On the principles and method of a practical science of mind : a reply to a criticism / by Thomas Laycock.

  • Laycock, Thomas, 1812-1876.
Date:
1862
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On the principles and method of a practical science of mind : a reply to a criticism / by Thomas Laycock. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The University of Glasgow Library. The original may be consulted at The University of Glasgow Library.

    15/28 (page 13)
    7. T/ie generalisation of a directive or teleological force applied.— A\ luit ^Tc will now ask is tlie most fiiiidamcntal or general principle of a mental science, cultivated after this metliod ? tliis, that there is a directive force or pow-er universally operative in creation, in virtue of which, mechanical force is transmitted and made active to ends {vis viva), according- to a law of design. It is in virtue of this di- rective force, that living things display all those various adaptations to ends, whether consciously or unconsciously, w'hich are essential to our notion of life, and without w hich there would be no hfe; and it is on the same force operating according to biological laws in the development and functional activity of the encephalon, that man-'s mental phenomena depend. Dr. JBushnan has given a lucid and able summary of the arguments in favour of this my first general principle, and admits their validity as to organic nature. He states, however, that additional evidence is required to prove that mind in the sense of an agent or force, ever adjusting means to ends, de- termines the arrangements of the physical universe. The uniformity and stability of these arrangements constitute the strongest proofs it is possible to adduce, of design, so that an undevout astronomer is mad, has become a proverb. Hence Sir Isaac Newton observes, Tam miram uniformitatem in planetarura systemate necessario fatendum est intelligentia et consilio fuisse affectam. La Placets profound mathematical calculations as to the adaptation of these ar- rangements to secure stability have supplied a kind of proof, which ought to be at least as convincing as the argument of Newton. He has shewn as to this stability that while the probability of the sun^s rising again on the morrow of any given day is more than one million eight hundred thousand to one, it is above tw^o million times more pro- bable than this, that the motions in our system were designed by one first cause, or above four millions to one. If Dr. Bushnan can, how- ever, direct me to any method by which stronger proof can be reached, I shall be grateful; but I confess I do not conceive it possible to arrive at evidence more complete or conclusive. It is true a certain physiological school rejects this and all other evidence of design whether in organic or inorganic nature, but that cannot be helped. And it is certaui that by so doing, they render any true mental science impossible, for they must of necessity exclude from their system, a consideration of the fundamental phenomena of human consciousness; as for example, the intuitions of designing and of acting to the attain ment of ends. Nor do I see in their system, any room for even tht sensational phenomena of human nature. Now I advance in favou.- of my fundamental doctrine, that all the phenomena of created things can be brought under it. There are some bearings of this principle, however, as to which explanation is necessary. The critic of the Saturday Keview already referred to considers my directive force to be essentially the same as