them out altogether, rendering the

transition more or less unconscious and auto-

matic. As to the Theosophical belief in a period

of fifteen hundred years between lives, this idea

is now generally abandoned, one reason being

that it does not represent a true rhythm. Inas-

much as the time value is utterly changed in a

subjective state, the discarnate period might

seem relatively much longer . Some such hy-pothesis would seem necessary to account for all

the facts.

One: evening in Florida I submitted the ques-tion of reincarnation to an automatic writer

with a result that was somewhat startling. Theviews not only differed from those of all pres-

ent, but in some particulars, from any I have



METAPSYCHICS 203

ever read. This is the answer that camethrough :

The truth is that you of that plane are not expected to

know too much for your own good; but that, if you would

know, then the following extract from the local conven-

tion can be given to you

"Life is continuous and is ever changing ; but to let a

small (word marked out and illegible) agreement into

your lives we can say that to live is a privilege to some

but only to some is this granted. You are fortunately

favored for a definite purpose but to suppose that all souls

reincarnate is merely supposition and has no real basis

in fact. Let those who are ready for this take heed for

small groups of men and women come often to the earth

for a certain definite purpose, and to this end few are

granted the privilege. So you see that a greater lifeawaits the soul that is sufficiently aroused on other planes

of being than the torturous one of earth."

Give this message if you wish to quote us, but remem-ber that we, too, are seeking a definite rule for all life

and we, too, are seeking to reincarnate in this manner .

Life is a small beginning for the soul. The birth, you

might say, for it is in growth, that it gains strength on

other planes. The promise of rebirth is denied to those

who are not serving God in some way, but life is always

continuing, never fear for that

If we give the above credence, it would indi-

cate that those on the other side of life know

little more about reincarnation than we do here .

It would also suggest a possible and rather in-

teresting explanation Suppose that the view

of the Theosophists is right, that in the great

majority of cases the period between births is

very long, as long as fifteen hundred years. Inthat event it is altogether possible that entities

on the other side, at least those recently dead,

would know nothing about it. But suppose fur-




ther that a smaller group reincarnated muchmore frequently for a special work. There might

be knowledge of these especially if, as in this

case, there was actual contact with one of such

special group, who was making inquiry andthus calling attention to the subject. Some suchpossible interpretation is indicated by the state-

ment in the supposed communicaiton : "You are

fortunately favored for a definite purpose," etc.

All of this is more or less conjecture. Personal-

ly, I am only sure of one thing : That the indivi-

dual does not begin with birth any more than

he ends with death.

As to the other branches of metapsychicscience, the mass of data has grown too great to

be disregarded. There are now records of clair-

voyance that are so circumstantial and well-au-

thenticated as to be convincing even to the most

sceptical. There is something in some men and

women analogous to radio-receptivity that en-

ables them to see and hear at a distance. Whilethere may be only a comparatively few mediums

gifted with "second sight" in these the faculty

is so clearly and definitely proved that science

must take note of it. When we come to analyze

this faculty, the possession of it in people of

sensitive organization is not so surprising as it

would at first appear. If every sight and sound

has its effects, even though infinitesimal, regard-

less of distance, what is to prevent a sufficiently

sensitive organism from selecting out and ampli-

fying these minute disturbances or vibrations in

the ether exactly as is done by radio? Especial-



METAPSYCHICS 20 5

ly would this appear possible, if kindred interest

or thought sharpened and heightened the perci-

pient's receptivity. At any rate, the fact is sure,

whatever the explanation may be . Science is

only invading the invisible universe a step or

two further to bring these added phenomena to

light.

The same is true of psychometry . What isthis but a finer and higher kind of photography?

Not only has the Metapsychic Institute estab-

lished cases of unquestioned psychometric abi-

lity, but the American Geologist, Prof. WmDenton, Dr. Joseph Rodes Buchanan and many

others had previously brought to light evidences

of this supernormal faculty in some people. If

a specially sensitize film may take a record and

hold it indefinitely, why may not other forms

of matter? And if the eye may behold these

records when developed into photographs why

may not some finer sense detect them without

this objective picturing? It has long been a

matter of common belief that a record of events

is impressed on the surroundings, that every

room carries a history and that even handker-

chiefs and other inanimate objects bear the aro-

ma of their possessors and all that is needed is

a higher degree of sensitivity to detect these.

If a dog may follow a faint scent for long dis-

tances, why may not a deeper and finer soul

sense discern even more intangible clues and

traces? These things are not new. They havebeen known for ages. Now they are only being

systematized and verified .



METAPSYCHICS 207

probable also that everything which comesthrough the medium originates with the medium

and with these psychic entities ; except telepathic

impressions If it is true that nearly all me-

diums are more or less neurotic and on the

verge of dissociation of personalities, so that

something akin to a secondary self dramatizes

the part of the so-called discarnate entity, that

in no way invalidates our theory as to telepathic

communication with our dead. The part of the

medium is simply to bring the message over from

the subconscious to the conscious.

The name metapsychic is fortunate in another

way. All these higher powers belong to the souland not to the organism. Again they are from

a realm above the psychic. In mental healing

we are learning more and more to depend not on

the brain-mind with which psychology has to

deal but on the Absolute that works through the

spirit. Here is also where clairvoyance, clair-

audience and the rest of these soul-powers origi-

nate. This is the realm of the super-conscious .

This is the higher mind, the better self, the

Christ in us. Here is to be found soul memory.

Here resides the man out of heaven .

One evening while playing solitaire, it occur-

red to me that the cards are only symbols and

that, when shuffled or in a state of chaos, they

represent nothingness. Chaos, caprice, change

all represent negativity or nothingness. Onlythought is reality. This introduces order and

meaning. From this I went by degrees into astate of ecstasy in the realization of Reality. I




seemed to transcend time and space, to compre-

hend all time and space as one. My mind seemed

to merge into the Absolute. I thought I could

not continue to live as a man in that state so

gradually I again built up a barrier or differen-

tiation in my thought. But for those rare, ex-

alted moments I was veritably in the conscious-

ness of God and thinking God's thoughts. Andfor days thereafter I was unconsciously refer-

ring everything to the Absolute. I was looking

with more or less wonder on the fact that I was

this man in this place, was seeking to search

out the roots of all thought and to discover the

origin of self and of difference. Birth and death

were swallowed up and I was in a state of joy

unspeakable

After I had becolme familiar with this new

sense, I knew that it was with me for life and

that I could not live in any other consciousness.

Everything on which I looked became God . I

knew what Jesus meant when he said, "I and the

Father are one."

We are told that "He descended into Hell."

Hell is a condition of mind in which there is no

order or meaning in anything. It involves the

keenest agony conceivable to the mind of man

It is insupportable and yet must be supported

"He ascended into Heaven." Here He beheldeverything divinely in order and therefore every-

thing gave pleasure. "And God looked upon all .

that He had made and behold it was very good."

The lost word is the Absolute. So long as we

do not see everything in the light of the Abso-



METAPSYCHICS 2 09

lute the meaning of the word is lost to us, and

the meaning is the word .

Many years ago I saw the universe as a seam-

less robe being woven in the loom of time. Everand ever it grew in everlasting unfoldment .

Years later one morning I awoke with the sense

of a new kind of motion. It was from within

outward, a motion of becoming, like an evolv-

ing or unfolding spiral. It came into manifesta-

tion, containing its own other in the form of

all possible variation and complexity .

There is a wonderful new book that I especial-

ly commend to all readers of Invading the In-

visible . It is The Projection of the Astral Body

by Sylvan J. Muldoon and Hereward Carrington,

London: Rider & Co., Paternoster House, E. C. ,

1929 . This covers a subject that may well be

added to our special psychic sciences which we

are considering under the general heading of

this chapter on Metapsychics and that should

certainly be included in the wonderflul new

Spiritual Science being given to the world. It

concerns the projection or exteriorization, of

the astral, or etheric, body, .and lays down meth-

ods by which this may be brought about. It is

entirely scientific, since Mr. Muldoon has been

using these very methods for very many years,

and through them has succeeded not only in ef-

fecting a multitude of such projections of his

own etheric double, but has been able to retain

complete consciousness in a great many in-

stances during the whole enchanting process .

By all means read this most remarkable book,



METAPSYCHICS 211

other intermediate speeds down to that of or-

dinary walking, how it penetrates and passes

through all ordinary matter, how it slightly

contracts or expands the etheric body and levi-

tates it to any desired height, how this body is

covered by an aura from which thought cancreate any desired apparel, how it emits its own

light, how it communicates telepathically with

other entities and how it may see and hear,clairvoyantly or clairaudiently, at a distance .

He verifies the experiments of those who have

tested the weight of the etheric body and deter-

mines it to be about 21/4 ounces. He shows how

there may be obsessions and that many cases of

insanity are due to such. He verifies the teach-

ings of Jesus in another startling way. I quote

The phantom must learn to think correctly, for a man's

thoughts govern him. It is thought which sustains the

astral body! Do you think the astral phantom walks upon

the floor of a house because the floor holds him up? No!

Never that! He is independent of the floor; he does not

make contact with the floor at all. Yet he can walk upon

it. Why? Merely because his thoughts sustains him .

He has always walked upon floors in the physical, and,

through force of habit, thus learned in the physical-

habit rooted in the subconscious mind-he is sustained.

The habit of walking upon a floor permits a phantom todo that in the astral-holds him on the line of the floor

So, the desire to walk upon an upper floor could sustain the

phantom and allow him to do that. The subconsciousWill regulates the weight of the astral body, causing it to

rise, to fall, or to remain at any given elevation. Theconscious Will can do the very same thing also .

All this can never be explained by mortal mind-how

thought creates or makes "reality" in the astral world .

Imagine walking on the upper floor of a house, as if that




floor sustained you, and yet not make contact with the

floor! You would naturally suppose this would be astrange sensation. But it is not. In fact, it is unnoticedby the phantom; but if one begins to think about it as I

have, many times-down through the floor one goes. Why?Merely because the projector thinks that the floor, not

making "contact" with him, cannot sustain him!

One goes along, unconsciously walking in this manner,

because the subconscious Will, through habit, actually holds

the body in its position. You do not think of walking in

the physical, do you? Neither do you in the astral. It is

habit; in other words subconscious expression. Similarly,

when you walk upstairs and downstairs, in your astral

body, you are not aware that you are not actually stepping

upon the stairs. But think of it, and down you go!

All this has a striking resemblance to the Bible story,

in which Christ walked upon the water-His thought sus-

tained Him; but when Peter, who stopped to think about

it, tried to do so, down he went! There is not the slightest

doubt that Christ could do this. He could do it in the

physical body by levitation. He could do it in the astral

body naturally-merely by thinking. He could; and Histhought sustained Him, as thought will sustain each and

every one of us when we depart from our physical anchors .

The new spiritual sciences are making prog-

ress. Man, by invading the invisible, is entering

a New AgeAmong these new spiritual sciences are not

only the various branches of metapsychics dealt

with here but a more spiritual psychology, phys-

ics and medicine, a more Christian form of gov-

ernment and sociology Spiritual healing,

brotherhood, peace and everything in the plan

and program of Confucius, Buddha and Jesus,

that leads up to the Kingdom of God on Earth

and the more Divine Civilization will be parts

of this new Culture.



METAPSYCHICS 213

This is a work for a new and higher kind of

institutions of learning. Education in the past

has been one-sided. It has left out the spiritual

and moral nature of man . The new education

will more nearly train the whole man. It will

teach us how to remain well, physically, ethically

and spiritually well. It will teach us how to heal

the body and know the soul, how to govern our-

selves and love our neighbor, how to remember

things of the spirit and to find God .



CHAPTER XIPSYCHOTHERAPY

As we progress in this inquiry we get on more

familiar ground and our factors are of more

practical meaning and use in everyday life .

In almost every age of the world's history,

even among primitive peoples, mental or spiritu-

al healing has been practiced . Among theAmerican Indians, this was one of the standard

methods employed by the medicine men. Simi-

lar conditions obtain among many primitive or

semi-civilized peoples. In Greece, where the

modern science of medicine had its rise, spiritu-

al methods were quite as much in vogue as mate-

rial remedies. This condition continued through-

out the Middle Ages, to some extent In the

Catholic Church, which was the only church of

those days, miracles were wrought by means

of sacred relics. We now know that it did not

matter whether these sacred relics were genuine

or not so long as the patient believed them to

be so. In the same way the magic practiced

among primitive peoples, in many cases quite

elaborate, was intended to impress and influence

the patient, and if it did this, the result was the

same, however irrational or fantastic we may

regard the method to be .

In our own day, interest in this subject was214



PSYCHOTHERAPY 215

revived by what we now know as hypnotism, at

first called mesmerism and by various other

names. During the investigation of this subjectit was discovered that there was a therapeutic

factor involved and that hypnotic subjects could

be healed by the suggestion of the operator.

Out of this discovery has grown the modern

movement. Thomson J. Hudson, whom I mentioned in my last chapter, wrote one of the most

illuminating of the early books along this line

The Law of Psychic Phenomena-in which he

deals, from the scientific aspect, with the power

of the subconscious mind over the organism, and

identifies this method of healing with that used

by Jesus Christ. I advise everyone who has not

read that book to do so. It is in one sense a

primer of this whole philosophy of mental or,

spiritual healing .

Since that time the new philosophy has ex-

tended into many different cults and into prac

tically every land upon earth. Christian Science

numbers its disciples by the hundreds ofthousands, if not the millions . New Thought,Divine Science, Mental Science, The HigherThought, The Unity Movement, The Church ofTruth Movement, Homes of Truth, healing cir-,

cles in orthodox churches, etc., have all grown

out from this original development. It is impos-

sible that so many people would follow an un-

fruitful philosophy for so long a time . There-

fore, the mere fact of the growth of this method

of healing, which has not been equalled, so far

as I can discover, since the days of the early




church, is, in itself, a proof of its efficacy and

the validity of its truths .

Now, science has entered into this field, and

that is the reason I am considering the subject,

because this series of lessons is an attempt to

gather up the recent results discovered by scien-

tists, and give them a universal meaning. To-day, we can scarcely pick up a medical treatise

that has not one or more chapters on psycho-

therapy. The method employed by the scientific

world in treating this subject is somewhat dif-

ferent from that of these various new religions,

as they are sometimes called, that I have already

mentioned. In the scientific world, suggestion

is the sovereign method. Suggestion takes the

place of hypnotism. It was found that hypno-

tism was no longer necessary ; that there are

certain undesirable elements in hypnotism, such

as subjection to another will and robbing the

subject, therefore, of the right to his own or-

ganism; the right to the control of his own life,to some extent. As I say, this has been discov-

ered to be unnecessary-the same results can

be obtained if the subject has faith. That is the

point. The only thing that hypnotism did was

to remove the objective mind out of the way with

its doubts and skepticism and erase its wrong

education-its belief in the material, and other

complexes that entered into the objective con-

sciousness. It is my contention that complexes

can appear in the objective as well as in the sub-

jective mind. We are all more or less subject

to such complexes.




necessary to get the message over to the sub-

conscious. All I can say is that if those doses

had any such effect on the subconscious that

they did on the conscious, the message got over .

And the message, let me add, was supplemented

by suggestion, either expressed or implied, that

those doses were good for what ailed me .

So we discover that even without intention

mental methods were employed then. I begin to

suspect that they have entered into the practice

of medicine from the beginning more largely

than we thought. I remember a case in my own

boyhood when I thought I was ill. They sent for

a doctor and as soon as I knew he was on the

way I got better. The doctor was usually a

cheerful individual, benign, benevolent, who ra-diated. confidence. The very fact of his supposed

learning and mastery of the ills of the flesh was

a suggestion to the patient in itself. That musthave been a facotr, in view of the ways in which

material medicines have changed during all of

these years. At about this same time in my boy-

hood I remember that the patient was hermetic-

ally sealed up. They thought fresh air harmful,

especially night air-that was poison . So the

windows, in effect, were nailed down and the

doors kept closed. Then, again, the patient was

not fed, especially in fever cases. It was thought

fatal to feed a fever patient because that added

to the fever. At the same time the neighbors

had a way of showing sympathy that I cannot

but now suspect had in it an element of malice

and a propensity to glorify in one's own escape



PSYCHOTHERAPY 21 9

from the ills of others. There is something in

the human mind that, as we say,, pats itself on

the back because it Is not as unfortunate as

somebody else. This factor may have entered

into the minds of those neighbors, chiefly old

ladies who went in to cheer up the patient and,

in so doing, practically wept over her and told

how some other patient whom they had knownhad had similar troubles, and the dear soul had

passed on. As I say, all of this was intended in

the best way, perhaps,, to cheer the patient up,,

but the suggestion was one at which the mod,

ern psycho-analyst or psycho-therapist would

stand aghast.

I mention these methods of an earlier day, and

I go no further back than my boyhood, to showw

how they have been revolutionized. Today, wedo not give large and bitter doses of drugs. I,

was in a tuberculosis sanitarium in the State

of New Jersey a few years ago and they told

me there that they no longer used drugs to any,

extent They had a few specifics which they

employed rarely. I asked them as to their meth-

od. They said, "Well, first we give the patients

all the fresh air possible, night and day, winter

and summier. They sleep with the windows wide

open. They go out for long hikes if they are

able, in the snow, as well as in the sunshine.

They are fed liberally and they are not allowed,

to talk to anybody about their symptoms. Their

minds are diverted to other and more cheerful

subjects."

In every one of the four particulars I have




mentioned the methods in use in that sanitarium

were exactly the opposite to what they were

when I was a boy. If we go still further back

we will find changes as radical. I live within a

few miles of Mount Vernon, and it is a tradition

in the countryside that George Washington was

bled to death. Washington was a particularly

illustrious patient and therefore, no doubt, the

doctors were more numerous and more assiduous

than they would have been in other cases, and

they bled the General for a slight cold that had

been contracted in riding about his plantations

in inclement weather. Today, we do not bleed

patients ; on the contrary we bleed other people,

and infuse their blood into the patient's veins.

So there again, the method is exactly opposite to

what it was then. Someone tells a very touch-

ing little incident of a case of transfusion in

New York. There was a litle girl who was pro-nounced a victim of anaemia. She had a rosy-

cheeked brother and the doctors, therefore, de-

cided that there should be a blood transfusion

from the veins of the healthy boy into the veins

of the anaemic little girl. The two small figures

were strapped side by side on their cots and,

as is usual in such cases, the doctors first asked

the boy if he were willing to have the operation

performed. He gulped, but nodded his assent,

and thereupon an incision was made and theblood stream flowed from one child to the other

The doctors were all eyes for the patient and

practically forgot the litle boy but one of them,

glancing at him, saw that he was under a very



PSYCHOTHERAPY 2 21

great tension. He was growing white, and final-

ly, the little chap plucked the arm of the interne

and whispered "Doe, when do I croak?" It ap-

peared that he had heard that blood is the life-

stream, and that one who loses blood must die.

Yet he had given his assent in face of that be-

lief. "Greater love hath no man than he whogives his life for his friend." There is another

Bible text that also applies to this case: "The

Kingdom of Heaven is like unto a little child."

With this continual change in the methods of

material practice it must be that the factor of

faith of the patient in his physician and in his

remedies has been a therapeutic agent in the

past as now. In contrast to that, I refer again

to the methods of spiritual healing which have

not changed, either in method or in principle,

from the days of Jesus Christ to our own. Weall remember the house that was builded on the

rock and that builded on the sand. I think each

of you can make his or her own application .

Now, there is a philosophy of healing and I

prefer to illustrate this by a simple everyday ex-

ample. Take the case of a common wound. Wewill suppose that I have a cut in my body. What

happens? First, there is a great blood flow, but

that gradually assuages itself. The bloodthickens and clots form a protective covering.

We call it a scab, which serves the double pur-

pose not only to prevent the further effusion

of blood but to protect the wound from outside

infection. Then, there is a fever set up at this

point which indicates intense activity, and this



PSYCHOTHERAPY 2 2 3

ly delicate and marvelous, yet all of these are

builded into their right places.

