STUDY OF HISTORY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXXI, Issue 226, 23 September 1940, Page 6

STUDY OF HISTORY.

Mr. James Flanagan's letter flounders hopelessly in a rut nowadays carefully avoided by wiser sceptic*. But, as his appeal to the illustrious name of Gibbon may impress unwary readers. I beg space for comment that may prove helpfulMr. Justice O'Regan. at the Catholic Men's Luncheon Club, affirmed that tie supernatural field is the most important and fruitful that can occupy mans attention. Mr. Flanagan would appear to deny the existence of that field, bat hesitates to do so categorically. Instead, he slides into an attitude of mere nonaffirmation. As an excuse for his foggy attitude, Mr. Flanajran refers us to anonymous Buddhist •'native tribes"* and "Nordic people" who "helieve that there is no after existence." Also he cites two persons by name—Gibbon and Florence Nightingale—as sceptics. Now, apart from the charming spectacle of people "who helieve" in a negative, all that hs* little or nothing t>< «io with. Mr. O'Regans catejrnrial affirmative. If Mr. Flanagan would deny the reality of the supernatural, lot h:m «!•• *« i n plain term-. But. while he :- .it it. it r-ecnis neoft-ory that he (ell u- just what he i >i<lers to It in. ':: :• i i:i the term "natural."' Do.>- :.<• b-i.it the natural t.. material jhinjr-? If i-o. h"W does he explain liir. nun faltering adventure into the supernatural ti,l<i —as he certainly docs adventure «lien he -peaks of the sceptics' intellevtual attitude as an entity? HUGH McIIAIGH.