It is remarkable that these ideas, so excessively and exaggeratedly
spiritualistic, should have been brought forward by a chemist and a
physician, while ideas completely opposed to these were admitted by
philosophers like Descartes and Leibniz, who were decided believers
in the spirituality of the soul. Stahl had been Professor of Medicine
at the University of Halle, physician to the Duke of Saxe-Weimar,
and later to the King of Prussia. He left an important medical and
chemical work, both theoretical and practical. He is the author of the
celebrated theory of phlogiston, which held its ground in chemistry up
to the time of Lavoisier. He died about 1734.
Animism survived him for some time, maintained by the zeal of a few
faithful disciples. But after the witty mockery of Bordeu,[1] in 1742,
it began to decay. We must, however, point out that an attempt to
revive this theory was made in 1878 by a well-known doctor of the last
generation, E. Chauffard. While preserving the essential features of
the theory, this learned physician proposed to bring it into harmony
with modern science, and to free it from all the reproaches which had
been levelled at it.
[1] In a thesis presented in 1742 at Montpellier, Bordeu, then only
twenty years of age, made game of the tasks imposed by animists on
the Soul, “which has to moisten the lips when required;” or, “whose
anger produces the symptoms of certain diseases;” or again, “which
is prevented by the consequences of original sin from guiding and
directing the body.”
_The Animism of E. Chauffard._—These reproaches were numerous. The
most serious is of a philosophic nature. It rises from the difficulty
of conceiving a direct and immediate action of the soul, considered as
a spiritual principle, upon the matter of the body. There is such an
abyss—hewn by the philosophic mind itself—between soul and body, that
it is impossible to imagine any relation between them. We can only get
a glimpse of how the soul might become an instrument of action.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account