The first point of this process is that every

step in it is intelligent-highly intelligent-and

intelligent action, or a series of intelligent acts

directed to a given end, presupposes an intelli-

gent agent. The only intelligent agent we know

anything about is mind. Therefore, we are jus-

tified in assuming that mind is at work in this

whole healing process. Not only that, but there

must be a pattern or an archetype or a specifi-

cation on which this new tissue is builded. That

pattern cannot be physical because the physical

pattern was expelled with the suppuration of the

injured tissue. Where, then is it? Where isthis pattern-this model-on which the newtissue is erected so accurately and put in its

exact place? Again, we must resort to mind-

the only thing that can fashion a specification or

a model. It exists somewhere, therefore, in the

thought. We are not conscious of it, but it is

more intelligent than we could devise with our

conscious minds Now, the whole amazingprocess revolves around such simple examples

as I have given. A few years ago we werethrilled-I was-by the fact that the engineer,

Mr. C. M. Jacobs, succeeded in driving a tunnelunder the North River, starting a gang of work-

men on the Jersey side and another gang of

workmen on the New York side and having these

gangs, that worked independently of each other,

meet under the middle of the Hudson Riverwithin an inch or two, both horizontally and



PSYCHOTHERAPY 225

other forms of life. I wonder if we have ever

reflected seriously on the power of thought-

and I refer now to our human world? Thought

builded this city ; thought builded this civiliza-

tion; thought made all the inventions that are

for the convenience and comfort of modern man ;

thought gave us, in our own day, the telephone,

the electric motor, the steam engine, the air-

plane, the radio-thought is the most powerful

force man knows. If this is true in the human

world, why is it not more true in the world at

large?

If man is, therefore, a mental being, then he

should not only be master of his environment,

but master of his organism for in one aspect his

organism is a part of his environment-'the

most important and vital part of his environ-

ment That he can do this is proved by the

slight advances we have so far made in this art .

May I inject at this point a correction? Wehave talked a great deal about the subconscious

mind or the unconscious mind or the extra-con-

scious mind. All of these terms, in a sense, are

misleading, for there is only one mind . Forpractical reasons, this functions in different

ways, butt am convinced that what we call the

unconscious mind is never wholly unconscious .

This is proved by a very simple illustration. You

set yourself to awaken at a certain hour, andgenerally do so. I have tried that experiment in

a number of ways and have had striking results .

It did not always work, but it worked in enough

cases to convince me that it could not be due



2 26 INVADING. THE INVISIBLE

to chance. Now, what is the probable truth of

all of this : The reason we can awaken at a cer-

tain hour is that we are, to a certain extent,

conscious all the time. We do not know justhow this is true, but if we can go back to some

of our previous chapters we shall discover that

there is a primary method of knowing-of mind

action-that is present wherever life is present .

It is not conscious in the way that we are con-

scious. Our consciousness is due to a very high

development and of a special form of mind ac-

tion. This more primary form of mind action,

however, is discovered all through nature . It

is discovered in the birds that fly for thousands

of miles from the south to the north, or in the

opposite direction, every year, and that go ac-

curately back to their old nests or old habitats

in the north or in the south. How? It cannotbe by observation of landmarks because, fre-

quently, the flight is for a considerable distance

over water where there are no landmarks. Thebee does the same thing for shorter distances,

and we speak of the "bee-line." The same thing

applies to the cat that returns even though it

is taken in a blind-fold condition or in a bag for

twenty miles or more . How? How does in-stinct arise, or the change of organism due to

a change of environment or of needs for the pre-

servation or the development, of that particular

species? Wherever we look, we find mind act-

ive, but we find it acting in a more wonderful

way in the building of these organisms, each

one covering the whole route, from the primal




slight loss of weight at death, which has been

verified by a number of experiments ; sixth, to

explain why nearly all religions on earth be-

lieve in some such body; seventh, to correspond

with the idea of the ether of space that we found

necessary in the formation of atoms, as an ether

stream to carry the planets, as a transmitter of

light, heat, electricity, radio waves, gravitiation

and energy generally; and to coincide with facts

reported by various psychic observers who saw,

or said they saw, the etheric body withdraw

from the physical at death. By the way, myson, James C. Edgerton, who is well-known in

aviation circles and who never had any previous

psychic experiences, permits me to relate the

following. rt is in his own words

This experience, which absolutely convinces me of a

future personal life, was produced by an anaesthetic in

preparation for an operation for appendicitis. There wasno conscious background for the experience, as it was

totally dissimilar from any with which I am familliar .

In the first place please let me say that I was in full

possession of my faculties, as there was no fever or other

mental deterrent present. As is usual I was strapped to

the operating table and was given an anaesthetic through

a face mask which completely obscured vision. I wasfully conscious of inhaling three full breaths . On thesecond breath, however, an unusual train of circumstances

started which can best be described by the statement that

my physical senses seemed suddenly to shift to a body

other than physical . With no mental lapse whatsoever,

I was clearly conscious that I was half sitting up and

that my eyes seemed to take on X-ray qualities, which

reduced my physical body to a mere shadow with theankle and knee joints slightly more prominent. I saw an-

other body within this shell, glistening brilliantly, and as

I watched this new body of which I seemed to be a part,



PSYCHOTHERAPY 22 9

and which was more objective to me than my physical

body had ever been I slid out of my fleshy envelope with

rapidly increasing acceleration .

During this interval my other senses were also func-

tioning, the sense of feeling being concerned with a soul

shaking wrench which seemed to extend to every cell of

the body. To my ears came a beautiful sine wave note

corresponding to middle E on the piano, which increased

from zero to a volume which seemed to fill the universe.

Following this I heard a voice to which I seemed to re-

spond as to any physical voice, which repeated these

words: "You are now suffering all the pangs of violent

death. You are in the hands of friends and everything

will be all right. "

I did not lose consciousness until I was entirely separate

from the physical body, which I knew beyond any question

I had left

Wecan learn another lesson from material

medicine. I refer to treatment by serums . In

most cases the serum is developed in some in-

ferior organism that is given the same disease

it is sought to combat. What does that mean?This inferior organism, be it a cow, a guinea pig

or a rabbit-arouses itself to throw off the en-

croachment of that disease and, in so doing,

gives us for our blood-stream the value of that

intelligent reaction of its organism and the

secretion created thereby to combat the disease

in question. The same thing is true of vaccines .

Vaccination for smallpox, for example ; what is

that? It is the same thing in a different form ;

that is, we are given a mild case of smallpox,

called vari,oloid., so that our own organism can

combat this attack and, in so doing, fortify it-

self against a greater attack of the smallpox it-

self The whole philosophy of Hahnemann's



PSYCHOTHERAPY 23 1

examination in Vienna of one thousand bodies

showed lesions in the lungs of a large percent-

age, my memory is a majority. In most cases

these healed without the knowledge of the pa-

tient or of anyone else. Now, such healing, ac-

cording to the usual accepted theories of psycho-

therapy, is under the direction of the subcon-

scious mind; and might in other similar in-

stances respond to mental or suggestive treat-

ment. Such healing involves only the customarymetabolism which itself would seem to be con-

nected with the unconscious mind of the organ-

ism

That this is mental power is proved, not only

by all the considerations we have had before us,

but by many more. In the lowest form of life-

in the infusoria-we find evidences of mentality .

In the plant, we see reaction to environment .

In the sunshine the leaves take on a different

shape than, in the rain. A tropical tree, taken

gradually into a northern climate, adapts itself

to the change of environment . It will not do

this if the transition is too sudden because there

is more of a change than that organism canovercome or adapt itself to, but in a sufficient

time, some evergreen trees in the south will be-

come deciduous and thus adapt themselves to

the colder climate of the north . Similar proc-

esses are going on continuously in nature. All

of this evidences either mind in the organism

or mind in the cosmos that shapes, adapts, modi-

fies and protects the organism. That same mind

is available to man. Aye, it is doubly available



PSYCHOTHERAPY 233

not that ye be not judged." When we learn just

what hurtful criticism may do, we see that in-

dulgence in it is unscientific-just: as unscienti-

fic as it would be to put our hands in the fire

or to jump over a cliff. Mental and moral laws

are as real on the higher level as physical laws

on the lower. We have to discover that action

and reaction are equal, not only in the material

universe but in the moral universe. At the last,

they become justice-Theosophists call it "Kar-

ma," which is only another statement of the

same principle. What, we give out, we receive .

That is the law of compensation. When welearn this, really, so that it becomes a part of

character and a part of habit, life is trans-

formed. In that aspect, we no longer have en-

mities, for we know that an enmity is a disease

of relationship just as much as pneumonia in

our physical organism is a disease on its plane .

Lack of means is a disease of circumstances

That, on its level is just as destructive and hurt-

ful as mere illness in the body. So it goesthroughout all life

What we have to learn, therefore, is healing on

the higher plane. We have to become, in a way, the

builders of our own life. I am convinced that

nothing can come into anyone's life that is not

invited or permitted. We are king in our own

realm and if we are on the job in a royal capaci-

ty, we do not permit insurrections or disorders

or other hurtful conditions in the realm over

which we rule. This is, in a way, figurative lan-

guage based on analogy, yet it contains a deeper



PSYCHOTHERAPY 23 5

are representatives of the universe, or sons 'of

God. That is what life means ; it is a progres-sion from the unconscious to the conscious. That

truth, also, has a bearing on our present subject,

for this mastery is not a thing alone of sugges-

tion; it is not a thing alone of a mechanical ap-

peal to the subconscious. It is a conscious sha-

ping of all the forces of life, inner and outer .

This point is supremely important. Whatevermay be the destiny of the individual, I am con-

vinced that until this lesson is thoroughly

learned, assimilated, and made a part of our

personal characters, we must go on with our

schooling. In other words, our adventure is an

infinite one. It is not for one life ; it is for

an eternity.

The dialectic, to which I have been referring,

is analogous to the dialectic that we meet every

day that we live. We have problems or opposi-

tions, chaotic conditions, or adverse circum-

stances, that we have to overcome, transcend,

and convert into the gold of experience-life is

like that. It is, in common, everyday, practical

life, a surmounting of self. In the last analysis,

the only thing we have to transcend is self. In

this whole process we are transcending self ;

first, in gaining universal ideas in the tran-

scending of the selfish individual consciousness ;

next, in surmouting the material, we surmount

it through understanding, through seeing that

it is only a symbol, a function, an object. Real-

izing this truth, we can know ourselves and

know the universe, and can transcend these con-



2 3 6 INVADING THE INVISIBLE

ditions through knowledge . In the same way,

we transcend our diseases ; we transcend our

complexes ; we transcend our inadequacies ; we

transcend our defects ., We gain mastery only

through the method of mastery ; that is, through

mastering our own lives, our own ailments, our

own social and financial conditions, and tran-

scending our tendency to belittle our brother .

In the highest sense our brother is our other

s e l f . He is that not only in a metaphysical and

religious way, but in the social aspect . Until

we learn this and gain all there is to gain

through love, appreciation and service, we have

not finished with our brother .

This all comes, in the last analysis, to what

I have treated in another book under the title

The Philosophy of Jesus . I discovered that

Jesus was scientific, that His whole philosophy

is an integral thing, and that we cannot know

it until we see it as a whole . It includes non-

resistance, love of enemies, healing of the body

and healing of our neighbors, brotherhood, for-

getfulness of self, innocence, a very receptive at-

titude to the spiritual universe . Jesus taught

that the Kingdom of Heaven does not belong to

some other state of being, but is here and now .

The Kingdom of Heaven is within us, and when

we know our inner life as the Kingdom of Heav-

en, it is outside of us, too, because the inner is

manifested in the outer ; not as a condition, but

as a plane of consciousness . Jesus gave us a con-

sciousness and a life, and this consciousness and

life, when we once learn it, is regenerative on



PSYCHOTHERAPY 23 7

every plane; on the moral plane, on the physical

plane, on the spiritual plane. That is the phil-

osophy that we are learning in psychotherapy ;

for, after all, this state of consciousness is not

a matter of observation; and observation is the

method of science. Science is descriptive. This

is a matter that goes deeper ; it goes into the

very spirit of man and opens him to all of the

life-giving energy of the universe including the

renewing, regenerative power of God .

In conclusion: I had one little experience in

my life that is not out of place here. Just be-

fore retiring one night, I uttered a prayer in

my heart that I might be given a simple phrase,

in a few words, that would describe this whole

healing process. I awoke in the morning withthese two words in mind, "Jehovah reponens ."

I did not know the meaning of reponens at that

time. Two or three days later, however, I got

to a place where a Latin dictionary was avail-

able, and I discovered repono means I renew,

and that the phrase, therefore, could be trans-

lated, "God renewing." The more I thought of

that the more it meant, for all life is a process

of renewal. That is what distinguishes living

matter from dead or inorganic matter. Everyorganism has the power of renewing itself an']

of reproducing itself. We talk about reincarna-

tion ! Why, we 'are reincarnated every dayWhat does reincarnation mean? Literally, it

means entering a new body. That is what weare,doing with every breath we draw, with every,

meal we eat, with every moment we live. Our




body is a different body from what it was an

hour ago. I have likened the ,flesh to a stream

of water. It keeps a certain form because the

banks hold it in check, but the physical part of

that stream is forever moving. The body main-

tains 'a certain form because the etheric body,

or soul, holds it in that form ; but the matter in

it is forever changing. All the flesh changes in

about a year, and even the bones change in a

few years. So I liken this stream-the middle

-of it, where the current is swift-I liken that to

the flesh that is changing all the time, and the

shores, where the force is retarded, is like the

bony structure that changes more gradually, yet

it all changes, it all flows and it forever renews

itself. This power of the universe-the creative

intelligence-is forever renewing. It is part of

the spiritual universe that breaks through into

the material and fashions all organisms and

heals all life.

We hear much of glandular treatment,through surgical and electrical agencies. Whyconfine such treatment to these crude and me-chanical methods when the same result can be

attained by thought?

The glands respond to mental impulses even

before there is any physical need of their activi-

ty. For example, when we are told a piece of

sad news, the tear ducts flow. Nothing has hap-

pened to us except an idea. A man may be inperfect health, but he receives a telegram from

which he falls dead. Nothing has happened to

him except a thought. We go out walking on a



PSYCHOTHERAPY 23 9

pleasant morning in'the woods and meet a bear .

The adrenal glands immediately throw into the

bloodstream a 'secretion that serves a double

purpose. It gives the whole organism endurance

and it tends to stop the bloodstream in case of

wounds We see a meal upon the table: Ourmouths water and all of the digestive juices are

accumulated in quantities to take care of that

meal. In the case of the bear and in the case

of the viands, nothing has happened to us except

a thought We can each picture in his ownmind how other glands respond at a mere visual

image, but it is not even necessary that the

visual image be there. If we can imagine with

enough realization, the same result will take

place Herbert 'Spencer, following Mansel,speaks of a vivid stream of images and a faint

stream, the vivid stream responding to the ob-

jective reactions from the senses and the faint

stream to our memories thereof or our recon-

struction in imagination; but that the difference

between the faint and the vivid is not caused by

the mere presence or absence of the objective

stimuli, is proved by the fact that if our aware-

ness of the absence of these stimuli is somehow

blotted out, as in a dream or hallucination or

hypnosis, the faint stream becomes vivid at the

mere actuation of thought ; and this demon-strates something else-that it is not the existence

of the objective stimuli that accounts for the viv-

idness or the faintness of these impressions, but

only our inhibitions. It is due to the fact that

we know the faint stream to be unreal that




makes it faint. The moment we think it is real

it becomes as vivid as the other . The samething is true of the ductless glands . They re-

spond to thought and respond to nothing else,

but the degree of 'their response is due to the

degree in which we believe that we need them .

The same thing is true of healing. If you have

faith, nothing is impossible to you, for this is

a thought universe-organized by thought, vivi-

fied by thought, explained by thought and taken

into reality of functioning by thought.



CHAPTER XIITHE NEW PSYCHOLOGY

PHILOSOPHY is the mother of the special

sciences In the pre-Socratic days they were

merged Thales thought that the unifying or

primary substance in nature is water and others

following him identified it with other substances

such as air, fire, attraction and repulsion, and

so forth

The first of the special sciences to be organ-

ized in its own behalf, perhaps, was physics, and

following this, biology or, as it was known in

the earlier days, zoology, although biology has

a wider meaning in that it includes the plant

world as well as the animal . Then astronomyemerged from the common background and, la-

ter, chemistry. After that came the other phy-

sical sciences and, last of all, psychology and

the social sciences. It is not surprising, there-

fore, that psychology is still in a more or less

formative stage. We have many forms of psy-

ch-ology We have behaviorism, of which DrJohn B. Watson is the foremost authority. Wehave introspectionism. We have what is known

as the Gestalt psychology, of which Dr. Wolf-

gang Kohler is the spokesman. We have analy-

tic psychology, with Freud and Jung as the out-

standing figures. We have applied psychology,

and I am not now referring to the popular form241



THE NEW PSYCHOLOGY 2 45

As to the differences between Freud and Jung,

chief among these is that Jung does not stress

sex, but also includes the ego, or ego-maxima-

tion, but lack of space forbids going into these

matters in detail . I am not seeking to treat

psychology except as it has a meaning for phil-

osophy and, therefore, what I say will necessari-

ly be general. Psycho-analysis is a part of the

general movement that is giving to the world

a whole new mental background and outlook . It

is removing some of our old inhibitions, fears

and phobias. It is bringing these things out

of the shadows into the light of day and, like

all noxious growths of the dark, they cannot

stand the sunlight. They disappear as soon as

subjected to the aneasthetic of publicity. Whenwe turn over a stone, all sorts of bugs and noi-

some creatures underneath scurry for another

cover. We find, in like manner, various social

monstrosities growing in the darkness. The mo-

ment they are brought into the light they flee

or are destroyed. According to the doctrine of

correspondences what we find on one plane we

find in some similar form of manifestation on

other planes. I sometimes liken our sins and

pet errors to these forms of life that grow in the

darkness. Often, we are not conscious of them .

They have not emerged into the light of our own

awareness, much less into that of public observa-

tion, and the moment they are brought forth, the

moment the stone is overturned and the sunlight

introduced, they flee or are dissipated .

Dr. Phineas P. Quimby, who was perhaps the




founder of mental and spiritual healing in the

modern age, stated that in some way that he

could not wholly explain he entered sympa-thetically and telepathically into inner commu-

nion with his patient, became en rapport, to use

a spiritualistic term, and through this means

learned of the seat of the trouble. He further

testified that the very moment he came to a

knowledge of these hidden sources, the cure

started. If we reflect, we are surprised to find

that was the method used by Jesus Christ. Hesaid repeatedly, "Thy sins are forgiven thee ;"

and what is that but a canceling or dissipation

of some -complex that the patient perhaps knew,

but was careful that nobody else should know?

Or the complex might have gone deeper-itmight not have been known to the subject, but

in his subconsciousness these words had power,

and the work was done by the method of the

substitution and suggestion.

As I stated, psycho-analysis was at first a

therapeutic agent but now it is being used more

and more in the way that academic psychology

had been used before Instead of charting a

curve of reflexes and reactions, each individual

is being examined as to his conscious and sub-

conscious history, so that the springs of action

may be discovered and, through this method, nor-

mality or, at least, the normal trend of that in-

dividual, may be discovered . We cannot talkof normality in a standard fashion because there

is a norm for each individual. We do not react

in the same way because we are not organized in




at a moment's notice-the moment they cease to

workIt is obvious that with this method scientists

may believe much more than they state. Theyhave a body of public opinion among their con-

freres that is always a check on too exhuberant

or fanciful conclusions. A scientist who becomes

what we call a "cloud chaser" is in danger of not

being taken seriously 'by his co-workers It is

obvious, therefore, that we cannot depend on

general conclusions from any special scientist

because he does not speculate. That is a primary

principle . Much of the confusion of modernthought is due to this very fact, that true scien-

tists are negative about anything they cannot

quantitatively measure, weigh, demonstrate and

use. Philosophy, on the other hand, lives upon

the very food of speculation. It must do so in

the nature of things and in this youngest child

of philosophy-psychology-the tendency hasbeen, as is always the case, with one obtaining

his majority, to declare his independence more

than he means. He is like a new people in revolt

who are much more bitter towards the mother

country than toward any other, whatever the ties

between them may have been .

Psychology has 'been hampered further in

using the physical method of quantitativemeasurement, and in seeking to observe phy-

siologically rather than from any deeper level

or stratum of consciousness. The great trouble

with physiological psychology and, to an extent,

with behaviorism, is that it has taken the




"psyche" out of the word and has given us"psychology without a soul ." Take the simple

matter of visual reflexes. I have already com-

mented on the fact that the universe we see is

due quite as much to our organization and our

reaction as to the thing in itself. No one hasever discovered how it is that we see, and the

more we analyze the organ of sight, the further

we appear from our goal of understadning. Thepicture on 'the retina is reversed. It is upside

down How is it that this reversed picture is

analyzed by nerves and carried back to some

cortex in the brain and there reconstructed into

the familiar world? For, please bear in mind

that each one of these nerve fibres carries only

a section of the picture, if it carries even that .

Perhaps what it does carry is a section of the

stimulus from the particular point in the retina

that it contacts

We can approach this subject through the an-

alogy of television. How many of us, I wonder,

are familiar with the method of sending pictures

by radio, and I speak now of still-life pictures .

