Raymond; or, Life and Death: With examples of the evidence for survival of memory and affection after death.Lodge, Oliver, Sir
Religion
Raymond; or, Life and Death: With examples of the evidence for survival of memory and affection after death.
Lodge, Oliver, Sir
Future life; Lodge, Raymond, 1889-1915 (Spirit); Spiritualism; World War, 1914-1918 -- Personal narratives, British
That the behaviour of animated matter differs from what is often
called dead matter is familiar, and is illustrated by the description
sometimes given of an uncanny piece of mechanism--that "it behaves
as if it were alive." In the case of a jumping bean, for instance,
its spasmodic and capricious behaviour can be explained with apparent
simplicity, though with a suspicious trend towards superstition,
by the information that a live and active maggot inhabits a cavity
inside. It is thereby removed from the bare category of physics
only, though still perfectly obedient to physical laws: it jumps in
accordance with mechanics, but neither the times nor the direction of
its jumps can be predicted.[32]
We must admit that the term 'dead matter' is often misapplied. It
is used sometimes to denote merely the constituents of the general
inorganic world. But it is inconvenient to speak of utterly inanimate
things, like stones, as 'dead,' when no idea of life was ever
associated with them, and when 'inorganic' is all that is meant. The
term 'dead' applied to a piece of matter signifies the absence of a
vivifying principle, no doubt, but it is most properly applied to a
collocation of organic matter which has been animated.
Again, when animation has ceased, the thing we properly call dead
is not the complete organism, but that material portion which is
left behind; we do not or should not intend to make any assertion
concerning the vivifying principle which has left it,--beyond the
bare fact of its departure. We know too little about that principle
to be able to make safe general assertions. The life that is
transmitted by an acorn or other seed fruit is always beyond our ken.
We can but study its effects, and note its presence or its absence by
results.
Life must be considered _sui generis_; it is not a form of energy,
nor can it be expressed in terms of something else. Electricity is
in the same predicament; it too cannot be explained in terms of
something else. This is true of all fundamental forms of being.
Magnetism may be called a concomitant of moving electricity; ordinary
matter can perhaps be resolved into electric charges: but an electric
charge can certainly not be expressed in terms of either matter or
energy. No more can life. To show that the living principle in a seed
is not one of the forms of energy, it is sufficient to remember that
that seed can give rise to innumerable descendants, through countless
generations, without limit. There is nothing like a constant quantity
of something to be shared, as there is in all examples of energy:
there is no conservation about it: the seed embodies a stimulating
and organising principle which appears to well from a limitless
source.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account