To speak of thought as a secretion of the brain is to misuse the word “secretion” and to render it meaningless, in which case the famous phrase becomes nonsensical. A secretion is a material substance organised from, and by, some other, parent, material substance. It belongs to the domain of physics and can be expressed in terms of statics and dynamics. Nothing of all this is possible with regard to thought, which belongs to the domain of metaphysics and is immaterial. To speak of something immaterial being organised from something material is an abuse of language, and reduces discussion to an idle jangle of articulate sounds. There is not anything similarly nonsensical in the idea of body and soul being interdependent entities. The question is one of simple fact and observation. It is a matter of common knowledge that human bodies continue to exist long after their separation from the something that is called “soul.” This continued existence may even be unaccompanied (as in the case of mummies) by ordinary decay, and in some cases may involve a prolongation of partial vitality, such as, for instance, the well-known phenomenon of the growth of hair and nails after “death.” But that the soul has ceased to be united as before with the body is, in all cases, a matter of certainty. Hence the idea now being discussed obviously requires amendment. It is not permissible to say that body is perpetually dependent upon soul. And the question remains whether it is permissible to say that the existence of an individual soul is dependent upon its remaining attached to the body it accompanied during life.