That is quite commonly done now-a-days. Pic-

tures have been radioed from Europe and from

various parts of the world. The method is the

analysis of that whole picture by a pencil of

light projected through holes or lenses spirally

arranged on a revolving disk. This pencil sweeps

from left to right cutting the vertically moving

picture into strips of varying light intensities .

The light values are then transformed into elec-

tricity, just as is done in the case of sound trans-




formed into electrical values, which are trans-

mitted by radio and transformed back again into

light values and the picture reconstructed .

Applying this process to that of the human

eye, it is obvious, with an end nerve touching

each cell of the retinal wall, that in some similar

fashion the stimulii from this picture are car-

ried back through each one of these individual

nerves to the principle brain cortex, where the

whole thing is reassembled right side up and in

its proper place . There are still more striking

features of this process. One would say that we

should see the picture subjectively or inside the

brain cortex or at least as it appeared on the

retina. We do nothing of the kind. We not only

reconstruct it but we put it out where it belongs

and see it in the objective world. That is what

actually happens. So that if our introspection-

ist friends are seeking to remove all of the sub-

jective elements fromm our sense reactions, they

have quite a way farther to go . First, they would

have to eliminate all color values because these,

peculiarly, are due to the reactions-the subjec-

tive reactions of the organism-but they would

not stop there . I suspect that they would have

to eliminate the whole picture ; it is an organic

whole. The picture method belongs to our or-

ganism, our reactions .

Now, the Gestalt psychology seeks to behold

things from the standpoint of the organic whole,

and not only the organic whole of the subjective,

but the organic whole of the thought process that

organizes the objective and brings it into the



THE NEW PSYCHOLOGY 251

consciousness . When we come to reflect we dis-

cover that is the peculiar function of thought-

it organizes .

Perhaps it may illustrate what I mean to re-

fer to what I have called "the accidentalist

theory," from another angle : A gas is chaotic .

We talk of gas pressure. What does it mean?It means that the molecules of the element or

the compound that makes up the gas are bom-

barding the sides of the container, and the more

heat that is introduced into the gas, the more it

vibrates and the more violent is the bombard-

ment until, finally, these molecules-these in-

finitesimal molecules-beat the sides of that con-

tainer with such force that even though made

of triple iron or steel they are cast asunder .

Now, to ascribe any organizing ability to this

chaos is beyond conception but that is, original-

ly, what the physical universe is . It is incan-

descent and all the molecules, atoms and elec-

trons are in violent commotion . There is some

element that imposes order on this chaos and or-

ganizes it, and since the only thing we can dis-

cover in the universe that has this organizing

ability is thought, we must conclude that thought

is involved in this process and that somehow,

somewhere, there is purpose, co-ordination and

organic action behind it, constraining the chaos

to bring it into system . We discover a similar

process throughout nature . I play solitaire, and

I discover that there is a cosmic process in-

volved even here . Shuffling the cards reduces

them as far as possible to a chaotic condition,




and the game is to bring them back into order .

To the extent I accomplish this I win the game.

Nature, again, is like herself, and we discover

everywhere reminders and clues to this riddle

and puzzle .

In this same way, thought organizes its per-

ceptions, that is, it organizes the raw material ;

takes it up, sees what it is made of, compares it,

classifies it, systematizes it, organizes it into a

meaning-that is the thought process TheGestalt psychology not only considers organic

wholes but considers the organic thought process

by which we comprehend them. That which dis-

tinguishes an entity, a whole thing, from the

mere sum or addition of its parts is the co-or-

dinating factor, that intangible something that

makes it an entity, and this factor is necessarily

spiritual.

I have already remarked that psychology is

a young science. It has to go through the same

stages already passed by other sciences. Physics

is relatively an old science. When psychologyhas attained an equal age I hope, and even pre-

dict, that it will make as great advancement in

its own field as physics has made in its field .

Physics, as already remarked, has led us to the

very doors of the spiritual universe. Psychology

should be peculiarly adapted to an equal or a

greater progress in the same direction because

it is in a more peculiarly mental field. It will

reach that goal when it ceases to imitate physics

and emerges on its own level by using qualitative

as well as quantitative methods. There is hope,




but to surmount all obstacles. Can we wonder,

then, at evolution; can we wonder that life, al-

though seemingly thwarted and beaten back-de-

feated by the glacial age; defeated by the violence

of the elements; defeated by the chaos in the

early world ; by the constant earthquakes, erup-

tions, fire and poisonous gases of the primeval

ages-yet pursues its way, not only surviving

but progressing, emerging on new levels until

at last it crowns itself with rational conscious-

ness. Life appears in the most impossible places,

under the most untoward conditions . There is

no nook or cranny it does not invade. It or-

ganizes and adapts itself to all environments .

We find this organizing feature again in psy-

chology, in the extra-conscious mind, and evenif the classic psychologists are unfriendly, it has

so woven itself into the whole texture of this

science that never again can it be ignored . It

may happen in this age, as it has happened so

often before that those scientists who restrict

themselves too closely to familiar concepts will

be discredited, just as reactionaries in every age

have been left behind and have passed intooblivion. It is not a mark of superiority to re-

ject the new simply because it is new. If we ex-

amine the history of science we discover that it

is only those venturesome minds who are ready

to seize the new as a vantage point for further

discovery that have made science what it is .

There were so-called classic scientists in Galileo's

day, and they laughed him to scorn; they refused

to look through his telescope. That impresses us




now as amusing, but, if we stop to reflect, men

in our own day are doing the same thing-and

very advanced men, presumably, at that-some

of the greatest scientists in the world. I have

met them-men who will not consider psycho-

analysis because, perse, it is novel and does notfollow beaten paths.

The very essence of reactionism is fealty to

familiar concepts and that is true whether it is

applied to religious, scientific or political con-

cepts Precisely as no advancement has ever

been made without an invasion of the invisible,

so no advancement has been made without em-

bracing novelty

In conclusion: Psychology points beyond it-

self . I have already mentioned the method ofthe sense of vision . I have tried to show how

radio-vision is reached through the analysis or

cutting up of the picture and the transmission

of it line by line. Perhaps in the same way, the

light values, or stimulii, are analyzed and re-

constructed by the optic nerves in the brain, but

what or who is then the observer? It cannot be

a mere brain cortex because t h e b r a i n

cortex itself is an object and an instru-ment That is all we can say for it. Anobject and an instrument cannot have con-sciousness. A machine exists for a function that

is beyond the machine, and this cortex is only a

machine The function is beyond it. It is a

method of carrying the material to something

that reconstructs it into a picture. What is that

something? We cannot answer the question



THE NEW PSYCHOLOGY 259

ure, and yet that is always present and belongs,

I am convinced, to a level and an order of life

that science has never yet considered and of

which even philosophy has only touched the hem

of its garment. We find this everywhere present ;

in all of the lower orders of life ; we find it in

history

This brings us to imagination, or, more proper-

ly, to the imaging faculty. This is involved in

perception, for it is a necessary part of building

the picture. Again it is concerned in building

the concept, in generalizing and classifying the

individual percepts. Again it is an essential

part of memory; and, more important still, it is

of the very essence of the creative process, or

what we call imagination proper. Coue says

that we heal through imagination. Perhaps it

would be more correct to say that we healthrough imagination, intuition and faith. Im-agination is at the root of genius. It is the facul-

ty that distinguishes the exceptional mind from

the mediocre. It is that which enables men to

construct the perfect in art .

One of the greatest emperors of India ascribed

his own pre-eminence to the fact that he saw

things not as they are but as they ought to be .

Jesus had the same faculty. He looked beyond

the appearance to the reality. He saw thingss as

they exist in the mind of God, in the Absolute

Idea. This very perception banished all unreali-

ty, all defect and disease. This power of vision-

ing the ideal belongs in some degree to all of us .

Men know more than they suspect. They have




not been left without some reminder of whatthey are and what they ought to be; and what

they ought to be is a prophecy of what they will

be, given time, understanding and character, so

that through merit and as a part of their own

internal worth and their own divinity, men can

become that which they ought to be. Their very

recognition of obligation indicates that God

wants them to become these better men they

vision and through His grace they can and will

at last succeed. They are not left without some

prescience, premonition or sacred reminder of

this We find, therefore, in all ages religions

arising and, however diverse the circumstances

under which these religions emerge, they are

much alike; if we get beneath the creeds and the

forms, we find a surprising number of factors

that are common to them all, and these must

arise from that deeper consciousness, that mar-

gin beyond all of these measurable or observable

things, of the spirit in man .



CHAPTER XIIITHE PHILOSOPHY OF VALUES

THEworld as man experiences it is a complex

of phenomena, of interpretations and of human

estimates and values. The physical universe is

a mere abstraction from this world of expe-

rience. That applies also to the biological world .

It is only a section of the world man knows .

Values and interest are purely on the human

plane. There are many of these values. There

is a pragmatic value; that is the value of use.

On this basis William James wrote a philosophy

the keynote of which is that a thing or an idea

is judged by the way it works. Mr. James saidthat he believed in God and immortality be-

cause both ideas work well ; they make better

men and women; they give a dynamic to thesoul ; they hold out hope, and offer meaning. We

can judge of our values somewhat on this basis .

What effect do they have on character? Do they

advance civilization? Do they help human beings

to go forward? Do they offer incentives? Do

they give inspiration?

We have another philosopher in America who

collaborated with Mr. James before his death,

John Dewey who has written a book recently

on The Quest for Certainty, in which he takes

a step in advance even of pragmatism. The old261




philosophy, in his opinion, was based on static

ideals-the same yesterday, to-day and forever .

Mr. Dewey regards the course of human progressas rather a venture in which we are discovering

new things, and we are doing this by means of

experiment, of observation, of laboratory tests,

of special equipment, such as the test tube, the

microscope, the telescope, the X-ray. Throughthese means man corrects his sense-reactions.

There has been a question of the phenomenal

universe, which is the reason the Hindoos refer

to it as mirage or illusion because it is a com-

plex of stimuli from the outer world and man's

reaction thereto. In other words, the phenome-

nal universe is created by us quite as much as it

is received by us, and that gives the impression

of duality. Through the means of instrumental-

ism, however, we correct whatever defects there

may be in our senses and approach nearer to

reality By empirical methods we see howthings behave under various conditions and seen

from different angles, and thus gain a clue as to

the validity of our observations .

I am not unfamiliar with the dogma of at

least a certain school of philosophers to the ef-

fect that empirical science has no proper place

in philosophy. It may be due to this very dogma

that philosophy has practically stood still for a

century while all the special sciences have so

signally advanced. Be that as it may, the ob-

jection to the empirical element in philosophy

has not the pith in it that it had of yore. Notto speak too disrespectfully of logic-chopping,



THE PHILOSOPHY OF VALUES 263

cobweb-spinning, hair-splitting and other fami-

liar metaphysical and epistemological disciplines

of an earlier day, it is yet a fact, welcome to some

of us at least, that philosophy, if not made exactly

popular, has been humanized and brought into

the field of actualities

'There are language values. Man forms con-cepts and labels these concepts by words. Thushe builds a system of communication, and ex-

pression. This may not perfectly coincide with

the reality of things, yet it is the only way man,

through the language method, can progress. Hegets concepts and relates them to words. It has

been said that we think in language. In other

words, without these labels, these designations,

we have nothing for the mind to take hold of .

We think, not this time by the picture method

but by the label method-think the signs that

stand for the concepts. Yet out of this grows

various values-literature, poetry, oratory, the

spoken and the written word. These have cul-

tural advantages, and differentiate man from all

the lower orders of life .

Again, we have esthetic values-in art, in mu-

sic, in the drama. We build up a world that is

acknowledged to be fictional, and yet it may be

real in the idealistic sense . It belongs to the

intelligible universe Dickens' characters are

quite as real to us as folks we have met. I can

see Nickelby in my mind's eye, or Sairy Gamp,

or David Copperfield, and all of these characters

might represent truth more nearly than TomJones, John Smith or other people that we con-




tact in the flesh. In other words, they are typi-

cal of human qualities, and the author does not

see them alone from the outside as we: see most

of our fellows in ordinary circumstances, but

through constructing his characters he gets an

internal view and reveals this to his reader.

Then, we have ethical values-the moraluniverse. We can only measure the meaning of

these in the building of character, in testing the

fibre of the individual, in giving him a contact

with the moral ideals of God. Immanuel Kant,as I have mentioned before, could not discover

God by intellectual methods, but he did discover

Him by the practical approach of ethics and

morals, because there he found an entity acting

and, whereas reason discovered only the pheno-

menal universe, this Moral Being, in his rela-

tions to his brother and to his Maker, touched

noumenaAgain, we have economic values-in business

and industry. Indeed, we use the word value

as a measure of price That is not the sense,

however, in which we mean it in this discus-

sion because it involves a commercial element

which appeals to the lower self, and these values

we are discussing transcend the self and are in

the ideal world, in the intelligible universe

We have political values-security, democra-

cy, Government. Without the State man would

be subjected to every sort of hazard from those

who do not have his ethical and moral viewpoint .

He could not function at his best. We might say

that in entering political relations we have to



THE PHILOSOPHY OF VALUES 2 65

surrender some of our natural rights. We haveto obey the laws. We have to subordinate the

individual to the public good. Looked at from

that viewpoint, it would seem that we are placed

in bondage by the State but, through this bond-

age we purchase freedom from the selfish and

lawless members of society. We are enabledthrough law to gain a larger liberty .

Then, again, there are play values. It is not

an accident that we refer to sports as recrea-

tions. The meaning of the word "recreation" is

that we renew ourselves, and we do this by es-

caping from routine and refreshing the mind,

or reviving interest. That is one phase of sport,

and another is that we play the game of life,

and this whole adventure that we are taking in

the infinite is a form of playing the game. There

is one feature of sport to which I call special at-

tention-that of fair play. It gives us a clue to

what our conduct should be in other affairs of

life . The sportsman who seeks to win by re-

tarding or injuring his opponent is ruled out of

the game. If that were true in business we should

have a distinctly better world, and yet we rec-

ognize the principle in business. I used to be

a buyer, and if a salesman came to me with an

attempt to injure his competitor, I was placed

on guard at once. He was invoking a wrongprinciple. He was invoking a method that, if

used in sport, would eliminate him from the com-

petition. The rule is the right one that we

should do everything we can to excel, but Mat

we should place no bar in the way of our com-




petitor. Indeed, the more efficient our opponent

is, the more it is a challenge to us to do our

best. That is the object of playing the game on

any plane. Our competitor, therefore, is our

helper. If he does his best he brings out all of

our resources and our ability to excel him.

We have social values, of which the most con-

spicuous is represented by the family. We can-not measure what family life has done for civi-

lization. It has been called the cornerstone. It

is a breeding-ground of ideals, of moral values,

of love, trust, companionship, and all of the most

precious things that develop in our humanworld There is nothing finer in civilization

than the Christian, home . The destruction or

the impairment of it would be a loss to civiliza-

tion that we cannot measure. Especially, would

it be a loss to the child. The child builds his

whole world of ideals around the home, around

the estimate he puts upon his parents, around

the affection that he gives to other members of

the family

Then, again, there are religious values . Wehave all read of economic determinism. We aretold that men are actuated by economic motives

and this, to some extent, is true, but there is a

higher determinism . I call it spiritual deter-

minism Let me illustrate what I mean : Our

country was made what it is by spiritual ideals .

I defy you to find in history any groups that

in their accomplishments and their motives ex-

cel the groups we discover in the history of the

Christian church, those who builded the struc-




ture of Christianity with the cement of their

own blood, the martyrs ; those who for con-

science's sake and for their ideals, were fed to

wild beasts, burned-living torches, their bodies

soaked in oil-were not actuated by any com-

mercial or material motive. In our own coun-

try, we have as our most precious heritages the

results of a similar spirit ,and consecration. Wein this day make light of the Puritans, and yet,without the Puritan revolution in England, and

without the idealistic substratum that was fur-

nished to our civilization through the Pilgrim

Fathers, this republic would have been impos-

sible. You say these men were ruled by econo-

mic determinism? They came into the wilder-

ness where they lost all economic advantages

possessed in their own countries. A large por-

tion of the Pilgrims who settled at Plymouth

Rock died in the first winter. They came into

a wilderness that they had to clear before they

could cultivate ; settled in the midst of a rocky

and inhospitable environment where they were

subjected not only to crop failures and famine

and all manner of misfortunes including sick-

ness and death, but were exposed to savage foes

that massacred them, burnt their houses and

held them under a continual reign of terror .

Do you say that economic motives actuated these

people? You have not read their history if you

imagine that they were even influenced by such

things. It was a case, purely, of spiritual and

idealistic determinism.

This brings us to perhaps the highest value




that has been known in human civilization. I

do not exalt Jesus Christ and His philosophy be-

cause he happens to be the founder of the reli-

gion of this country and of our special groups .

I exalt Him because He has been the greatest

force for progress, for spirituality, for human-

izing mankind, for teaching gentleness and kind-

liness, just dealing, love of our neighbors and

even of our enemies, that this world has ever

known There is a regenerative power in the

very consciousness that He has given to the whole

world, not only to His own followers but to all

men; He founded democracy, as we know it. Hegave freedom to the human spirit .

There is another phase of the subject to which

I wish to devote the remaining portion of thischapter : That is what we call the value of the

practical. This goes a step beyond pragmatism

or the practical philosophy which has always

been interpreted as moral philosophy. What Imean by the practical is that everything in the

world, including man, seems to be governed by

practical purposes. We have already discussed

the protective devices that appear in all the

orders of life, such as a protective armor, a pe-

culiar coloration, or fleetness of foot, or teeth

and claws, to repel attack . In every one of

these defensive mechanisms, we discover prac-

tical purpose. We can even go beyond thatinto the inorganic world. How many of us have

reflected on the narrow range of temperature, for

example, in which life can thrive? There is a

range of possible temperature running into the




thousands of degrees. The zero of space is some

thing near four hundred degrees below 0, F .

The temperature of the sun is supposed to run

to fifty million or more. There is a range' of

more than fifty million degrees. Man and otherforms of life can only exist within a narrow

range running from, say, about one hundredthirty degrees F. to sixty degrees below zero,

which would cover not more than two hundred

degrees out of a possible fifty million, four hun-

dred. Yet life has gone on upon this planet for

countless ages in which the temperature has not

varied sufficiently to make it impossible. Thiswas true, even in the ice age .

I call attention to another striking factor in

the inorganic world. Almost every element orcompound known in nature contracts when itsolidifies, with the one exception of water-that

expands. Were it not for this fact, life as we

know it would be impossible. Ice, if contracted,

would sink to the bottom for its specific gravity

would be such that it would displace an equal

volume of water. That means that the streams

in the north or in the temperate and frigid zones

of either hemispheres would freeze solid, and

while the sun might thaw them to some extent in

summer, they would be like the glaciers-they

would not be wholly melted. Not only so, but

many of the common uses of water would be-

come impossible. We find that the arrangement

is a practical one

We can discover the same thing in the organic

world. Take, for example, the love of a parent




for a child, which is not peculiar to the human

family. It exists among all mammals. It exists,

indeed, wherever it is necessary that it should

exist, but, where it would make little or no dif-

ference to the preservation of the young, it is

not present in the same degree, and in the lower

orders of life, among the mammals, it is only

present so long as the young need the -protection

of the mother. When a cat weans her kittens,

she will have nothing more to do with them .

This same feature is found among almost all

animals. Again it is a practical arrangement

for the preservation of the species. While the

young are immature and defenseless, they have

the mother love. When that no longer is neces-

sary-I am speaking now of the lower orders of

life-it disappears. In man, love possesses other

values and there are other practical reasons why

this affection should continue, for it is the

foundation of the family life and, in a sense, of

the whole social fabric. Therefore, it does con-

tinue.

Again, we find that there are practical reas-ons, even in psychic phenomena, in death itself,

and in loss of memory in successive lives. Letme point that out in detail. There is a practical

reason for death. It is in the interests of prog-

ress. If an entity remained always in the same

organism, it would become fixed in that organ-

ism, or in the thought content, or both, and thus

would stand still .

I used to be greatly disturbed because I could

not know for sure as to life after death. And




-to do myself justice-it was not wholly a self-

ish reason I think it is so with any human

being. All of us have loved ones that have passed

through the valley of the shadow. We want toknow about them We long for a comforting

word from the cold lips ; for a reassurance of the

identity of those who have been more precious,

in many instances, than our own life itself. I

wondered why I could not know for sure about

these things. Then, I reflected, if it be true that

man has lived before and shall live again, why

is it we cannot remember? And I wondered,still again : If there is in us a subconscious mind

that controls the organism, that presides over

the organs of the body, that heals us-why could

I not know this in my conscious mind? Theanswer to all these questions came to me in my

heart: It would not be practical. If we knewof everything that the subconscious mind is do-

ing in the body, with all the cells and organs, a

boiler factory would be a 'Sunday School com-

pared to the resultant confusion and chaos. Our

minds would be incapable of attending to any-

thing else. So all of this is retired into the sub-

conscious for a purpose. It leaves our conscious

minds free to attend to other duties .

