REPLY TO T. BOYLE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXVIII, Issue 3, 2 September 1915, Page 3

REPLY TO T. BOYLE.

[To The Editor Stratford Post.] Sir, —Tn Mr Boyle’s reply to my letter of August 2Gtli he speaks in paragraph one of “feelings of delight.” This is important, contrasted with his state of mental exasperation as evidenced in his first letter, and indicates that lie is coming back to normal. He speaks of irrelevant quotations and has not even attempted to show their irrelevancy. Paragraphs one and three are now confined to the Waste paper basket, and taking paragraph two, Mr Boyle might have shown ns how he would treat the matter syllogistically. He came forth with a vigorous offensive and a flourish of trumpets, but that offensive is considerably minimised. He has not advanced an argument since he started, but made state-

ments which are merely evidence that he is consistent only in his own inconsistencies. In my letter of August 26 I stated that the main claims of spiritualism were: (1) That human personality survives bodily death. (2) To quote Sir Oliver Lodge: “That to believe that there are intelligent agencies outside of ourselves which can.) under certain conditions, co-operate with us, is the only way to explain all the facts. In an interjection on Sunday evening Mr Boyle stated that ho admitted the phenomena, and even quoted Sir Oliver Lodge as indicated above. Contrasting this view along with portion of paragraph 2: “The limits of finite mind, etc., and we know only our impressions of things, •etc,” Mr Boyle seems to rely in the extreme on the evidence of the fine physical senses and will you pardon me, Sir, for asking the question: “What evidence has Mr Boyle for believing in anything.” Our senses have frequently failed us, and are so limited in their sphere of activity. Take, for instance, our sense of hearing. Science has demonstrated that there are sounds which we are unable to hear, and a sound wave may he interpreted in all manner of ways by different individuals. Same applies to our sense of j smelling, we have had astounding evi- ( deuce of the failure of our sense of sight, and whether the object of our perception is merely reflected upon the retina and what we see is the reflection, or if it i s direct the information is equally unreliable, but in addition to this defect there is a mental process involved. Reason brings the evidence and a judgment is pro- ( uounced. T may say to you “I see my brother,” which is possibly a wrong “suggestion” for a start. At the very best we can only say “1 see someone who resembles my brother in every ] shape and form and an act of judgment has pronounced that it is my, brother,” and this judgment has given! its decision on “resemblances.” And ( we can draw resemblances between an elephant and a rectangular table. And Mr Boyle himself is the only one whose logic would compel him to admit that the elephant was the rectangular table just the same as his reference to an “intangible nothing” would lead him to deny electricity. 1 am merely advancing this argument because it has a peculiar interest, and t have, no doubt Mr Boyle will throw some interesting light upon it. I hope Mr Boyle wjll not say it is irrelevant, because 1 assert that we get knowledge from sources far beyond the ken of our physical senses. From a psychological point of view Mr Boyle’s argument seems to indicate that the “conscious self” comprises the whole of the consciousness or faculty within us. With this position 1 entirely disagree, and i am convinced that there is a more comprehensive consciousness, a profoundcr faculty

within ns, which for the most part remains potential only so far as regards onr earth life, but from which the consciousness and the faculty of earth life are mere selections and which asserts itself in its plenitude. After Hie liberating charge called death, Mr Boyle’s position would not admit of him accepting telepathy or telaesthesia because the perception of distant thoughts and distant scenes without the agency of the recognised organs of sense would be incompatible with his position, and, furthermore, would suggest incalculable extension of our own mental powers or else the influence of some “intelligent agency” outside of ourselves. As an extension of this argument retrocognitive telaethesia may give the! most support. While 1 am not blind to the vast amount of so-called phenomena, which can be accounted for by the application of the first principle, I believe that it takes both principles to satisfactorily explain all the iacts. And the

majority of the leading scientists are in accord with tins view, and very definite and clear statements are made hy them concerning the life beyond. Alfred Russell Wallace, who was the great champion of the,cause of spiritualism, ventured to explain almost all from the second principle, and possibly he went to the. other extreme, but his spiritualism was different to the dish-water tvpe of stuff we frequently got. While I dislike the one who sticks his head in the sand of prejudice 1 equally dislike the one who uncritically accepts all phenomena regarded as being of super-normal origin, short time ago I gave a certain lady a portion of what purported to he a letter - from the front, and headed “Au/.ac Cove” for the purpose of receiving a psychometrieal reading. Ihe letter brought the medium into touch with spirit land, notwithstanding the fact that I had written the letter before leaving home. In addition to other mental processes involved, here clearly is evidence of the “Law oi the Association of Ideas.” Such humbug, coupled with the gullibility and sacrifice of reason of the hearers brings discredit, hut notwithstanding this we now and again hear the pickaxes of our friends on the other side. To hastily return to telepathy and telatliesia as an argument against the position adopted hy Mr Boyle, Sir Oliver Lodge says it is just here that we begin. Here we have mind communications with another mind, and what is unreasonable about saying that a discarnate spirit, whose field of activity is not limited by the physical organism, can co-operate with one still encumbered by the body. From here, of course, we have to follow Bacon’s rule of “observation and experiment,” and the institute of jsychical research has supplied so much evidence that no reasonable man can be blind to the facts. The establishing of the main claims of spiritualism certainly come under the category of science and a mode of life and action consistent with the will of the Divine being has to lie adopted or. further expressed in the words of Wordsworth. I have felt a presence that disturbs . jue with joy of elevated thoughts, A sense Sublime of something far more . deeply interposed;; ' ~ ■ Whose : dwelling is the light of setting simsyi, And the; round ocean, arid ‘the Hying air, And the blue sky and in the mind of man, A motion and a spirit that impels All thinking things, all objects of all thought, ‘1 And rolls through all things. —I am\ etc, F. G. BLAKE.