« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
On the other hand the
being pure intellect and destitute of emotion, is manifestly best fitted for the exercise of that judicial power that absolute sovereignty- which must of necessity reside in one or the other of the two minds. subjective entity, being the seat of the emotions, and charged in this life with but the three normal functions, which constitute the master passions of all animate Nature, must necessarily be under the dominion of some moral force capable of restraining and regulating those passions and directing their current into legitimate channels. Otherwise man could never have been elevated above the level of the brute; certainly not above the status of the most primitive savagery. Civilization would be impossible, morality would be nameless, and religion non-existent. It will thus be seen that for the purposes of this life the law of suggestion is a necessity. If this life were all, and the three normal functions of the subjective mind were all that pertained to it, it might well be asked, why the necessity of a dual mind? And it would be difficult to find a rational answer. But when we postulate a future life for man, we find ample reason, not only for two minds, but for the limitation of power in the subjective mind. For it must now be observed and borne in mind that those limitations of power pertain exclusively to this life. But why the necessity for limiting the reasoning faculties of the subjective mind, thus depriving it of that power which invests the objective mind with its supremacy and dominion over the forces of Nature? There are two answers to this question. The first is that it is a corollary of the law of suggestion; for that law could not exist if the subjective mind possessed the power to reason independently, and it is therefore an absolute necessity for the purposes of this life. The second answer is twofold,
Firstly, there is obviously no necessity for the subjective mind to possess such a faculty, even if it were possible for the two minds to exist together in harmony, since the objec
tive mind possesses it and is the controlling and responsible power in this life. Secondly, the power of the subjective mind to reason inductively is neither necessary nor possible, for the reason that it is endowed with the faculty of intuitive perception or cognition of Nature's laws, independently of objective education.
A few words will make this proposition plain to the most superficial reader. What is induction? Induction is a method of inquiry. It is the slow and laborious process of investigation by which the dull and plodding objective mind of man is enabled to learn something of the laws which govern the universe. It is the one faculty which enables him to be certain that he knows something. It is the one weapon which enables him to conquer the forces of Nature. It lends accuracy to learning, permanency to progress, and stability to civilization. But it is of the earth, earthy; for it belongs alone to the objective mind. It is a function of the brain, a product of organic evolution, a faculty developed in response to the necessities of man's physical environment. I repeat, it is of the earth, earthy.
It can have no place, or power, or function in the future life, for the simple reason that it is not a necessity of that plane of existence. It is not a necessity, for the reason that the soul possesses that power of intuitive perception or cognition of Nature's laws which renders any process of laborious inquiry in the nature of induction superfluous, impossible. And this is why I have said that inductive reasoning is neither necessary nor possible to the subjective mind. It perceives; and its power of perception as far transcends the power of induction as Omniscience transcends the powers of sense. It is, in fact, the power of Omniscience, and its possession by the human soul demonstrates its kinship to God; for God himself cannot reason inductively. Induction, as I have before remarked, is a finite process of inquiry into something which finite man does not already know. To suppose an omniscient God to
be capable of induction would be a contradiction in terms as gross as it would be to say that a triangle is rectangular. Again, it must be remembered that this power of intuitive perception of Nature's laws has no legitimate place in earthly life. This is amply demonstrated by the fact that only occasional glimpses of phenomena can be obtained. which render it certain that the power exists as a part of the mental equipment of the subjective mind; and these glimpses can only be obtained under the most intensely abnormal conditions of the body or of the objective mind, or of both. This is a fact within the knowledge of the most superficial observer, but it will be more fully dealt with in a subsequent chapter.
Furthermore, its lack of legitimate function in this life is shown by the fact that, outside of the domains where demonstration by other means is possible, we can never be certain of the verity of subjective perception, owing to the ever-present power of suggestion. That is to say, when the power of perception is exercised, say, in the field of mathematics, we have the means of testing the accuracy of the alleged perceptions; but when we have not the means of verifying the alleged facts, we can never avail ourselves of the alleged information, for the reason that we cannot know to what extent the law of suggestion has operated as a factor in the case.
It comes to this, therefore, that we can never be certain of the accuracy of alleged intuitions, unless they are otherwise verified; and they cannot be verified except by the exercise of the powers of objective reason.
It follows that, so far as the mental operations of this life are concerned, the subjective powers of intuitive perception are superfluous and useless. If they were not so, that is, if they were normal, and could be depended upon as a source of information, the objective powers of reason would be superfluous, and therefore useless.
Before we close this branch of the subject, one word must be said concerning the transcendent power, possessed by the subjective mind, of correct deduction from given or suggested premises. Although this power differs only in degree from the corresponding faculty possessed by the objective mind, it must, for obvious reasons, be considered in connection with the other reasoning faculties. This faculty is an essential concomitant to the law of suggestion. The power of suggestion would be of little avail if the subjective mind could not correctly deduce all legitimate conclusions from the premises embraced in a suggestion. It is true that wrong or absurd suggestions will lead to wrong and absurd conclusions; but the conclusions will be logically correct whether the premises are true or false. This is inevitable from the very perfection of the faculty of deduction; but it is compensated for in many ways, for it becomes a factor of the utmost value when a correct suggestion is made. For instance, in the moral training of the subjective mind of a child, if it is punished for stealing from or lying about John Doe, the lesson that it learns is, not simply that it is wrong to injure John Doe, but that it is wrong to tell a falsehood or to appropriate the property of others. It is, however, too obvious to need illustration, that no suggestion could be intelligently carried into effect in the absence of this faculty of logical deduction.
The same faculty is possessed by animals; and, together with the power of suggestion over the animal kingdom, it constitutes the prime factor in the combination of causes which enables man to assert and maintain his dominion over the beasts of the field. A single illustration will suffice. The first step which an intelligent trainer takes in breaking a horse is to throw the animal, and hold it down until it ceases to struggle. When this is accomplished, half the battle is won; and although other means to the same end may be adopted, they all tend to demonstrate to the horse
that his trainer has absolute power and dominion over him. The rest is easy when gentle kindness and persuasion are employed to teach the animal his duties. Now, the first and most essential step named constitutes a suggestion to the animal that his trainer possesses complete mastery over him, and that it is useless to struggle against superior physical force. This suggestion, however, per se, applies only to the individual trainer; and but for the faculty of deduction, no one but the trainer could drive the animal. But the horse, from the suggestion that his trainer has power over him, deduces the conclusion that other men possess the same power. Otherwise every new driver would be obliged to rebreak the horse.
It will thus be seen that the subjective faculty of correct logical deduction from suggested premises possesses a farreaching significance, and importance in matters of everyday experience in this life. Concerning the part it may play in the mental operations incident to the life to come, it would, perhaps, be useless to speculate; although its concomitance with the faculty of intuitional perception is too obvious to require comment.
Having briefly discussed the reasoning powers of the two minds, we may now pause to take our bearings and find where we stand at this stage of the argument.
We have located and found a use for every reasoning or intuitional faculty of the two minds save one. We have found:
1. That the faculty of induction belongs exclusively to the objective mind, and hence pertains exclusively to earthly life.
2. That the faculty of intuitional perception belongs exclusively to the subjective mind.
3. That this faculty of intuitional perception performs no normal function in earthly life, as is clearly shown by reference to the facts,