Again, if we could continually communicate

with the other world, and we found it more de-

sirable than this, or imagined it to be so, and if

our loved ones were there, we might become dis-

contented with staying here. Therefore, we

would lose all of the value of life in the way of

training, education, character-building and,




even if we did not desert, we might be so dis-

tracted as to lose our efficiency. There is noth-

ing that is such an incentive to man as interest,

and we might lose interest in life . The samething would presumably be true if we remem-

bered past lives. There are any number ofthings that might discontent us. If, in the last

life, or in some previous life, we had been more

fortunately situated than we are now, that

would tend to discontent us and if, in a pre-

vious life, we had been less fortunate than we

are now; for example, if we had been in jail be-

cause we deserved to be there, that too would

depress and shame us. Therefore, it would not

be practical. In fact, when we come to examine

the matter we do not need all the lumber of adetailed memory because we have digested that

experience-that past experience, assimilated it,

incorporated it into our very soul texture, in

character, and we have thrown aside the mere

detail of the experiences as useless excess bag-

gage. To change the figure, we have sucked that

orange dry ; we do not need the rind. In ceasing

to remember details, we have not lost anything

except the mere identification with events which,

for the most part, would now have no meaning

and no interest, or slight meaning and interest,

their purpose having been served .

We find the practical ruling in almost every

plane of life. That gives a new and a valid ar-

gument for design, for practical purpose is only

design in another form. We cannot turn any-where in Nautre that we do not find design .




What does design mean? Order, plan, purpose .

Sometimes these purposes and the operations to

realize them are so marvelous that we cannot

account for them in any other way than that

some intelligent agent supervises them with final

ends in view. I have already mentioned the

wasp that paralyzes the caterpillar by stinging it

in certain nerve centers so that the young wasp

may be hatched in the caterpillar's body andfeed on the living tissue; also the moth whose

back looks like the eye lof an owl and whose

enemies happen to be afraid of owls. Thereare also the adaptations of the eye to light and

of sex in two different organisms. Purpose meets

us on every level of life. It is so plain that only

the blind-and there are "none so blind as those

who will not see"-can fail to discover it. Inour own organisms we find these purposes evi-

denced in striking ways. For example, in the

foot the tendons that govern the toes pass

through the curve of the ankle. What keepsthem from straightening out in the way a string

does when pulled by two ends? These tendons

are only finely organized strings, one end of

which is anchored in the muscles of the leg, the

other end in the toes and bent almost at right

angles at the ankle joint. What holds them at

right angles? Exactly the same sort of a device

that you or I would adopt under like conditions.

If we wished to keep aa string or bundle of

strings from straightening out we would tie an-

other string about it or them. That is precisely

what has been done in this case; and this string




that is tied about the tendons in the foot is not

in any way a part of the tendons themselves .

Maeterlinck has a very wonderful chapter on

the ways that bees form a honeycomb. Someof the different materials necessary to the manu-

facture are exuded from their bodies. The nec-

essary tools for its manipulation are also in

their bodies. The mathematical form of the cells

is so marvelous that mathematicians have won-

dered at it. One methematician worked out the

form in which the greatest economy -of space

could be attained and found it corresponded al-

most exactly to these cells made by bees. It is

not a matter of mechanical instinct alone, how-

ever, for only certain kinds of honey bees make

cells in this way. Other bees do not make them

so accurately. Moreover, if the form of the hive

is changed, the design is changed to match. The

comb is adapted to hollow trees or to tree

branches in the. open air. Cases have been known

where the cells, were placed upside down when

the form of the receptacle required it. All this

varied conduct requires intelligence . The bees

apparently have engineers that superintend the

operation, just as they have specialized workers,

each performing its own allotted part of the

task.

Yet the bees do not appear to be conscious and

to work out all these purposes for themselves.

The only explanation left would appear to be

design. This has a meaning for our study. Wecan no longer leave the practical out of our

equation in searching for truth ; it is a factor in




our philosophy. Hegel's motto-"The rational

is the real," I amend to read : The practical is

the real.

There is another value and that is in truth it-

self. Herbert Spencer once said, in effect, that

if man could adjust himself perfectly to his en-

vironment, he could know all things and live

forever Truth is an adjustment to environ-

ment. We have to know before we can adjust .

We have to 'be in right relations through know-

ledge. We have to be in right attitudes. I some-

times think that people are not purposely ma-

licious or wicked or selfish; that when we find

selfishness, it is because the individual needs

something and, therefore, he is reaching out to

grasp after a satisfaction of that need. I have

seen really educated and wise people who made

no effort to -seem educated or wise. They did not

need to do so. Having the reality, they did not

need the appearance . I have seen others: whc

were less wise and less educated who appeared

or tried to appear more so, because they had a

need. In a way, it was a defense mechanism to

shield them from displaying their lack of know-

edge to the world. In the same way, men whohave great wealth, do not need to appear to have

it ; for the most part they seek to conceal it.

They can wear old clothes; they can evendisregard the conventions ; they can disport

themselves pretty much as they please, be-cause having the reality and being secure,they do not need to seem. On the otherhand, those who have less, frequently appear to




have more because they have the need of it and

they do not want to advertise that lack. Wefind this throughout life. In the same way, it

is altogether possible that those who are for-

ever grasping, do so because of soul poverty,

or character poverty, of poverty as human en-

tities-they are seeking to supply their own

inner need .

Now, returning to the value of truth : In every

science, in every art, in every philosophy, and in

every religion, we find folks who do the work for

the work's sake. They do not look for rewards ;

they do not even look for results, but, like the

sportsman who plays the game, they serve only

because of interest and the ideal of seeking

truth for its own sake . That is somewhat the

sort of an adventure on which we are em-barked . There are no goals in sight, no re-

wards, no plaudits, butt there is a satisfaction

that is perhaps deeper than any achieved by

these external and ephemeral things, a satisfac-

tion in knowing for the sake of knowing, for the

sake of the value we gain from a right judgment

and a right assessment of life ,and of what it has

to offer Therefore, in this, our adventure, I

am happy from my own viewpoint that I amfree. I do not have to ,conform to any sect or

to any restraint. I can seek truth for its own

sake and have no inhibition or prohibition except

such as my own sense of the fitness of things and

of what is right imposes on me. Therefore, I pro-

pose as a motto of our study an old legal formula .

We cannot live up to it exactly perhaps-man




never does live wholly up to his ideals; but we

can put it before us as a shibboleth and standard,

and it is this : "The truth, the whole truth, and

nothing but the truth."



CHAPTER XIVA NEW SYNTHESIS

ANDnow we approach the end of our adven-

ture in truth and are ready for our conclusion.

What do all these scientific discoveries mean?

Can we relate and bring them together into

unity? Do they dovetail into each other to

form a system, and if so what is its interpreta-

tion? Do all our clues lead to a discovery? Can

we gather up our materials into a coherent and

intelligible whole? What is our new synthesis?

Perhaps, before we seek to arrive at any uni-

versal conclusion it will be well to examine fur-

ther, and to arrange, just what we have found.

First, we have discovered that the basis of

what the world called Materialism has crumbled.

Matter is not what it seems. It is only organ-

ized energy. Our previous concept of it was due

to an appearance and an abstraction, neither of

which was real in any ultimate sense .

This is most important. The World War wasdue at least in part to the materialism of the

Nineteenth Century. This materialism was un-

dermining religious faith, undermining moral

values, undermining idealism. It paralyzedspirituality, denied freedom and spontaneity,

made man a slave of a blind and insensate neces-

sity, tended to bring everything to its own low278



A NEW SYNTHESIS 2 79

physical level, and reduced thought to the static,

the partial and the three-dimensional, to

straightline logic, to the block universe. It rec-

ognized only one kind of mind action, the intel-

lectual, stressed the inductive, as against the de-

ductive reason, and looked from outside at parts

rather than from within at wholes. In a wordit beheld the symbol instead of the thing sym-

bolized, the letter instead of the spirit .

Second, we have looked behind and beyondthat twin appearance, Mechanism. The ma-chine has its place, but only as the toolof mind which is its creator and operator.

This is true whether we speak of ,a wheelbarrow,

or a solar system ; of an atom or of a universe

of laws. The organism is a machine, as is habit,

instinct and the automatic To recognize this

truth is important in order that we may have

the right mental perspective and shall not re-

gard the machine as something in and for itself .

The effects of mechanism and of a mechanis-

tic view of life are widely ramifying . Theytouch not only philosophy and almost all the

special sciences but art, literature, politics, edu-

cation, industry and even religion. Formalismand ritualism are like prayer wheels, a sort of

mechanism It is not a mere figure of speech

to refer to a political or a governmental machine,

or to a mechanical performance in music, poetry,

oratory, the drama, or the graphic arts. Mech-anism kills art as the letter may obscure the

spirit. Of its effects in the practical fields of so-

ciology and industry I will speak later. Of the




deadening effects of a too mechanistic view in

philosophy and science I have already treated.

The machine has its place but as subordinate .

It is only a tool and this is true whether it is

human or natural. It is an extension or a con-

venience of mind. It is like a symbol, it stands

for something else . Man who beholds thingsfrom the outside is prone to mistake the form

for the substance. He must look beyond the sign

for the thing signified and beyond the tool for

its purpose and use. Else he may get a mechan-

ical view and that is as deadly in philosophy

as it is in art. In both the fault lies in super-

ficiality-there is not enough depth, not enough

soul, either in the art or the philosophy .

Standardization and uniformity are a formof mechanism and too much of either kills spon-

taneity. There is nothing quite so hideous as a

row of houses exactly alike, except geometrical

figures in gardening. There is something in the

free spirit of man that revolts against that sort

of invasion by the machine into fields where it

does not belong. If carried too far, it becomes

ludicrous, and excites laughter, which is a sort

of escape valve from our reactions to the absurd

or incongruous that otherwise would be too pain-

ful to bear. Bergson says that one of the chief

sources of humor lies in making man into a man-

nikin, or the introduction of too much of the

mechanistic into human behavior. The error in

the machine philosophy betrays itself from va-

rious angles and points of view.

Kindred to materialism and mechanism is ac-




cidentalism or the doctrine of chance. I have

already shown how this has been responsible for

serious errors in physics, astronomy and biology .

The random element has its place but not as the

organizer of a universe. When we build a house

we do not leave it to chance to bring together

the materials and put them into place . Chaos

does not become cosmos without constraint and

direction . Construction and co-ordination aremental activities .

It is probable that this random or indeter-

minate element is a factor in the process of dif-

ferentiation. Apparently it runs all through

nature, as pointed out by Leibnitz and more re-

cently by Eddington. Leibnitz said that there

are no two things exactly similar in the universe,

else they would be identical. For example, no

two leaves on a tree are alike. This statement

caused the ladies of the court, where Leibnitz

was stationed in some capacity, to compare the

leaves in the court gardens in an effort to prove

the philosopher wrong. We now know that notwo finger-prints are alike and no two snow-

flakes. Eddington supposes that this variation

extends to cells, molecules and even atoms. They

not only differ in form but do not even behave

exactly alike. We see great masses of them,

however, and on the average these masses act ac-

cording to a norm and it is thus that we can

predicate laws. This point may have a bearing

on free will as we shall see later. We shouldbear in mind, however, that while the random

factor may enter into differentiation, there is




no possible chance that it could produce order.

Thus the doctrine of the fortuitous goes into the

limbo of abandoned theories along with sponta-

neous generation, empty space, materialism,

mechanism, et al.

Having cleared the ground of these negative

factors, we are in better position to consider

some of the affirmative results of our inquiry.

First among these is the presence of the extra-

conscious mind in living organisms and pre-

sumably throughout nature. This we have found

is a factor in psychic phenomena, in mental heal-

ing, in instinct, in forming the embryo and in

giving direction to the evolutionary processes.

It is probably incorrect to suppose this mind

wholly unconscious, but whatever consciousness

may accompany it is infinitesimal and does not

often arise above the threshold of ordinary

consciousness. We find its submergence andemergence to be governed bypractical considera-tions like most other things in nature. The ex-

tra-conscious is not, essentially different from

conscious mind, for one may pass into the other,

or be influenced by the other . The extra-con-

scious mind does not depend on brain activity,

however, for it may be greatest when brain

action is least .

If man is an image of the cosmos and the ex-

tra-conscious mind is, therefore, present in na-

ture, as facts seem to indicate, this would solve

many problems, including that of Pantheism .

The extra-conscious mind in the phenomenal

universe is only one phase of the Divine Mind,



A NEW SYNTHESIS 283

corresopnding to what the theologians designate

as God Immanent, while the conscious phaserepresents God.Transcendent.

The second great principle we have discovered,

or rather re-discovered, is polarity. It is found

in atom building, in electricity and magnetism,

in the pairs of opposites throughout nature, in

sex, and in the dialectic of thought . Therefore

it must be universal and in its highest formwould naturally appear as the two poles of spirit

and matter. The fundamental basis of polarity

is that the two poles complement or balance each

other and that what we can say of one we cannot

say of the other. Of the pole of matter we posit

privation, or diminution through use, but in

spirit everything remains constant, however

much used or shared ; ,a.nd this applies not only

to such ideal goods as truth, wisdom, love, joy,

etc., but to life and even to energy, if the con-

servation theory is true. Indeed, the things of

the ideal or intelligible universe actually in-

crease through use, which suggests a solution

of the old problem of addition or novelty. W eadd constantly to our thought and wisdom. Onthis plane all things are ever new .*

Again we posit of matter inertia, while spirit

is eternally active. It is mind that initiates .

Herein lies another disproof of materialism and

mechanism since there is nothing in this inert

thing called matter that could move or build

* Bertrand Russell, the philosopher and mathematician, implies thatthis same principle applies to infinite numbers, and quotes others in con-firmation . He says that the new idea of infinity is that it still remainsinfinite even after a number is subtracted from it . In other wordsinfinityis spiritual and is inexhaustible like all other spiritual things .




itself, just as there is nothing that could fashion

or use machines. In the same way that matter

is inert, so it is bound by necessity and is deter-

mined by something beyond or outside itself,

while spirit is self-acting and free . It will be

observed that these new elements and viewpoints

in philosophy are suggesting ,a solution to some

of the old problems and revealing false elements

in others that remove them from the category of

problems. Now we approach the most debatedof all these questions, that of free will. Cassius

J. Keyser in his Mole Philosophy gives us a

rather amusing dialogue on freedom whichbrings out the fact that man is at least free to

deliberate, which ends the discussion. Yet free-

dom to deliberate without freedom to decidewould have no meaning One of Mr. Keyser'sdebaters points out that all our jurisprudence

is based on man's freedom and moral responsi-

bility and he might have added that all history,

especially that of recent centuries, including the

wars for liberty, has a like basis. Thus do prac-

tical facts refute the hair-splitting doctrinaires,

just as Zeno's false problem of Achilles and the

tortoise was settled by the certain fact that

Achilles does overtake the tortoise .

How does the principle of polarity affect this

problem of free will? At the pole of the physi-

cal we find things necessitated and determined .

Then at the spiritual pole they are not neces-

sitated and determined, for, according to our

postulate, conditions are exactly reversed at the

two poles. It thus becomes apparent that those



A NEW SYNTHESIS 285

who deny freedom are looking at the question

solely from the physical standpoint. Whenthey speak of the weight of motives they even

use physical terminology. History again refutes

them, for as man has progressed toward the

spiritual, he has also progressed toward an ever

greater freedom. I am reminded here of twoscriptural texts : "The truth shall make youfree" and "Where the spirit of the Lord is there

is liberty." Mr. Haldane's remark is againapropos that each science must be treated on its

own level. Life cannot be dealt with in terms, of

physics nor value and interest from the stand-

point of physiology. The freedom of the will

cannot be decided by the weights and measures

of the block universe Even Thomas Paine,whom most people regard as anything but reli-

gious, employs the phrase : "So celestial an ar-

ticle as freedom."

Without freedom the moral universe wouldcrumble, our courts and law books would be a

mockery and human history would have nomeaning and no goal. From a practical stand-

point the freedom of the will simply has to be

true; and any kind of reasoning that makes it

seem untrue proves, not freedom, but itself to be

defective. Seen by the light of this principle

of polarity, the defect in it becomes plain. Neces-

sity belongs to the pole of matter, the argument

for it comes from the materially minded, while

the "celestial article," freedom, pertains to the

spirit .

The random or indeterminate element already




mentioned, which we found is a probable fac-

tor in differentiation, no doubt has a bearing

on this problem of freedom. Individual men are

differentiated and therefore would incorporate

this indeterminate element, which would give

them personal freedom, at least to an extent . If

we observed ,great masses of them we should

find, as we did in lower orders of animate or in-

animate entities, that their average behavior

would approach a norm, but this would leave a

margin for freedom or indeterminateness of in-

dividual choice and action. At any rate, man

knows in his heart that he is free and every prac-

tical consideration proves it

Next we approach the problem of cause and

effect. There is a false element here, also, as we

shall discover • It consists in assigning partial

causes. In the last analysis nothing less than

the whole universe is the cause of everything,

or anything, in it No wonder David Humefound no nexus of necessity between events but

only sequences; and no wonder the older philos-

ophers were driven toinvent four different kinds

of causes. I repeat that the whole universe is the

cause of everything in it, and that means the

whole universe not only in space but in time ; and

the whole universe in time necessarily involves

purpose and end. It is not only an efficient, but

a final cause. This is the only way to get rid of

the difficulties raised by Kant in his infinite re-

gression of causes .

Which brings us to Kant's famous antimo-

nies One will suffice to illustrate the four,



A NEW SYNTHESIS 287

since they are all based on the same principle .

'The first one proved that the world must have

had a beginning; and conversely, and by equally

'valid logic, it proved that the world could not

have had a beginning. Obviously both state-

ments could not be true. Just as obviously Kant

knew this, so that the net result of his logical

foray was to prove the defect of the intellectual

methods of approach to the ultimate, the limits

of reason. What is the defect? Well, here is a

suggestion. In this instance, and in the other

three as well, Kant is dealing with a straight-

'line infinite, which we are now convinced ins anillusion

As already remarked, Kant could nat provethe existence of God by the intellectual method

but did prove it, to his own satisfaction, by the

practical. He implied that it had never been

'intellectually proved. Perhaps it does not need

to be proved, for in one form or another, and

in varying terminology, every man admits it .

He must do so, as .a basis for rational thought .

If a proof be demanded, I submit, with all humi-

lity, the one suggested or implied at the end of

the chapter on Relativity, which is in somewhat

different terms, as follows

Proposition 1. The Universe knows itself .

Proof. Man knows the Universe, of whichhe is a part; but since the part cannot be great-

er, or wiser, than the whole, the Universe must

know itself.




Proposition 2. The Universe knows itself as

mindProof. Mind alone knows, hence, if the Uni-

verse knows itself at all it must know itself as

mindProposition 3. The Universe knows itself as

perfect and universal mind.

Proof. Man, being partial, knows the Uni-

verse in part; but since the Universe is whole

and perfect it must know itself as whole and

perfect; and since it knows itself as mind it

must know itself as perfect and universal mind.

Proposition 4. Perfect and universal mind is

GodProof. No proof needed, since that is the

definition of God .

As to Zeno's problems, I have already dealt

with one, and the only other I remember is that

of the moving arrow which Zeno proves does not

move at all, since at any given instant it is sta-

tionary, etc. This contains two false elements-

bath abstractions : First, the assumption that

anything is ever motionless when nothing is

motionless in nature; second, the abstracting of

parts and the approach to the whole movement

of the arrow from this lower and partial level

There is an intellectual trick in Zeno's prob-

lems.

It has been observed that the spiritual hypo-

thes1s has been fruitful in solving a number of

problems that can not be solved without it. Inother words, it works, and thus answers the




final test by which we determine the validity of

any hypothesis. My contention is that by this

method which is the identical method employed

by science, I have proved the existence of spirit

beyond reasonable doubt .

