The Metaphysic of Christianity and Buddhism: A Symphony — John Shaqi
The Metaphysic of Christianity and Buddhism: A SymphonyStrong, D. M. (Dawsonne Melanchthon)
Religion
The Metaphysic of Christianity and Buddhism: A Symphony
Strong, D. M. (Dawsonne Melanchthon)
Buddhism; Christianity; Christianity and other religions -- Buddhism
A comment in _Light_ on this discourse runs as follows: "In higher
organisms the mind becomes more and more localized, until in the
higher animals it has a special organ--the brain, which, however, is
shut up in darkness and 'has no knowledge except such as comes to it
from the sense-organs through the ingoing or sensory nerves.' Being
filled with these impressions, some of which are actual sensations,
while others are memories of past sensations, _the brain must make a
choice_ among them by fixation of attention, if it is to act properly.
To find data for such a choice is the function of the intellect. This,
Dr. Jordan tells us, is the difference between mind and mere instinct,
or inherited habits. Mind chooses, instinct cannot, for it is but an
automatic mind-process inherited from generation to generation."
It must be remembered, however, that this faculty of choosing, said to
be possessed by the brain and acquired by a process of development, is
not free, but conditioned. The terminal organs of the afferent nerves
also may be said to possess this faculty of choice, yet limited by
their qualities and the nature of the external influences to which they
are submitted.
The admission of a faculty of choice does not involve the idea of
absolute freedom, nor need it disturb the Buddhist conception that
there exists nothing behind the organism in the shape of an ego-entity,
or soul, which chooses or remembers, and that there is no hidden agent
which prompts the conveyance of impressions.
If we admit this faculty of choice to be possessed by the brain and
terminal organs of the afferent and efferent nerves, it simply involves
the concession that the stored-up memories in the brain, and the
habits acquired by the muscular organism, as results of past external
influences, act in the _manner_ of choice; and in this sense only, it
would seem, can the notion of "freedom" be scientifically and logically
entertained.
If the faculty of choice, in this restricted sense, as the possession
of a pluricellular organism such as man, is accepted in confirmation
of the existence of "freedom," then we must accord the possession of
"freedom" to the simplest form of life. The cellule composed only of
protoplasm and a nucleus possesses the very same faculty.
M. Alfred Binet tells us of the highly-developed psychical functions
of the spermatozoid; how it searches out the locality of the
ovule situated at a distance; how, with a sense of direction, it
traverses the whole length of the intervening space, overcoming all
obstacles--which are many--in its path, to attain the desired object;
and he maintains that such actions cannot be explained by simple
irritability, nor by chemical affinity. The brain may possess this
faculty, and the power to carry into effect the choice, as qualities
of its mechanism; but there is no discrete entity behind the brain as
agent.
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