We have learned certain other things in our

adventure in truth-for one thing, rhythm, the

basis of sound, light, electricity and apparently

of the whole phenomenal universe, also of the

periodicity of day and night, winter and sum-

mer, life and death and apparently of successive

lives, interspersed by periods of rest and assim-

ilation. We have likewise discovered the ether

of space, which is responsive to thought and one

state of which is thus organized, through op-

posite polarities, into vortices and tensions that

are the basis of atoms, solar systems and island

universes Next we have learned of relativity

both that of subjective idealism and that of the

frame of reference due to the motion of the ob-

server compared to that of other systems. Bound

up with relativity we have discovered that time

is the fourth dimension of space, which should

help to rid us of our static and three-dimension-

al ways of thinking and of our false infinities .

Also we, have had suggestions as to the use of

both intellect and intuition, each correcting the

defects of the other and giving us an insight in-

to the nature of things from a double approach .

We have learned of values and interests, of the

advantage of considering things in their in-

tegrity as wholes, of the pragmatic method of

evaluating ideas by the way they work, or of




judging a tree by its fruits; of the help of instru-

mentalism in supplementing the senses, inva-

ding the invisible by the aid of special equip-

ment and discovering how things behave under

varying conditions and viewed from different

angles. We have discovered how the practical

governs in nature and in our own lives, how this

is a new and valid proof of design and how

the practical element cannot be omitted from

our equation if we are to reach correct philo-

sophical results. We have found proofs of im-

mortality in the law of continuity, in the theory

of conservation, in the evidences brought us by

psychical research, in telepathy, in the perfect

memory of the extra-conscious mind, in the mor-

al nature of man and in the longings for per-

fection in our own hearts which point to uses

and satisfactions in another life. Finally wehave found with Plato that the crown of all

things is the Good, that all our discoveries paint

to God as the one reality ; that this is a spiritual

universe here and now, and if our vision were

clarified we should see it to be such, as God sees

it ; that we only regard it as imperfect because

we behold it fractionally and fragmentarily both

in space and in time, but viewed completely in

all its dimensions and with its purpose and final

ends unfolded, we should know it as the best of

possible worlds. These realizations regenerate

us from within, heal us in body and mind, and

give us a happier and more confident outlook on

life both here and hereafter .

We have made one other significant discov-



A NEW SYNTHESIS 291

ery : Not only that the new knowledge has very

effectively exploded the old materialistic philos-

ophies of Democritus and the Epicureans onwhich all the other materialistic systems are to

some extent based; but on the other hand it has

added vitality and validity to the intuitive and

idealistic systems. As examples, I cite the Hin

doo philosophy with its different states of ether ;

Pythagoras, with his basic principle of numbers,

corresponding to the number of electrons in the

atom and the numerical series of frequencies

underlying all phenomena; Plato and his arche-

types on which I shall have a final word later ;

and especially the Hermetic system to which

such frequent reference has been made, the basic

principles of which are here summarized as fol-

lows : (1) "The Universe is Mental." (2) "Asabove so below ; as below so above." The Prin-

ciple of Correspondence. (3) "Nothing rests ;

everything moves; everything vibrates." Theprinciple of vibration. (4) Everything is dual ;

everything has two poles ; everything has its pair

of opposites; like and unlike are identical in

nature but different in degree ; extremes meet."

The principle of Polarity. (5) "Everything

flows out and in; everything has its tides ; all

things rise and fall ; the pendulum "swing mani-

fests itself in everything; the measure of the

swing to the right is the measure of the swing

to the left; rhythm compensates." The prin-ciple of Rhythm. (6) "Every cause has its ef-

fect, every effect has its cause; everything hap-

pens according to law; chance is: but a name for




law not recognized; there are many planes of

causation but nothing escapes the law." Theprinciple of Cause and Effect. (7) Sex is found

throughout the universe .

I know of nothing more striking in the whole

history of human thought than the perfect way

in which all seven of the fundamental Hermetic

principles mentioned above coincide with mod-

ern scientific discoveries made nearly twenty

centuries after these principles were promul-

gated. Everyone of them is vital and true to-

day I have already commented on most ofthemAs to the principle of correspondence Sweden-

borg dealt with this quite fully and found these

analogies or similarities throughout Nature. I

doubt not that was the thought of Henry Drum-

mond when he wrote, Naituiral Law in the Spir-

itual World.

The first of the Hermetic principles is that

the Universe is mental ; it consists of thought.

That is the basis of the whole Hegelian philos-

ophy, as it was also of the Platonic philosophy.

The seventh of the postulates of Hermes is

that there is sex throughout the universe. I was

at first disposed to ignore that as merely a va-

riant of polarity. As I thought about the mat-

ter, however, I saw light. Sex is polarity acting

through rhythm. I saw the significance of God

being called the Father and began to suspect

that matter may be from the same root word as

mater, a like thought being conveyed by the

term, "Mother Nature." God is the father prin-




ciple, the primordial substance is the mother .

Through rhythm or energy and motion they be-get atoms and all the phenomenal universe .

This series of lessons in one aspect is based on

the Hermetic philosophy and is a modern state-

ment or interpretation of its principles .

Before we have our materials complete there

is one other question that must be introduced .

How does thought shape and control matter?What is the connection between mind and body?

The subjoined quotation is from Gustave Geley.*

He refers repeatedly to laboratory experiments

in which thought forms were created in what he

calls ideoplastic substance and in an appendix

gives reproductions of twenty-three photographs

of such thought-forms in various degrees of de-

velopment. He suggests this as an explanation

of the power that shapes the embryo. The un-conscious thoughts and memories that comedown from the parents form an etheric bodyor a body in the ideoplastic substance. The

force that forms this is called a "dynamo-psy-

chism." The pattern he calls a "cadre" which

Webster defines as a "Nucleus, frame-work,

skeleton, or scheme." Dr. Geley says

The rational concept of the individual in accord with

all the facts is as follows :

For the genesis of the individual the essential dynamo-psychism objectifies itself by gradual primoridal represen-

tations successively conditioning one another .

* From the Unconscious to the Conscious, by Dr . Gustave Geley . Trans .

by S. DeBrath . Harper & Bros ., New York .




According to our present knowledge the primordial

representations are:

1. The purely mental ;

2 . The Vital Dynamism ;

3. The single organic substance

These primordial representations constitute themselves

into secondary representations: The mental, by states ofconsciousness and thoughts ; the unique substance by cells

and organs. These primordial representations are cadres

which remain the same from the birth to the death of the

grouping which constitutes the individual. The secondary

representations, on the contrary, are perpetually renewed.

The cells of the organic complex are born, die and succeed

each other very rapidly. The states of consciousness and

thoughts follow on one another in the same way, associat-

ing, opposing, converging or diverging in a chaos which is

co-ordinated only by the directing Self .

In a footnote Dr. Geley adds

It is curious that the schools of thought called occultist

have reached by intuitive or mystical paths a systematiza-

tion not unlike this.

He could have added that these thought bodies

are like the Platonic archetypes except that in

actual life the general type or pattern is modi-

fied to fit each individual .

Dr. Geley makes a superior dynamo-psychismresponsible for the universe and interprets evo-

lution to be a progressive emergence into con-

sciousness of God's purposes and thoughts origin-

ally incorporated in the cosmos that is, His rep-

resentation. In the lower orders of life intel-

ligence is in an instinctive or dream state. Inman this intelligence becomes conscious, while

at the same time, for practical reasons, a reverse



A NEW SYNTHESIS 295

stream of perfected thought processes pass into

the habit mind or into the unconscious

These are our materials, our new factors that

strikingly enough recall old factors arrived at in-

tuitively or otherwise by lovers of wisdom in the

remote past. Thus brought together, they point

to their own interpretation, their own synthesis .

One truth they indicate is that we can have no

philosophy worthy the name that omits the spir-itual factor Without it we are dealing with

half-truths with appearances and mechanisms

that have little meaning until we look behind

and beyond them. Without it we are encounter-

ing unsolvable problems, that under the alembic

of the spirit are dissolved and. disappear from

our path. The spiritual is not discovered by

observation or by the intellectual approach

alone I have already likened it to a margin

beyond the edges of sense-perception and pheno-

mena. It is like the sun in eclipse. When theeclipse is total, there is yet a corona or rim of

light that does not leave the world in complete

darkness. So when the spiritual seems eclipsed

by the physical universe, there is yet this margin

of light

To complete our synthesis we must venture on

a further invasion of the invisible, and this we

must do through hypothesis. Yet we are not left

to theory alone. We have not only this "margin

of light," but all these new facts gathered for

us by the special sciences, as well as the con-

jectures of the old idealistic philosophies that

such facts have confirmed . All these elements




have indicated the direction we shall take, and

in general outline have shown the form of our

hypothesis.

It has already been demonstrated that the cos-

mos knows itself as perfect and universal mind

and is therefore identical with God. The phe-

nomenal universe is His representation .

In this study I am not attempting to recon-

struct the Cosmos. That has been done before

and is too ambitious a program for one humble

individual. Nor am I trying to tell the attributes

of God. I leave that to the theologians. Here I

am. only seeking to set forth the implicationsand interpretations of the facts we have ob-

tained. As a first step, they fairly compel us

to acknowledge that God is. That is enough.

As to what He is, we are left to grope. To meHe is all. He objectifies Himself in Nature. He

multiplies Himself in His emanations, in His

children, but this, according to the nature of

the spiritual universe, does not subtract from

His own being These emanations are whatLeibnitz calls monads. There is one feature of

Leibnitz's system that I cannot accept, however .

He calls God the chief monad, which wouldmake Him the member of a series. God is the

One, and there is none other. The emanationsor monads are derived from Him, just as the

phenomenal Universe is representative of Him.

In the language of the conventional cosmog-

ony, I should now say, "in the beginning ;" but

there is no beginning. "From everlasting to

everlasting I am God." The curve of space-



A NEW SYNTHESIS 297

time returns upon itself but is endless in both

directions . The eternal process is not depend-

ent on time. God is forever renewing and ani-

mating the Universe, which is His object, or His

other It is a present tense action . I do not

like the word, "creating" for it implies making

something out of nothing, which is a human

concept having no meaning.

In the pairs of opposites, at the very top of

the scale, let us posit mind as the positive and

primordial substance as the negative pole, the

nexus between them being energy The first

product is the movable ether, the basis of the

physical universe . This is polarized into posi-

tive and negative electrons which start the vor-

tices called atoms, and set up not only vortexial

movements but strains and tensions in the ether,

or attractions and repulsions, which grow in

force as the atoms are massed together. At the

same time cadences and rhythms are generated,

one range of which is light. "And God said let

there be light." In the same way that the elec-

trons revolve about their nucleus, so, when the

atoms mass themselves into suns, planets are

carried about these in their own vortices and

moons about the planets. None of these things

happen by accident, but according to law, the

laws corresponding to God's eternal purposes .

When any planet is ready for life, the spirit

breaks through into matter in the form of pro-

toplasm and cells, the matrices or cadres of

which are formed in the ideoplastic substance,




which may be another ether, or state of the pri-

mordial substance .

Now begins the long ascent of Transforma-

tion or Evolution. As the first single-cell enti-

ties associate themselves in more and more com-

plex organisms, the cadres or forms in the ideo-

plastic substance advance correspondingly, be-

ing formed by the extra-conscious, or dimly con-

scious mind that is breaking through into mat-

ter and pervading it from the spiritual pole of

being. The process goes forward not in any

mechanical or preordained way, but through

trial and error, and by ever-larger accretions of

spirit, as the organism becomes fitted to express

mind in ever-unfolding degrees of intelligence .

The one-cell entities are in a sense immortal,

since they multiply by sub-dividing, but as soon

as the organisms become at all complex, death

appears so that the entity may not remain fixed

in the organism and so impede its progress. Atthe same time the forms or cadres in the ideo-

plastic substance advance in the same way and

participate in the rhythm of life and death .

These etheric doubles are the permanent bodies

or rather thought-forms of each entity, but there

is ~so slight a consciousness involved that we can-

not call them immortal until man emerges into

true self-consciousness . They are all eternal,

but not consciously so. Immortality is conscious

eternality. We thus arrive at the human plane,

which has already been treated so fully that it

need not be recapitulated here.

This in brief outline is our hypothesis. It is




only offered tentatively as a working basis for

further study and investigation. From my ownviewpoint, it is not wholly theory It is justi-

fied by the facts we have discovered and is neces-

sary to harmonize and explain them. The proc-

ess goes forward under the direction of the ex-

tra-conscious mind of the cosmos, the elan vital

of Bergson. This, or its emanations or cor-

respondences in the entities, is at first almostwholly unconscious, but gradually advances into

some sort of dim awareness until in man it

bursts into flower in intuition and reason .

For practical purposes the entities seem inde-

pendent and separate. This is a necessary part

of the scheme since individuation or differentia-

tion is a feature of the life-process. On the hu-

man level it comes into full manifestation as

self-consciousness . Yet there is an element of

illusion, as well as of impermanency, in this idea

of separateness. Here we must again revert to

the principle of polarity. If things seem divided

on the physical plane they are united on the

spiritual. The line is individual but merged in

the universal.

God rules over all by a sort of pre-established

harmony, as Leibnitz called it. He is not special

to any form of life bust His powers are available

to all to the extent that they are practically

needed and consciously or unconsciously in-

voked. He does not rule through any special

intervention but by a telepathic pervasion of all

the universe of mind with His Universal Love

and Goodness. Being the Absolute He contains,




in idea, all within Himself, including the per-

sonality of man, and responds to every entity

according to its nature and to the degree of its

unfoldment. He knows the Cosmos as His own

Divine Mind, which is pictured and objectified

by His other, the phenomenal universe, and

which is mirrored in the lives and souls of all

His creatures.



CHAPTER XVAFTERTHOUGHTS

ANUMBERof questions have been left "up in

the air," so to speak, and our next two chapters

will be devoted to these, the present one being

occupied with a further discussion of physics

and relativity and the last with an application

of our results to practical problems.

As to the greater mass of the proton compared

with the electron in the atom, it has already

been suggested that this is apparently a practi-

cal arrangement to insure the relative stability of

the protons while the electrons revolve about

them as a center. It may be that this greater

mass has something to do with attraction, al-

though Mr. Einstein has ascribed gravitationalattraction to the "warping of space," which we

have already identified with vortex motion in

the content, or ether, of space, since space itself

is only a frame or dimension.* We find a vortex

has this very property belonging to gravitation,

since it draws everything into its center. Wealso observe that all matter tends to vortical

motion.

By the way, if we are looking for purpose in

" In Mr. Einstein's later paper in which he identified electrical energywith gravitation and energy generally he implies that attraction may beelectrical or rather magnetic which would seem to be borne out by attrac-tion of the positive and negative electrons. Inasmuch as this is, in asense, an organizing activity and as organization is the peculiar functionof mind, it may be after all, that there is a psychic factor involved.

301




Nature, where can we discover a more signal

evidence of it than in the mass -of the proton,

without which neither the atom nor the physical

universe could be constituted in the way it is.

At the same time no physical or mechanical

reason is apparent which would account for

the tremendous disparity in the mass: of the

two types of electrons. If they are only positive

and negative electrical charges, this mass should

be the same. Whether or not there is a psychic

factor in the proton, as some have supposed,

there is certainly something mysterious that

may explain much if it is ever known; and there

is just as certainly purpose revealed by this

whole arrangement.

The atom has been called the building block

of matter, but that carried the thought of mate-

rial atoms, whereas the probability is that these

are only vortices of energy . Although mixing

metaphors a bit, a scientific friend refers to

them as "solar systems of the elemental world"

and "outposts of the phenomenal universe." Heproposes a theory that would explain electricalconduction and some other phenomena. I have

taken the liberty to condense his statement. Herefers to the "proton or nucleus, central to or-

bital vortices traveled by individual points of

energy or bound ether, which we term electrons,"

and infers that their rate of revolution, or rath-

er speed, decreases as they approach the center,

since these inside orbits are smaller .

His hypothesis is that the atom is "the source

of the entire upper frequency range of vibra-



AFTERTHOUGHTS 303

tions. It is a hetrodyne of frequencies," being

able "to convert one band of frequencies into

one or more bands of a different order." On the

quantum theory of internal displacement, or the

jumping of the electrons to orbits arranged in

a series, he claims that "an element is not re-

sponsive to a given frequency range unless there

are electronic orbits in the atoms composing it

which are in resonance therewith."

Applied to the light range, this theory operates logic-ally . If a given substance appears red to our eye, it

means that there is only one electronic orbit responsive

to the light frequencies and this happens to be the one

known to our eye as red. A white substance would there-fore be responsive orbitally to the entire light range .

Black would be just the reverse. Half tones, intermediate

to the primary colors, could be accounted for by indirect

resonance or the law of harmonics .

The range of vibrations above light also respond to

the same laws of orbital resonance, the space-time factor

simply being correspondingly smaller. This would seemto be proven by the Millikan ray hypothesis, whichplaces the origin of these rays in inter-stellar space, the

source being matter of extreme density, which wouldmean atoms of great complexity and a wide orbital reso-

nance range

This theory clearly applies to the electrical range. Wecan find here a reasonable explanation for electrical con-duction. An electrical conductor presupposes atoms whose

electronic orbits are resonant to the given electrical fre-

quency Each atom composing the conducting mediumresponds through its resonant orbit and transmits the im-

pulse to its neighbors . Partial conduction, shown by

resistances, infers the lack of direct orbital resonance, de-

pending on minor harmonics for transmittal. So insula-tors indicate a lack of practically all electrical resonance .

We see from the above how the atom may transmit vi-

brations It also has an apparent role as a converter .

Such applications of energy to a substance as friction re-




act on the molecule and thence on the atom . Continued

friction produces radiant heat and light . This probably

means that the energy application is transformed into

successive ranges of vibration by orbital resonance, as

before. Sudden impacts may have the same result. Itis significant that frictional energy may produce heat

and static electricity . Here another orbital resonance

comes into play .

There is an additional factor I must introduce

at this point. It is from Eddington.* He calls

attention to a feature of the quantum theory

that we have not yet considered. It involves what

lie designates as "the atom of action," which is

a product of energy multiplied by time, i. e., the

amount of energy multiplied by the period of

vibration. He mentions sodium and after deter-

mining the amount of energy emitted by one

atom multiplies this by the vibration period

which is five hundred and ten billions to the sec-

ond and gets a product in what are termed "erg-

seconds." This is referred to as the quantum h

He proceeds :

The remarkable law of Nature is that we are con-tinually getting the same numerical results. We maytake another source of light-hydrogen, calcium, or any

other atom. The energy will be a different number of

ergs ; the period will be a different number of seconds ;

but the product will be the same number of erg-seconds .

The same applies to X-rays, to gamma rays and to other

forms of radiation. It applies to light absorbed by an

atom as well as to light emitted . . . Evidently h is a kind

of atom-something that coheres as one unit in the proc-

esses of radiation ; it is not an atom of matter but an

atom or, as we usually call it, a quantum of the more elu-

sive entity action . Whereas there are ninety-two different

kinds of material atoms there is only one quantum of

* T h e N a t u r e o f P h y s i c a l W o r l d b y A . S . E d d i n g t on , M a c m i l la n , N e w

Y o r k .



AFTERTHOUGHTS 30 5

action-the same whatever the material is associated

with I say the same without reservation. You mightperhaps think that there must be some qualitative differ-

ence betwen the quantum of red light and the quantum of

blue light, although both contain the same number of erg-

seconds; but the apparent difference is only relative to a

frame of space and time and does not concern the abso-

lute lump of action .

We thus discover that time is not only the

fourth dimension of space, the dimension in

which motion and life occur, but it is the co-

efficient of energy in producing the absolute

atom of action, and the measurer of the vibra-

tion-frequencies that give us all the phenomena

of the universe. By the way, this result fur-

nishes an added proof of Einstein's theory.

There is one thing about time, however, that

is not yet made plain. To it there are two pos-

sible clues. One is that mentioned by Edding-

ton regarding erg-seconds and the quantum h .

.The other is much more familiar. It is the prin-

ciple involved in the lever. The same principle

is found in the inclined plane, the wedge, the

cog-wheel, the pulley, etc. It consists in a mul-

tiplication of power at the expense of time, that

is, a relatively fast connected with a slower

motion. Suppose we examine this clue first .

Time is the dimension of motion. Both seemto be involved in any kind of multiplication .

When we multiply a number we say so many"times" that number. Two times two are four

Is this a mere figure of speech or is something

more fundamental involved? In the case of the

lever, etc., our power is multiplied by a faster




compared to a slower motion, i .e . , the frame of

reference of the time factor is changed. Thespace factor is also involved. If the length of

one arm of the lever is four times that of the

other, a force of ten pounds will lift forty, but

the arc described by the long arm is four times

that of the short-the space factor-and the

rate of its motion is four times as fast-the

time factor. The load lifted is four times the

force exerted-the energy factor .

Just what does this mean? Why do we saythat power is gained at the expense of time? Thepower is multiplied. Why do we say in all mul-

tiplication so many times? The physicists, the

mechanical physicists, know this principle. They

have known it since- the days of Archimedes, but

so far as I am informed they have not explained

it. They have taken it for granted. That is the

way with science, and it is a perfectly legitimate

way; science describes; but it cannot be the waywith philosophy ; and nothing, perhaps, could

better illustrate the difference between the two .

Philosophy must have the meaning, the explana-

tion, as well as the description .

Now, why is it that a faster motion multiplies

power as against a slower motion? We knowthat it does this in the lever, the pulley, etc

We know also that the longer and shorter move-

ments of the corresponding ends of the lever,

occurring in the same time interval, involve a

change in the relative time and space values .

We know, for a third thing, that any sort of mo-

tion is like a vibration frequency. Are we get-



AFTERTHOUGHTS 3 0 7

ting an inkling, here, of the nature of space

and time, or space-time, as related to motion

and energy?

To answer this question we must have re-course to our first clue, the quantum h, or the

atom of action. We have already found thatthis quantum is constant, however the two fac-

tors of time and energy vary. These exactly

balance each other. If the energy is greater the

time of the vibration is shorter and vice-versa

But there is another factor involved in the

equation, that of space . A vibration cov-

ers not only a time interval, but also aspace interval. Eddington seemingly over-looked this fact, but the oversight meantnothing in his problem for the reason that the

variation in the time and space interval exactly

corresponded. A shorter time interval was ac-

companied by exactly that much shorter space

interval . In other words, it became literally

a space-time interval in the meaning of the four-

dimensional theory.

That condition does not apply to the problem

of the lever, however. Here the exact coordina-

tion or correlation of the time and space factors

ceases. They are violently driven asunder, we

might say, by mechanical means. Or, in the

Einstein phrase, they are "warped" asunder.

The time interval remains the same on both ends

of the lever but the space interval is different .

This variation must be compensated. How? Bya variation of energy or power, the only remain-

ing factor. In other words our two factors are




space-time and energy. The time factor decreases

exactly as the energy factor increases so that

the product 'of the two is always the same ; but

in Mr. Eddington's problem the space factor de-

creases exactly as does the time factor, so that

it does not affect the result, which would have

been the same if the space interval had been

used as the multiplicand instead of the time in-

terval. The two remain in union as the space-

time factor; but in the lever problem, the space

interval is only one-fourth on the load end of

that on the power-end, while the time element is

the same on both, therefore the enrgy or power

factor is four times as great .

Even this does not answer the question as to

what space-time, motion and energy are. It mere-

ly takes one step in that direction by identi-

fying the principle underlying the lever with

that involved in they atom of action. It also

gives one additional example of correspondence

-"as below so above."

There is yet another interesting fact with re-

gard to the quantum theory. The atoms do not

give off light continuously. The action is inter-

mittent, a period of emission followed by a pe-

riod of rest. It was by contrasting the twothat the quantity of energy given out was meas-

ured. The fact that half of the atoms are thus

out of action is not visible to us for the reason

that we look at great masses of them and get the

average effect

Apparently these periods of rest are neces-

sary to replenish the atom's stock of energy .



AFTERTHOUGHTS 3 09

From what source? Possibly from the sur-

rounding atoms and possibly from the general

storehouse. We have already mentioned the sec-

ond law of thermo-dynamics which is that heat,

in doing work, steps down to a lower level and

finally becomes latent or static. Now, a motion

in one direction generally implies a return mo-

tion in the other direction, so, to balance this

descent of energy into the static, there must be

an equal ascent of other energy units or ergs

into the kinetic. Here is a possible source for

the restocking of the atoms, or it may even be

that the atoms themselves act as converters, as

already indicated. Latent or static energy is

probably only a low rate of vibration and the

rapid motion of the electrons in the atom would

raise the vibration of the static energy and con-

vert it into active or dynamic, somewhat as, fric-

tion generates electricity. In this way the atoms

themselves would renew the kinetic energy of

the universe. There must be some such process

to restock the energy of the atoms so that they

can again give off light. This suggests a clue

to the nature of energy itself. In one aspect

it is only a vibration frequency like electricity,

heat and light. This is further suggested by the

constant relation between the amount of energy

and the wave-length involved in they atom of

action or the quantum h. (After all, the space-

time continuum is only a sort of frame for its

content, the ether.) In this aspect the amount

of energy is the vibration frequency, so that the

energy volume and the wave interval would only




be different phases of the same thing, and their

product would necessarily remain constantLikewise, this would be true of both the space-

interval and time-interval since the two accom-

pany each other and are but different dimen-

sions of the same wave-motion, another proof

of the four dimensional theory.* Strictly speak-

ing, however, there are only two dimensions,

space and time, since the three dimensions of

space are more or less arbitrary.

We now see why the amount of energy, orerg, is exactly measured by the space-time inter-

val, but in a reverse way, since the higher the

vibration, the greater the energy. We have thus

taken another step in the direction of determin-

ing the nature of energy, but have not yet ar-rived at the goal .

Do we find an additional clue in the name,

the "atom of action?" Action means an actor

and, in the last analysis, the only actor is mind .

Have we arrived again at the doors of the spiri-

tual universe? We had already decided that the

two poles are mind and primordial substance

and that the nexus between them is energy ; and

now, from a different approach, we arrive at an

indication of the same truth. Mind acts on the

primary ether through polarity which in turn

produces the positive and negative electrons,

which start ether vortices, or atoms. The rapid

revolution of the electrons generate a vibration

*It may be objected that I am assuming this exact correspondence

between the time and space factors in vibration frequencies, and this i s

true; but it stands to reason and, so far as I am informed, is in accordance

with the facts empirically determined ; and I am further assuming that, iffor the reasons mentioned, or any other, there is a distortion of this perfect

correspondence, there must be an energy compensation.



AFTERTHOUGHTS 313

true of a magnet passed behind the sheet, or

of an electric charge, if our visual reaction andtime value were so changed that we could see it .

In fact, the electric charge, or current, is most

suggestive. An electric current passing through

a wire, for example, probably consists of a mere

progressive change of state of the atoms .

What is the ether and how does motion take

place in it? When most of us are faced by such

a fundamental question, we either dodge behind

some Spencerian unknowable, or lump the whole

thing into a large abstraction that makes noth-

ing plain except our own mental poverty. Wesay either that man does not and cannot know

anything about it, or that Nature does it, or God

does it, etc. That gets us exactly nowhere. Are

we to make a plea of "we cannot know" and let

it go at that, or are we, manlike, to wrestle

with the problem, even in the face of almost cer-

tain defeat, and attempt to obtain some inkling,

or suggestion, of the truth?

The question is so elusive and difficult that

perhaps the best we can do is to make various

approaches and tentative suggestions .

First, as to the ether, we have alreadyagreed that it must be continuous so that there

may he action at a distance, and that it must be

susceptible to strains, tensions, vibrations, mo-

tions, etc., to account for the other phenomena

of the Universe. Now, a continuous substance

would necessarily be indivisible. We might think

of it as being sufficiently elastic to permit of

strains, tensions and vibrations, although even




these present difficulties, but to think of it as

being sufficiently elastic to admit of the con-

tinuous rotation and orbital revolution of the

planets increases these difficulties practically to

the point of impossibility. It is this feature that

has necessitated the postulating of more than

one ether, or ether state.

We encounter a like difficulty with vibration

frequencies. We have identified enough of theseto indicate that they cover a gamut, or ascend-

ing scale, running all the way from zero to in-

finity . We have already localized the sound

range, the radio band. of frequencies, the electric

and magnetic field, the heat and light spectrum,

the ultra-violet, the X-ray, the Millikan or cos-

mic ray, etc. There must be still higher ranges

for if telepathy is true there must be some me-

dium or band of frequencies to carry thought .

Indeed, we seem to be encountering a gigantic

form of polarity here with the phenomenal uni-

verse at one end of the scale and the spiritual

at the other. This is not altogether a new idea

for it has been suggested both by religious and

scientific writers. One authority supposed that

matter, or physical energy, is only spirit slowed

down, and another that the biological cells con-

tain a feature analogous to the hetrodyne that

transforms or "steps down" the spiritual fre-

quency ranges to those we call the physical .

Now here is our difficulty. If this theory be

true, or something in a general way correspond-

ing to it, how can one ether simultaneously car-

ry all these almost infinite ranges of vibrations



AFTERTHOUGHTS 31 5

and activities? Does not this hypothesis also

call for more than one ether state?

Granted that this is true, our hypothesis no

longer presents insuperable obstacles, for the

ether states, like the frequency rates themselves,

are in a sense only varying phases of the one

primordial substance and there is no principle

that imposes a limit on these phases or frequen-

c i e s .

Even accepting all this, we have not yet ac-

counted for motion . Here is a clue, the same

we found in the atom of action : Motion implies

a mover and there is no mover we can think of

except mind. Thus we are again led to the doors

of the spiritual universe . The identity between

vibration-frequencies and more extended move-

ments has already been indicated, for it matters

not whether a motion be in the form of a wave,

a vortex, or a continuous progress, the principle

involved is the same .

There may be some who will object that I my-

self have resorted to an abstraction in indicating

the above answer and if I had nothing further

to offer, this might be granted ; although we have

found the spiritual necessary from so many dif-

ferent angles that it is no longer an empty ab-

straction, at least, but a working hypothesis .

There is, however, a further word, which is this

Motion is the phenomenal universe. As: v i b r a •

tion-frequency we have already found it insepar-

ably bound up with energy, of which space-time

is the measure . We thus arrive at the funda-

mental unity of ether and energy, whose syn-




thesis is motion, the basic reality of the objective

universe .

The above conclusion is verified in another

way. Motion is but one aspect of becoming, orevolution, which Hegel implied and HerbertSpencer, Bergson and practically all modern

philosophers have accepted as the basic activity

of nature. It also harmonizes the outstanding

oppositions of the old Greek philosophy. Hera-

clitus made motion or becoming the fundament-

al truth of the universe, while Parmenides coun-

tered that it is not motion but the absolute.

Both were right, their only defect being that

each failed to specify which universe, or, rather,

which pole of the universe, he meant.

Motion is the fundamental fact of the phenom-

enal universe while the absolute is the basic

truth of the Spiritual Universe-the Absolute

Idea.

Of the two Spirit holds priority, for it alone,

of all the factors in the Universe, can initiate

motion .

The truth that motion is the basis of the phe-

nomenal universe is verified from many different

directions. We have already agreed that if any-

thing came to absolute rest, both within and

without, it would pass out of the visible world

which is proved by the fact that our senses re-

spond only to frequencies and resistances, both

of which are forms of motion. The atom consists

of motion, energy is produced by motion, light,

heat and electricity are motion, mass is governed

by motion, sensation is a reaction to motion,



AFTERTHOUGHTS 31 7

evolution is a progressive motion, activity is mo-

tion, space-time is a measure of motion, and sowe might continue indefinitely.

Mr. Einstein's relativity has to do with mo-tion, a change in which alters the frame of ref-

erence and affects all values . Life is motion,

the difference between a living and a dead body

is expressed by motion or the lack of it. Reso-

nance, to which we have already referred, is mo-

tion. The cycles of all things are measured by

motion.

Here is the summing up of the matter

The Absolute Idea is the dynamic of the Uni-

verse, and toward it motion is a progressive un-

foldment.

The question of attraction has yet to be con-

sidered, especially gravitation . Mr. Einsteinsuggests that it is a warp or a hump in space-

time in the vicinity of masses of matter. In his

last paper, however, he identified gravitation

with magnetism, etc. We have seen evidences

that vortex motion is also a factor. Let us see

if we can work out all of these clues and har-

monize the seeming paradoxes.

In the lever problem we found that where

there is a longer and shorter connected motion

in the same time-interval there must be a com-

pensation in the only other factor, energy. Inthe revolution of a vortex, such as an atom., a

planet, or a solar system, the outside is moving

more rapidly than the inside. To illustrate, the

earth is approximately eight thousand miles in




diameter Therefore in its revolution or the

revolution of the vortex, a point on the surface

will move more rapidly than a point, say four

thousand miles from the center and this relative

retardation or slower motion will become more

pronounced as we approach still nearer to the

center. In other words there is a greater space

interval, or arc, at the surface which interval is

shortened in a graduated series all the way to

the center, yet the time interval remains the

same This is the "warp." In the lever we

found that this distortion was compensated by

energy, i . e . , the shorter space interval was ac-

companied by increase of power. Exactly the

same thing happens here. There is a constant

increase of energy as we approach the center,

hence: the attraction of gravitation

As to magnetism, resonance is also apparently

a factor. Things are only attracted by magnet-

ism that are in resonance with the electromag-

netic range of frequencies As to gravitation

the earth covers every frequency range and

therefore attracts everything .

In a vortex the "warp" is between the time

and space values caused by the concentric cir-

cles or orbits, each inside orbit being smaller

than the next in series, resulting in a progress-

ive decrease of the space factor and a consequent

increase in the compensating energy factor,

hence the pull. When I identified this changing

time and space value with the multiplying of

power as manifested in the lever, I at first doubt-

ed it to be a true lever principle since the ful-



AFTERTHOUGHTS 3 19

crum is at the center of the vortex. The doubtwas resolved, however, by the reflection that the

load may be between the power and the fulcrum

as well as on the opposite ends of the lever with

the fulcrum between.

Thus all the factors seemed to be harmonized .

The space-time "warp" or "hump" of Einstein,

the vortex motion, the atom of action, the lever

principle, and all the other elements were in-

cluded. This not only verified Einstien's theory

but made it plain.

It should be stated at this point that all these

suggestions are merely tentative. They are not

offered as absolute solutions but as possibly in-

dicating directions in which solutions may be

obtained. I have had no means for testing their

validity, but leave this to others. I only offer

them for what they are worth.

Nor does this hypothesis account for all at-

traction. I have already pointed out how chem-

ical attraction may be caused by too few elec-

trons in the atom, etc. The present suggestion

relates particularly to gravitation and magnet-

ism. In the case of the magnet, the familiar

experiment with iron filings indicates the pres-

ence of the vortex principle

There is one possible objection to our gravita-

tional hypothesis which is that gravity decreases

on the ratio of the inverse Square, which means

that it increases at the same rate, while with the

lever the power only increases by simple multi-

plication. It should be remembered, however, that

the lever only describes a circle while the planet




is a sphere Therefore the planet, or other

gravitational body, no doubt, involves a com-pound or spherical vortex . The circumference

of a circle increases by simple multiplication,

two r times pi (2ti x ir) while the surface of the

sphere increases with the square, four pi r sq .

( 4 , x x tie) . As yet we know little about vortices,

but the law of harmonics involving nodal points,

is suggestive, also the action of a magnet which

creates a sphere with decrease or increase of

power also on the ratio of the square. We havealready seen, with Einstein, that magnetism, in

its limited resonance range, is similar to gravity,

which is universal .

The principle of the gravity pull itself would

seem simple and plain The need for compen-

sating energy at the center of the vortex would

draw energy units from the outside, which, so

moving, would be what we call matter, since

we have already determined matter to be moving

energy

The will of God is energy which produces

action in the phenomenal universe, just as the

will of man produces action in his more limited

sphere. All resolves itself finally to the infinite

will and idea as seen by Schopenhauer .

God's idea is executed by His will which ener-

gizes the primordial ether, polarizes the protons

and electrons and begets matter which is the

moving energy or energized state of the basic

substance. Apparently the same law of the vor-

The same principle may be observed in the spinning top or gyro-

scope, and develops the tremendous energy at the center of the cyclone orwaterspout. Men blindfolded walk in circles, which fact is suggestive .



AFTERTHOUGHTS 3 2 1

tex is at work in the atom in the attraction of

the protons and electrons .

As to repulsion that is sometimes accounted

for by similar polarity, an overplus of either

positive: or negative electrons in two repellant

atoms, also, perhaps, a matter of discordant

resonance, etc. Philosophy can only suggest in

matters such as these, leaving the verification

to scientific experiment. If any of these tenta-

tive suggestions are deemed of interest, such de-

tails of verification are left to those better fitted

by training and equipment to conduct them .

In these closing chapters perhaps one word

further should be said as to method. My onlyclaim is to employ the intuitive as well as the

intellectual method and to include the spiritual

as well as the physical factors. Lest there be

any misapprehension, however, may I add that

by spiritual I do not mean psychic? In my own

person I have never had a psychic experience,

which I recognized as such. I have only offered

one previously unpublished psychic message in

this entire book and I believe this to be wrong .

Some reference was made to mystical experien-

ces, but these were wholly internal and related

to thought, the only sort of spiritual experiences

I have ever had or sought.

As to the difference between the psychic and

spiritual, here is a possible suggestion that may

be helpful :

The psychic corresponds to the sub-conscious,

the spiritual to the super-conscious




To sum up this chapter, we have identified the

Absolute as the Absolute or Divine Idea at the

spiritual pole of the Universe. It is the dynamic

that begets motion or becoming as the funda-

mental reality at the other pole of the phenome-

nal. Herbert Spencer once went so far as to

identify this ultimate material factor with force

or energy, which in a sense is the same thing,

since we might designate force as motion in the

making, or motion as the manifestation of force .

In other words: force or energy is only possible

motion. The proof that motion is the ultimate

reality of phenomena becomes absolute when we

reflect that all man's sense reactions are from

the stimulus of motion which thus becomes the

means by which we know objects In reality

motion is the only objective universe we do know .

On the other hand, mind begets motion and thus

acts on the physical. The fundamental reality

from both viewpoints is motion, or, to follow the

thought a step farther, action.*

When Descartes and Spinoza referred tothought and extension as the two fundamentals,

they were talking of a static universe, that being

the three-dimensional aspect in which things

were then regarded. Now we have the four-dimensional way of thinking, which gives us, not

a static, but a living and becoming universe, the

great common denominators of which are pur-

pose or idea and motion or action.

We have also learned that heat, light, electri-

*The identity of motion and action suggests the identity between the

physical and spiritual universe. Motion is the physical universe, action

is the spiritual universe. Thus, as both Leibnitz and Berkeley saw, every-

thing resolves itself back to God's action



AFTERTHOUGHTS 323

city and all other forms of energy are vibration

frequencies of which space-time is the measure,

so that the amount of energy multiplied by the

frequency period gives a constant product, but

that when space and time are warped asunder

by a lever or other similar mechanical device,

which thus changes the relative space and time

values, there is an energy or power compensa-

tion; and that precisely the same thing happens

in the case of a vortex with progressively dimin-

ishing orbits. This gives us attraction toward

the center of the vortex where the compensating

energy is greatest. Gravitation is this vorticial

attraction on a magnified scale. It attracts all

objects, since it is in resonance with all bands

of frequencies. Magnetism only attracts those

objects resonant to the electro-magnetic band .

On the same principle, only those metals are

electrical conductors which are resonant to the

same range

There is an obscure factor right here. Whydoes not any form of energy act universally on

all objects? We have already determined that

energy is~ only a vibration frequency and evident-

ly any form of it does not act universally unless

it covers and includes all frequency ranges.

We have likewise seen that the universe of

motion is what we might call the kinetic phaseof the primordial ether and that there is no

principle imposing a limit on either the phases

or frequencies of this ultimate substance. Ap-parently the frequency rates extend all the way




from the zero of space to the telepathic rates of

thought and the spiritual universe .

I must beg the reader's pardon for these rep-

etitions, but the subject is so difficult that I have

adopted the policy of restating things in various

ways to make sure that they are understood, or,

at least, understandable



CHAPTER XVIPRACTICAL IDEALISM

WEnow approach the practical application of

our results which will involve a slight shifting

of terms

Our philosophical synthessis points beyond

itself to a religious synthesis . It has removed

some of the obstacles and cleared the road to a

harmony between science and religion It has

made plain that the Universe is mind and mo-

tion, that Nature is the outpicturing of mind,

and that life is the process through which mind

acts and becomes conscious of itself .

Man has always known these truths, not clear-

ly and in detail, but dimly and in general out-

line. He only becomes doubtful when confused

with too much minutiae which he fails to relate

properly to the general scheme. He has always

known God and immortality, as is proved by all

religions and practically all philosophies. I say

always, but this knowledge has been progress-

ive and has grown clearer as man has advanced

in intelligence. As already remarked, God'sideas are telepathically present in His universe

and are available to us as we ascend the scale

and become more receptive. Even Jove hurling

the thunderbolt is a somewhat crude and con-3 25




fused recognition of Divine Mind building mat-

ter through the use of electrical energy .

We need more spirituality. That is our key-

thought The spirit alone is immortal, the

spirit alone is self-active, the spirit alone is life,

love, wisdom and truth. In it we reach our great-

est common denominatorWe have referred to matter as the antithesis

of spirit, but in the course of these studies, we

have reduced matter to motion and becoming.

We must seek an apter and more: descriptiveterm. We could call it Nature, but that is not

sufficiently distinctive. Nature includes the sub-

jective as well as objective element Perhaps

the right word is mechanism, which is organized

motion. If we examine the phenomenal universe

more attentively, we discover that it behaves like

a machine, a gigantic cosmical machine . That

gives us our opposite key-word, or common de-

nominator.

The special sciences have to do with this ma-

chine. They busy themselves with analyzing

and describing it. They observe the perfect co-

ordination of its parts and laws. They and their

votaries are lost in wonder, so lost that many

of them forget or ignore the other phase of be-

ing altogether. In effect they deify the machine

and erect altars to it in the form of a mechanis-

tic philosophy which is manifested outwardly ina machine age. And all the time they are omit-

ting from their equation the simple and obvious

fact that mechanism by its very nature is only

a function of something else. It is not self-act-



PRACTICAL IDEALISM 327

ing, not original; it is derived. Any philosophy

based upon it is a cart-before-the-horse philoso-

phy. It results in such strange inversions as

placing behavior before its mental cause, brain

before mind, the implement before the user, and

the part before the whole. It turns the Universe

into a mindless automaton . In the name ofscience, it adopts a method so unscientific as to

ignore the biggest and most apparent fact of all,

the very fact by which science itself proceeds,

the presence of mind in man. As a consequence,

it also ignores or denies mind in the whole of

which man is a part. It will not work. We can-

not substitute a machine in place of God .

A friend who is of a scientific turn of mind

objects to my use of the word spirit, as the other

term of our equation. He says it smacks of the

old philosophy. He proposes the word life as,

at least, more modern. Terminology is a bit ar-

bitrary, at best, but in this instance there is , areal reason for using the word, spirit, since

there is no other term that has quite the samefundamental and comprehensive significance .

The word life refers especially to biological

processes. In a way it unites both poles, while

spirit belongs to the one. The word mind is amore perfect synonym, but mind is popularly

identified with the human intellect, which again

is essentially different from the spiritual. Prob-ably the exact meaning of spirit is indicated by

an idea already mentioned, the mind of Godtelepathically present in His Universe. We can-not do without the word spirit any more than




we can do without the fact for which it stands.

For the purposes of this discussion, however,

I am disposed to adopt the word mind as the op-

posite pole to mechanism, but it must be under-

stood that it is universal mind that is meant.

I adopt it for two reasons, first on the scientific

principle that we should employ a known term

rather than one less well known and, second,

because mind is the most perfect antithesis to

machine. It should be explained that the two

poles shade into each other and have varying de-

grees connecting them, as for example, light and

darkness, or cold and heat with all the shades

of luminosity or degrees of warmth between .

Mind as it approaches mechanism passesthrough degrees such as habit, instinct, the sub-

conscious, etc., and conversely mechanism, as it

approaches mind, developes use, function, organ

and the like

We are agreed, then, that our two poles, or

antitheses, for this present discussion, are mind

and mechanism, which are a humanized form ofthe absolute and motion. We have discovered,

likewise, that these have a most intimate rela-

tion to life, especially in this age. To the dis-

cussion of a few of the questions thus suggested,

the remainder of this chapter will be devoted .

The machine is intended to free man, not to

enslave him. I have already pointed out how

this is brought about. The processes that have

been perfected are delegated to organs, conscious

or unconscious instincts, habits, or to tools and

machines proper outside of the organism. By so




delegating these tasks, the conscious mind is

left free to attend to other things, exactly as the

head of a factory or a business is left free to

attend to large affairs by delegating the routine

tasks to subordinates or to mechanical devices .

This principle is of immense importance at the

present time, in what has come to be known as

the machine age. Julius Barnes said he could

measure the advancement of a civilization by the

number and quality of the machines in use. To-

day, especially in Western Europe and America,

the output of each worker is multiplied manyfold-some estimate as high as twenty or thirty

fold-,by mechanical equipment. This is notalone due to machines but to system, standardi-

zation, improved technique, etc., which them-

selves contain a mechanical element, in the

broad sense in which I am using the word . All

this should not only result in liberating, but in

otherwise enriching and bettering the workers,

as well as the employers and the general public .

It does do this to some extent, and would do it

to a greater degree, except for the element of

selfishness that tends to divert orappropriate to

the few the benefits that should go to the work-

ers and in a degree to all citizens. Yet approx-

imately a century ago we had in England an in-

dustrial revolt against the introduction of ma-

chines that, it was charged, were taking the

"bread out of the laborers' mouths," and today

we are having a national strike in India largely

for the same reason. At the same time there is

unemployment in many lands, overproduction




and distress among farmers and workers indica-

ting that they have not duly shared in the in-creased prosperity brought about by labor-

saving devices, all of which would indicate that

our economic and social welfare development has

not kept pace with our mechanical .

Other counts in the indictment against the

machine, especially as it concerns industry, are

that, it stifles initiative and excellence of work-

manship; that it makes man himself a cog in amachine, limiting him to some slight detail in

the process of manufacture; that it robs him of

pride in the product and so of interest in his

work, beyond the mere physical demands of ma-

king a livelihood; that it tends to standardiza-

tion in every line which in itself is a mechanical

process; that it results in overproduction and

so throws men out of work; and, last, and worst

of all, that it tends to exalt the machine and

machine methods at the expense of flesh and

blood and of the human spirit .

In both business and industry another tend-

ency is apparent that is in a sense mechanical

and is an inevitable product of the machine age .

I refer to the organization of ever greater aggre-

gations of capital, such as trusts, corporations,

combinations in restraint of competition, chain

stores, chain banks, etc., that not only stifles

individual enterprise, since it forces the greatmasses of men and women into the employeeclass, but also discourages community building,

drives the small merchant out of business, and

cheapens not only products but life and the high-



PRACTICAL IDEALISM 3 3 1

er values of the mind. Through this over-or-

ganization of capital, the unquestioned econo-

mies that result from mass production and from

more efficient methods of distribution are not

equitably divided but go more and more to the

increased enrichment of a class.

All these and other charges, one other charge

against the machine being that it tends to make

everything artificial and leads men away from

the simple life, are brought against the machine

and machine methods, and while the picture may

be overdrawn, there is enough truth in it to

cause genuine disquiet among thinking people .

In some degree, no doubt, the evils complained

of are due to lack of adjustment. Science and

invention have been moving so rapidly during

the past century that it has been impossible to

keep up with them and to adjust our social or-

ganism to the changes they have necessitated .

What is the remedy? Obviously we cannot

scrap or abandon the machines and go back to

more primitive methods of production and trade .

That would not be in the direction of progress .

The mechanizing trend has: been going on from

the beginning of manifest life, first in biological

processes, then in sociological. It is a part of

evolution. There is nothing evil in the machine

per se Rightly used, it makes for convenience,

speed, leisure and a higher level of life and cul-

ture. But man must never allow it to enslave or

subordinate him. Rightly understood it is only

a tool or extension of mind. We must regardthe whole question with the right perspective




and sense of proportion. Neither the machine

nor the corporation, we say, has a soul. Yet

that is no reason the people who utilize them

should not have souls. Perhaps the remedy lies

in spiritualizing our thought and humanizing

our methods Democratize the machine andmake it impossible for selfish groups and blocs

to control it exclusively. Selfishness belongs to

our animal natures. Spiritualize mankind and

all these questions will take care of themselves .

Not only are business and industry affected

by the machine age but politics and government .

The names political and governmental machines

are descriptive. Much of the misgovernment of

our cities is due to the machines and machine

politicians. Today in America we have two po-

litical parties that correspond to no natural divi-

sion in public opinion and are only kept alive

apparently by the force of tradition and the

tendency of a machine or any other organic en-

tity to perpetuate itself There is also a tend-

ency of these entities toward aggrandizement

through more and more elaborate organization .

The almost inevitable result is to overorganize.

We apparently have an example of that in the

centralization and multiplication of bureaus at

Washington, just as they had a few years ago

in the bureaucracy of Russia and as is found,

to some extent, in most of the nations of the

world. Some one has remarked that it is easy

to start a new governmental bureau, but almost

impossible to stop it when once started . Theover-produciton of laws in the United States



PRACTICAL IDEALISM 3 33

and other nations is another illustration. Thenational and state legislatures are organized to

make laws. That is their reason for being. Sothey all continue to grind out this product till

the statute books will not hold the avalanches of

laws and neither the courts, nor lawyers, much

less the common citizens, can keep track of them .

This process defeats its own end, for if there are

too many laws, the tendency of the people is to

ignore all of them . Over-organization reaches

its practical limit here, as elsewhere

A similar trend is observable in armies, navies

and war machines generally. Having been or-

ganized for that special purpose, that is the

special purpose they follow. The same is true

of professional patriotic societies whose stand-

ardized product is patriotism. If the peoples of

the world really want peace, they should take

this factor into consideration and not listen too

much to the professional patriots and war-ma-

kers. The machine is headed in a certain direc-

tion, just as is the psychology of those who run

it, and it and they have a tendency to keep on

the customary course even against the better

judgment of the world. That may be one reason

the peace conferences encounter such difficulties

The military and nationalistic machines are or-

ganized the other way and tenaciously hold on

to both their habits and equipment . The late

World War was fought by mechanical methodsand was started by a military machine.

Not only does mechanism tend to over-ag-

grandizement and over-organization but forgets




its maker, which is mind, and throttles or

thwarts the free spirit of man. It becomes a

Frankenstein to destroy its author. While on

the subject of government, I suspect that Bol-

shevism in Russia is also too mechanistic. It

depends too much on force and too little on the

spontaneous movement of the human soul toward

betterment. It is too atheistic and, like the

French Revolution, will break down from that

and kindred causes. Man cannot build up a per-

manent order on such an inverted truth as eco-

nomic determinism. Neither can he force the

sort of communism on the world that does

violence to the love of natural justice. Eachman is entitled to that which he produces, or its

equivalent, or to the equivalent of the service he

renders. All these forced Milleniums (or Mil-

lenia, as you prefer) are too mechanical and ar-

tificial to be lasting. Sovietism, as is also true

of Karl Marx Socialism, contains another false

element, class consciousness. This involves a

doctrine of hatred, which is destructive, not con-

structive. We need not altogether wonder at it

in Europe, for it is obviously a reaction, a re-

verse swing of the social pendulum, from the

centuries of aristocratic class consciousness. An

abuse in one direction usually breeds a similar

one in the other direction, another example of

the antithesis. Even though intelligible, how-

ever, class consciousness is not intelligent and

cannot be defended. Bolshevism has served one

good purpose-as an object lesson .

Scarcely any developments of life have been




left unaffected by mechanism and the moderntrends with which we are dealing. Even educa-

tion and art are-I am almost tempted to say-

their victims. Not only have great institutions

of learning been endowed-or subsidized--bythose who have grown rich by the methods of

big business, which fact, even without intention,

may involve a subtle kind of propaganda, but

is there not too much of a tendency toward

standardization and uniformity, to develop the

deepest and finest in the pupils? Can we con-

ceive a Lincoln coming out of one of these

schools, or a Shakespeare, or Socrates? Build-

ing character and genius is not a matter of dead-

level uniformity or mechanical standardiza-

tion.

As for art, that belongs to the realm of the

spirit and does not mix with the mechanical any

more than the proverbial oil with water. Whenever I see one of these futuristic monstrosities

with its chaos of blocks I have an uneasy feeling

that it is symbolical of Art being invaded by

the Materialism of the block universe. In the

same way jazz music is built around the beat

of a drum and gives me an atavistic feeling of

the jungle, the wild orgy and voodoo. Someone has said that when a drum beats man stops

thinking. In a way all these things are the

by-products of the machine age. No one willever get anywhere in art by a mechanical per-

formance whether in poetry, painting, music or

the drama No matter how perfect the tech-

nique, or how "faultily faultless" the product,




if it lacks soul or meaning, it has no message or

appeal to the human spirit .

Mechanism has even invaded religion, pro-

ducing standardized prayers, formalistic wor-

ship and iron-clad creeds and dogmas . Themechanical is quite as deadly to devotion as it

is to art. Even sectarianism smells of the party

convention and the armed camp. If it is replied

that differentiation belongs to all life, it must

be admited that is true on the biological plane

but not on the heavenly. There we expect con-

cord and unity Sectarian division recalls the

warfare of the animal, not the peace of the

spirit. Splitting over technicalities is a favorite

pastime of the intellect, and those who indulge

in it advertise themselves as subjects of the

kingdom of the intellect and not of the realm of

divine grace . Human brotherhood, like free-

dom, is a celestial product .

The thing that did more than any other one

thing to discredit the argument for design was

that it contained a mechanistic element which

left man no choice. It was too much like fatal-ism. We should substitute for the harsher word,

design, the gentler word, purpose . God winsthrough love rather than compels through force .

No one can look at Nature with any insight or

understanding and fail to see purpose staring

him in the face from every forest nook and from

every pair of eyes that are the windows of life.

Purpose in Nature becomes absolute determin-

ism, because there is no principle to oppose it ;

but in man it is moral determinism, because of




free will. This removes Bergson's objection to

design that it means fatalism, like predestina-

tion or foreordination, because moral determin-

ism leaves a margin for choice. Absolute deter-

minism would itself be mechanical and would

make man only an automaton, but since man is

spiritual and a child of God, he partakes of

God's freedom. Returning to religion, when it

rids itself of mechanism and of the spirit of

faction and condemnation it will become truly

representative of the spiritual universe.

There is one important characteristic of over-

organization we should not forget. It may reach

a point where it breaks down of its own weight .

There is a limit in every organism to its too

great elaboration. Just as there is a practical

reason for death which is that we may not be-

come fixed in our own mechanism, so there is a

practical reason not to become fixed in these ar-

tificial mechanisms. Even the nautilus aban-

dons its old shell when outgrown.

Referring again to the effects of mechanism inthe various departments of life, here are a few

suggested remedies

As to the industrial problem, one answer is

democratic ownership and management. Let the

workers own stock, share in the profits, govern

themselves through what is known as the Beth-

lehem plan, or something similar . Under theBethlehem plan the workers have an assembly

of their own in which they settle most of the

grievances and complaints that come from their

own ranks, only appealing to the executives in




the more difficult cases. They also have a voice

in shop managementEncourage the general public to own stock in

these great plants. These remarks also apply

to business. It is fortunate that there is already

a decided trend in this direction in America, es-

pecially among the railroads and big industrial

enterprises. Finally, apply the Golden Rule to

business and industry, as was done so success-

fully by the late Arthur Nash. Such measureswill increase interest and good will both among

the employers and employees and will tend to

prevent strikes. One other remedy that natu-

rally suggests itself is to enforce the laws against

the trusts, chain stores and the like, yet we

have been trying to enforce such laws for nearly

fifty years without any very signal results .

The answer to the political problem is like-

wise more democracy Public spirit and true

devotion to service will also help. Finally there

should be sincere love of country, or real pa-

triotism, as opposed to the professional or ma-chine variety.

The same answer in a general way applies to

education. Let the pupils govern themselves;

as has been done with such signal success in

many schools. Elective studies, manual training

and practical training for real life as we find it

are other steps in a progressive direction. Final-

ly, eliminate machine methods, as far as pos-

sible, also the poison of subtle propaganda.

Thus far we have found democracy to be our

common denominator. Democracy is a spiritual




product. It came as a protest against the old

machine methods of monarchy and aristocratic

class rule. It contains the elements of equality,

fraternity and liberty, all of which are spiritual.

It is harmonious with the teachings of Jesus

Christ, who was rightfully called "the first demo-

crat." It frees the human spirit, not only poli-

tically but psychologically, i .e . , from class dis-

tinctions and inferiority complexes which is

most important.

As to art, religion, peace, etc., these all belong

peculiarly to the spiritual realm, so that the

remedy must be spiritual. As already pointed

out spirituality would dissolve sectarianism and

mechanical worship.

My final plea is, therefore, a repetition of one

already uttered. It is for spirituality. Justgovernment plus spirituality will end war. En-lightened science plus spirituality will banish

disease Right thought plus spirituality will

dissipate doubt and fear. Interested toil plus

spirituality will remove poverty and failure.

We need the tonic of a right philosophy. Weneed eyes far-sighted and clear-sighted enough

to discern the reality from the seeming. We need

intellect yoked to intuition-intellect that is a

bad master but a good servant-that with the

aid of this twain we can look behind the mask of

appearance and see the loving face of God .

One last word on Psychic Phenomena! There

are several objections to the spiritistic hypo-

thesis, some valid and some not. One takes the




of contact with undesirable entities; and, third,

they distract us from dependence on the one God-the God within-and cause us to rely on in-

ferior intelligences which is not only a weaken-

ing process, but possibly one of enslavement ;

fourth, the whole spiritistic approach is neither

practical nor entirely wholesome. I am not at-

tempting to answer these objections, but instead

am giving my own view on this entire subject,

which in brief is this

The method of communication between thedead and the living is: telepathic. This is im-

plied by Dr. Hudson and proved by Mr. Stead.

Moreover it seems to harmonize with, and ex-

plain, all the facts. In suggesting telepathy as

the true method of spiritual communion, this

should not be confused with the argument of

those who would confine such telepathy to the

living. I mean it especially to apply to inter-

communication across the border between the

two planes

Telepathic communication is through the ex-

tra-conscious mind . Mr. Stead thus commu-nicated with both the dead and the living. Themessages from the living were verified and those

with the dead were proved on the basis of anyrules of evidence of which I have knowledge. But

both were telepathic. Moreover every religion,

as well as the universal experience of mankind,seems to approve the telepathic method aswholesome, helpful, ethical and practical.*

*I do not question that a discarnate entity may, to an extent, controlthe organism of the medium . What I do question is that this is whollydesirable or produces t he beat results .




From the practical standpoint there is little

or nothing to be gained by dabbling in the psy-

chic Our real communion with the dead and

with the spiritual universe is telepathic and this

sort of communion man has always enjoyed. It

is not tinctured with fraud, commercialism,

"signs and wonders," or dramatization by the

conscious or sub-conscious mind of the medium.

Its results may be rare, but they are right and

reasonable

What, then, are we to say of reincarnation?

Dr. Gustave Geley approaches this questionfrom the scientific angle He shows how thewhole evolutionary process is a movement from

the unconscious to the conscious. The divine

emanation, or monad, is representative of the

universe, but at first unconsciously and only in

potency. Then the latent mounts into thekinetic, in a way analogous to the ascent of en-

ergy, and, like energy again, it rises through

rhythmic movement More and more the pos-

sible becomes actual, the unconscious becomes

conscious. This process we call evolution. Atfirst it is outer, or manifested by changing form,

but when the level of self-consciousness is

reached and the monad emerges as man, the evo-

lutionary stream turns inward. While this stage

is being traversed, however, the memory is un-

conscious as the mind powers were in earlier

stages. At the long last, the whole monad emer-

ges, with its possibilities become realities, in-

cluding the memory of all its lives and it knows




itself, "even as it is known," a full-fledged son of

GodSays Dr. Geley

What, then, does death matter? It destroys only a sem-

blance, a temporary representation. The true and in-destructible individuality assimilates and so preserves all

the acquirements of the transitory personality; then bath-

ed for a time in the water of Lethe, it materializes anew

in personality and thus continues its evolution indefinitely

Yes, that is what Nature teaches us very clearly and

Nature never lies .

Every new life necessarily implies a temporary re-

striction of the individuality. Every embodiment, or rep-

resentation on the material plane implies a limitation of

all psychic activities by the field of cerebral action and its

organic memory .

But below that cerebral memory, the profound memory

remains indelible and permanent, retaining all its past

acquisitions, though these are for the most part cryptoid .

lly own view, which is confirmed by memories,

or seeming memories, is that a soul carries the

same character from life to life and, to some ex-

tent, the same appearance; that a sudden or

violent death, before the life impulse is spent,

means a correspondingly early return and that

the memory is carried, but infinitesimally, so

that it does not arise above the clamor of the ob-

jective life .

It is also my view that nothing is practically

gained by over emphasizing the question, until

the soul does come into its own and its past and

future are unfolded. Until that time dwelling

on this matter by the sense-mind may lead to

distractions and even hallucinations .

Another word should, perhaps, be said on




psychotherapy or spiritual healing. This is of

value not only from the standpoint of truth but

from that of the practical . It is a mistake to

think that the best results can be reached in

this field by scientific methods alone .

Faith is the medicine of the psyche, and noth-

ing arouses the full power of faith like religion

and the awakening of the spirit. The power

that created the organism alone can repair it .

In this connection, however, I desire to pay my

tribute to scientific medicine . I could not be one

hundred percent loyal to the truth and do less .

Any method of healing is divine, and in my own

humble view the practical idea we should hold

in view is a union of the two methods-faith and

science-in order that the sick may have thebenefit of all possible curative agencies .

In this connection a member of my class in

Washington by self-treatment and spiritual

methods alone was healed in a rather remark-

able way. I have her permission to mention anaccount of this in her own words. I vouch for

the facts, of which there is no question

One of my demonstrations made two years ago last

June may be of help to someone who is burdened with

the wearing of glasses I wore them continuously fromSeptember 23, 1903, to June 1927, a period of approximate-

ly twenty-five years, for nearsight and astigmatism, and

was almost blind on the street without them, and could

not distinguish the features of anyone in any average

sized room being able to tell where the features were sup-

posed to be only by the lights and shadows-all was a

blur. I was then in my forty-ninth year, when according

to the old orthodox idea, one naturally expects the eye-

sight to fail because of advancing years, necessitating new




and stronger glasses. While I was giving myself Truthtreatments, the old race thought told me that advancing

years was my trouble, but in this instance procrastina-

tion saved the day for me, as in the meantime I discov-

ered that I could see just as well without my glasses as

with them, so I put them away, and have not seen them

since, which freedom has been one of the great joys of

my life; also the realization that by myknowledge ofmetaphysical or Universal laws, and contact with my own

Divine inner forces, I had been able to accomplish that

which the finest eye specialists in the world could not do,

namely, to round out the faulty curvature of the cornea,

which according to Funk and wagnall's Standard Dic-tionary, is the cause of astigmatism. I have not yetlearned what corrected the nearsight, but, that too, has

disappeared .

No treatment of the practical would be com-

plete without a reference to moral philosophy

and the question of evil. On the basis of polari-

ty, evil is only the opposite of good. It is there-

fore more of a question for the individual than

for metaphysics. It is a test of and a discipline

for, the soul. It is our means of strengthening

the moral nature, as work is that of gaining

bodily strength. It is only through a free choicebetween good and evil that man gains moralworth and escapes being an automaton. Activi-

ty is the very nature of the spirit and of the

universe it animates and it is through work and

through moral activity that man touches the

noumemon or "thing in itself" and becomes one

with reality. This is the soul's pathway to God,

as marked out by the "Way,Shower," the great-

est moral force that ever came into this world,

Jesus of Nazareth.




We are at the beginning of a new age; a new

age in religion; a new age in philosophy; a new

age in world politics. Science, that has done so

much in shaping environment, in providing out-

ward comforts and conveniences-science, atlast, is to turn its attention to the finer and the

higher forces within. As we make progress in

that science we shall gain power to make great-

er progress, and no man can measure the results

of another century or of the many centuries that

are before us. This prospect not only invites us

but challenges us, for we are, in a peculiar sense,

the builders of that new world. We are pioneers

but are more fortunately situated than thepioneers in earlier days because they not only

had to meet neglect and lack of appreciation and

understanding, but more active forms of hostili-

ty. They were stoned, reviled, imprisoned, cru-

cified and met with every form of misunder-

standing, persecution, misrepresentation and

hatred, and all this from those they sought to

heal and save and to whom they gave the rich-

est treasures of their lives. Out of all this we

hear one cry that rings down the ages, "Father,

forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Because of their sufferings we are safe. Fromtheir agony they left us a heritage of security.

We do not now meet these active forms of hos-

tility and opposition. The world has becomeless hostile to new ideas because it has found

the value of inventions and discoveries, the prac-

tical utility of truth. These things have worth

because they work to produce good results in



PRACTICAL IDEALISM 3 47

ways that can be measured and understood by

the masses

We started this study, not knowing exactly

where it would lead, but I trust we leave it with

a larger vision and a surer hope .

Our first lesson was Philosophical Idealism,

which we have subjected to the test by fire of

examination and use, to have it come forth as

the pure gold of Practical Idealism .



CHAPTER XVII

CONCLUSION

In Plato's celebrated allegory of the cave he

represents life as a play of shadows. This al-

legory in condensed form follows

Behold! human beings living in an underground den,

which has a mouth open toward the light Here they

have been from childhood, and have their legs and necks

chained so that they cannot move, and can only see be-

fore them. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a

distance, and between the fire and prisoners there is a

raised way, a low wall built along the way, like the screen

which marionette-players have in front of them, overwhich they show the puppets. Men are passing along the

wall carrying all sorts of vessels, and statues and figures

of animals which appear over the wall. Some of themare talking, others silent like ourselves, and they see only

their own shadows, or the shadows of one another, which

the fire throws on the opposite wall of the cave. Of theobjects which are being carried in like manner there are

only the shadows. Suppose further that the prison had

an echo which came from the other side, and when one

of the passers-by spoke the voice seems to come from the

passing shadow. What will naturally follow if the prison-

ers are released and disabused of their error? At first

when any one is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand

up and turn his neck around and walk and look toward

the light, he will suffer sharp pains ; the glare will dis-

tress him and he will be unable to see the realities of

which in his former state he had seen the shadows. Con-

ceive someone saying to him that what he saw beforewas an illusion, but that what now he sees is a clearervision. What will be his reply? Will he not fancy that

the shadows which he formerly saw are truer than the

348



CONCLUSION 349

objects which are now shown to him? If he is compelled

to look straight at the light, will he not have a pain in

his eyes which will make him turn away to take refuge

in the objects of vision which he can see, and which he

will conceive to be in reality clearer than the things which

are now being shown to him?

Suppose once more that he is reluctantly dragged up a

steep and rugged ascent and held fast until he is forced

into the presence of the sun himself, is he not likely to be

pained and irritated? When he approaches the light his

eyes will be dazzled, and he will not be able to see any-

thing at all of what are now called realities. He will be

required to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper

world. At first he will see the shadows best, next the re-

flections of men and other objects in the water, and then

the objects themselves ; then he will gaze upon the light

of the moon and the stars and the spangled heaven ; and

he will see the sky and the stars by night better than the

sun or the light of the sun by day

Last of all he will be able to see the sun, and not mere

reflections of him in the water, but he will see him in

his own proper place, and not in another; and he will con-

template him as he is .

This entire allegory represents life ; the prison-house

is the world of sight, the light of the fire is the sun, the

journey upward is the ascent of the soul into the intel-

lectual world. In the world of knowledge the idea of good

appears last of all and is seen only with an effort, and

when seen is the universal author of all things beautiful

and right, parent of light and of the lord of light in this

visible world.

Emerson said that an institution is the length-

ened shadow of a man, and in the same way we

may speak of the universe as the lengthened

shadow of God. It is in this sense that the phe-

nomenal world is shadow or illusion, or, as the

Hindus call it, Maya .

Let us suppose another allegorical representa-

tion : The realities of this universe are the posi-




five attributes of God-absolute good, beauty,

truth, wisdom, life, health, supply, love, free-

dom, joy and the other qualities that go to make

up the idea of perfection . W e will suppose that

each of these qualities and of all of the other

real things of God's perfect idea are reflected

outwardly from the center of things in shadows

that extend to the very bounds of the universe,

but each shadow becomes darker and thus less-

ens in degree as it proceeds farther from the

center so that at the other pole or outermost cir-

cumference the original quality of good, beauty,

truth, etc., appears as nothingness, or as evil,

ugliness and error .

It requires some such figure to make clear to

us what happens in the world of phenomena, forhere we find everything in degrees . We findeverything adulterated with nothingness. Herewe also find a show or representation of things,

a shadow world on a three dimensional plane .

Things are limited, impermanent and forever

changing into something else. We also find the

chaotic elements of chance, caprice, indetermin-

ateness and variation.

"God geometrizes," said Plato, and thethought is echoed by Einstein and by the great

modern astronomer, Sir James Jeans, who not

only revives the idealism of Plato but that of

Berkeley In the Rede Memorial Lecture inCambridge, 1930, Sir James said, as reported in

the New York TimesNeither biology nor engineering has been successful in

helping to fathom the mysteries of the universe Nature



CONCLUSION 351

is more closely allied to the concepts of pure mathematics,

structures of pure thought

To my mind the laws which nature obeys are less sug-gestive of those which a machine obeys in its motion than

of those a musician obeys in writing a fugue or a poet

in composing a sonnet. The motions of electrons andatoms do not resemble the parts of a locomotive so much

as those of dancers in a cotillion .

If all this is so, then the universe can best be pictured

-though still very imperfectly and inadequately-as con-

sisting of pure thought, the thought of what for want of

a better word we must describe as a mathematical thinker.

We discover that the universe shows evidence of a de-

signing or controlling power that has something in com-

mon with our own individual minds-not emotion, morali-

ty or aesthetic appreciation, but a tendency to think in

a way which for want of a better word we describe as

mathematical .

Sir James, who as an astronomer has explored the fron-

tiers of human knowledge, reaffirmed the belief of BishopBerkeley, in the early eighteenth century, that "all the

choir of heaven and the furniture of earth, all those

bodies which compose the mighty frame of the world,have not any substance without the mind . "

In trying to picture the vastness of the universe, Sir

James adapted an image of Plato's, saying that "man is

still imprisoned in a cave, with his back to the light and

can only watch the shadows on the wall . "

Sir James reverted to Plato's image of the shadows "to

explain the inconsistencies in the present theories of

space and time."

Just as the shadows on the wall form the projection of

a three dimensional reality into two dimensions, so the

phenomena of the space-time continuum are four dimen-

sional projections of realities which occupy more than

four dimensions.

Sir James elaborates this idea in his bookThe Mysterious Universe . Many of the later

publications on physics, relativity, the higher

mathematics, etc., sound a similar note. In other




words, modern science and philosophy are redis-

covering God .

To make clearer what all of this implies an-

other hypothesis may be helpful . Let us sup-

pose that man in his present life is under a sort

of hypnosis-self-hypnosis, if you will . This

dream state is induced by his special form of

mind action that we call intellect, and has to do

with the universe relative to man's present mode

of functioning. Because of our specialized

forms of sense reaction responding only to cer-

tain bands of frequencies, or of wave motions,

in the ether of space, this universe is phenome-

nal ; that is, comes to us as a show or appear-

ance . It seems to be solid or material, in order

that man may act upon it, cut tools out of it,

etc . In other words, the suggestions that come

to us in our state of hypnosis concern a material

world that is independent of our thought and to

which we are subject . So long as our dreams

are normal this is all well and good, but we may

get warped or delusive ideas, fixed notions, com-

plexes, which result in defective or abnormal

states of thought, and of manifestation. Thesewe call disease . So identified are we with our

organism and with this hypnotized state of our

thoughts that these things seem real to us,

whereas they are but a part of the dream or the

hypnosis. How happy it would be were theresome cosmical operator who could suddenly cry,

"Right," and snap us out of it . Then we should

discover that it had only been a bad dream and

that we are as we always have been, a part of



CONCLUSION 3 53

God's perfect idea, spiritual beings in a spiritual

universe, like the man in the story, The Sleeper

Awakes

None of these analogies, or figures, is perfect,

but they indicate the truth, or, at least, point

the direction in which truth may he found. AsBishop Berkeley indicated, the Universe is God's

action and man's picture and concept of it rep-

resent his reactions to this Divine activity. Be-

cause God is infinite His forms of manifestation

are infinite. They represent every possible level

and variety of life .

It may help us to think of each individual as

a monad This monad plus its environmentmakes up the universe. It not only represents

the universe but corresponds to it. It knowsitself by knowing its other, or to put it differ-

ently, it comprehends its own nature by com-

prehending the cosmos. It is infinite in poten-

tiality and essence but only realizes this univer-

sal element within by realizing that without .

This is a progressive or evolutionary realization,

that runs the whole scale from nothingness to

the absolute or from zero to infinity. The monad

thus passes through degrees, in which it retains

its own identity as a particular self or person-

ality but in which it also realizes its universal

quality through knowledge, thought and action .

In his great book, Appearance and Reality,

Mr. F. H. Bradley proves by logic that there isnothing real except the Absolute and that this

is not many but one. This is not a frozen Abso-

lute, not a dead level of uniformity, not a mere




being in which there are no distinctions, not a

"night in which all cows are black," but a uni-

verse irridescent and luminous in which the

beauty of variety is brought out in vivid dis-

tinctness, containing all the multifarious glory

of the living universe, but which is yet harmo-

nized and included in the One-Life. Aside from

the Absolute all else is appearance even in-

cluding the self and self-consciousness, all these

are reflections, representations or shadows of

Reality, adulterated with nothingness, chaos,

confusion and defect . They are ever striving

more closely to attain to the Real, however, and

this begets motion in them, change and becom-

ing. This is also the basis of thought which is

ever seeking also to comprehend more fully andso long as it fails to do this it is still merely

thought. But when it succeeds completely in

understanding or comprehending its subject, it

passes over into it, ceases to be thought and be-

comes the thing in itself. It then incarnates,

identifies itself with the thing, ceases to be mere

thought and ceases to be conscious since it is no

longer practical or necessary that it be so. Inother words, its other exists only so long as not

completely known. When it is perfectly known,

it ceases to be Other and becomes the self. Godis Other to us only so long as we do not entirely

know Him. When we do so know Him He be-comes one with us. The seeming opposites are

caught up into a higher unity. It was Him wewere seeking all the time for there is no other .

We sought Him in our brothers and tried to



CONCLUSION 35 5

know and so to merge with and possess them .

We sought Him in nature and in revelationswhere He was represented. When we completely

know ourselves, we are That, as the Hin-doos say. The more perfectly we know and rep-

resent Him, the less defect is in us and the less

of pain and negation . There is only the Abso-

lute and we are only real so far as we incarnate

the Absolute. Christ knew this and so could say

"I and the Father are one." This is true of all

of us and is the only Truth. The world is only

other to us, objective and material because we do

not perfectly know it. The moment we do knowit in all its detail, it is spiritual and subjective .

It is only the mechanism through which thought

manifests and acts. When we transcend theduality and the illusion, we are in Nirvana. Wehave ceased to pass through the rhythm of mo-

tion, of birth and death, and have emerged into

the Truth and Liberty of our real selves, or

rather of our real Self, for the sense of separa-

iton belongs to the illusion. "The dewdrop slips

into the shining sea." The prodigal has re-

turned unto his Father's house .

We are God's thinking, not God thinking, for

the Universe is not a series or a multiplicity but

a unity. We, as seemingly separate and inde-

pendent, are derivative and representative .

"Thou shalt have none other gods before Me ."

In this whole series of studies we have been

discovering God. The supreme need of theworld today-and by the world we mean all na-

tions and all departments of human life-is to




know and relate itself anew to Him. He alone

can heal individuals and nations; He alone can

unify mankind and establish peace ; He alone

can give us a starting point from which to inter-

pret and build a greater science, philosophy and

religion that will be deep and broad enough to

fit this new time into which we are now enter-

ing. Having found God let us use Him as our

point of departure, as the great corner stone of

our structure, the first premise of our deductive

system. We start, then, with God Transcendent .

In all religious systems and most philosophies

we are told that His first expression is the Word .

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word

was with God, and the Word was God." Wehave called this form of the Divine expression

God immanent. In other words, this is God in-carnating Himself as the great first cause of

the universe. He becomes His other, or repre-

sentation, the objective pole of the Divine Mind,

which in turn becomes the Great Unconscious

or basis of the habit mind, Law or Mechanism

of the universe In other words, God thinks

Himself into an Infinite expression which be-

comes the Word Since this expression must

have all possible variety it becomes the many.

God thus gives forth an infinite number of eman-

ations or monads, each being the representation

or image of Himself. These, however, are all un-

conscious or potential since they are not yet ob-

jectified and, therefore, cannot know themselves,

because they cannot know their other Then,

the universal process starts, first in building the



CONCLUSION 3 5 7

physical universe, next in evolving a universe

of life and finally in perfecting a universe of

self-conscious human units. In this process we

find correspondences or analogies, also the dia-

lectic method of polarity caught into unity. In

the very beginning polarity appears in the pro-

ton and the electron, which correspond to the

thesis and the antithesis of thought. God's ac-

tion or will appears first as union which catches

up these two apparent opposites into unity, this

unity being the atom, or the building block of

the physical universe. In the way of this dialec-

tical method this synthesis becomes the thesis

of a new step upward. Our next polarity is be-

tween the physical universe and the psychical,

and the result here is the cell, the building block

of the universe of life. We can carry this meth-

od out further-almost as much further as we

like. The third great triad in the human world

might be called the man and the woman, whose

union or synthesis constitutes the home, which

becomes the building block of the sociological

structure, or the beginning of God's Kingdom

on Earth.

Aristotle's teaching was that we only know a

thing in its outcome, or end. We have alreadyseen that the Word became creative mind-an-

nima mundi, soul of the world . In the begin-

ning this was the great unconscious, or the mind

manifesting itself in nature and in the creatures,

but at the long last it becomes man . Natural

man is not its highest or final expression, how-

ever, for he does not realize God's idea, or full




purpose This only becomes manifest in Christ,

the perfect or spiritual man . Thus it is abso-

lutely correct to identify Christ with the Logos

or Word. He is the perfect fruit of the creative

process, and He is G od's realization of Himself

as the God-Man made in His image, the human

prototype and final fruit of the absolute idea

Thus the coming of Christ made a new era in

the human world just as the coming of man madea new era in the universe of life and the coming

of life made a new era in the physical universe .

Each of these are steps on the stairway leading

to God. Each of these are new scenes in the

Divine drama, new levels in the ascending evo-

lution .

Thus it is our healing is through Christ, and

thus it is that the new civilization, the coming

of man to himself, the awakening of the sleeper,

takes place through the Christ . We know our-

selves in Him, know ourselves as the children

of God. We are awakened from the dream ofthe material, of limitation, and of the self-hyp-

nosis of the intellect, and of specialized and rela-

tive modes of thinking, by knowing ourselves

even as we are known in Christ

The only path through which the monads

could ascend was that of the self, or self-con-

sciousness. This has been both our prison and

our liberator . It is in the self that all error

and sin have arisen, all disease and death . In

order that we might not be fixed in our organ-

ism, and in our complexes, we have had to pass

through the rhythm of life and death-death to



CONCLUSION 3 59

free us for a new adventure, and life to objectify

us into a new experience. At the long last, how-

ever, we are now transcending this limitation

and are beginning to see that the whole process

is one of life, life vibrating between subjective

and objective, or between the two planes of be-

ing, just as all energy vibrates in its ascent to

higher forms of energy, or manifestation . Man's

cure is the absolute idea that is his Creator, that

is his Reality, that is Himself . The sleeper is

awake and the hypnotic dream vanishes with the

shadows of the world of appearances . Man looks

upon the sun and knows Reality .

Our adventure is over, we have found the One .

There is no Other This One is the many ;

this One is the universe of life; this Oneis our beginning and our end, our Creator,our Healer, our Savior, our Immortality.

Only so much of us as belongs to His goodness,

His truth, His beauty, His perfection, survives

the "wreck of matter and crash of worlds ." All

the rest belongs to the dream and the hypnosis,

the appearance, the dance of shadows . God is

and we are in Him .

The way to Him and the way to health andhappiness is not alone through our specialized

form of mind action known as intellect, but more

especially through the forms of mind action such

as intuition, imagination and faith. We find this

truth represented in the universal religion of man-

kind and in science and philosophy as well. Wediscover the clue in man's speech, in the very root

words of his language . We discover it in the




traditions of all civilizations and in the vision

of all hearts. God has not left us without re-

minders of Himself, without answers to the rid-

dle of life .

After all it is the practical test that counts .

We go back to that. We know a thing through

its use The highest philosophy in the end

comes to that which belongs to the practical and

to the common sense of the race. As a summingup of our adventures from this phase we find

these net results

We cannot account for the physical without

recourse to the spiritual universe . Mechanismpresupposes mind as its inventor and operator

Everything points to God and all the new scien-

ces, as well as physics and mathematics, are

ever becoming more harmonious with religious

and philosophical idealism. In this study we

have scrutinized the new factors in humanknowledge and have found that science, quite as

much as religion, reveals God. In our adventure

we have really invaded new territory. We havediscovered the mystery of the lever and of gravi-

tation, seen something of the nature of en-

ergy, and have even caught glimpses of the crea-

tive process itself We have seen God in Na-ture, have gotten a more rational view of the

identity of the Logos, have seen Christ as His

perfect fruit and revealer to man, and have dis-

covered anew Christ's healing and regenerative

power in the soul. We came to study science

and end by studying spirit, love, life, truth .

What have we learned? For one thing we have

Invading the Invisibles JA Edgarton 1931 359pgs PHI

Documents

Transcript of Invading the Invisibles JA Edgarton 1931 359pgs PHI