SPIRIT MESSAGES
[To the Editor of Tint SrEcrieron.]
Sue—There are few fields of inquiry where controversy is
more rampant than that opened up by Psychical Research. Not long ago all alleged supernormal phenomena were seriously questioned, and there were few men of science who expmsed themselves convinced as to the reality of these occurrences. Fuller investigation led many to accept certain phenomena as not only probable, but well factually established ; and the consequence was that controversy regarding the reality of the phenomena was superseded by controversy on the point of their elucidation. And it is precisely here that Mr. C. E. M. Joad and many students of metaphysics will cross swords.
To begin with, the " psychic factor " theory by which ho
hopes to explain many so-called spirit messages is not a new one (as he asserts) but a very old hypothesis dressed up in new form. It was modernized by Dr. C. D. Broad, the author of a remarkable work called The Mind and lts Place in Nature. But I doubt if Dr. Broad and his disciple are in full agreement as to the type of the phenomena which this theory is to explain; for in his article in The Spectator, Mr. Joad is guilty of several generalizations likely to produce a very mistaken impression. In classifying all mediumistic communications into one section—a section, moreover, composed only of " vague generalities," " sentiments of platitudinous moral uplift, rarely detailed and never convincing "—Mr. Joad falls into the grievous error of opening his eyes to a field of phenomena which does undoubtedly support his theory, but closing his mind to all those significant incidents which do not. Respectfully I submit that Mr. Joad's general descrip- tion is neither fair nor accurate of a large and important section of messages not so characterized --messages clear, detailed and convincing, and in which platitudinous sentiments are conspicuous merely by their comparative rarity.
There are on record in the publications of the several
Societies for Psychical Research reports of cases where only the spiritistic hypothesis will hold good. But conviction of survival is not readily gained—it is a slow process, a process of elimination. lf, for instance, through the mediumship of Mrs. Osborne Leonard I tun brought into contact with an entity who claims to be my brother : the mere assertion of his name will not convince me that we are in communicat although the fact might be derived supernormally. Prof. Charles Richet has shown us too well the extent of medium- istic lucidity, and it has become common knowledge that sensitives may obtain facts and knowledge by other than the normal channels. And if my brother commences to converse with me, recalling events with which only we two were familiar, and sometimes imparting knowledge unknown to myself, the faculty of lucidity might still hold good. What is important is the manner in which this vital information is given : bow much, for instance, of the familiar personality is again manifest. So that conviction of personal identity is, as Sir Oliver Lodge put it, " a slow growth, not based upon any one instance, but gradually built up from each occurrence of the display of specific knowledge appropriate to that person atone, and still further strengthened by the slight nuances and personal traits characteristic of the individual." If this type of communication became frequent, and more and more evidence were accumulated over a period of years, the spirit- istic hypothesis would become irresistible—the more so indeed, if such an experience were duplicated in the case of scores of other investigators.
I submit that this is not merely a postulate--it is an accom-
plished fact ; and that to account for the more emphatic and evidential spirit messages, only the spiritualistic explanation will survive. To seek to explain such experiences by some mythical psychic factor is unnecessarily to complicate and evade the clear issue. Metaphysics is, in fact, suffering from a surfeit of hypotheses—hypotheses which, in many cases, have been invented without adequate consideration of the whole of the facts in question. " They pile hypothesis on hypothesis, mountain high, till it is impossible to come at the plain truth on any question. Hazlitt's aphorism is as tette' of metaphysics as it is of the ignorance of. the learned ; and we are faced with the fact that amid all this maze of specula- tion the spiritistic hypothesis, and it alone, will account for all the phenomena investigated.—I am Sir, &c., JAMES. LEIGH.
" The Two Worlds," . .
18 Corporation Street, Manchester. -
[Mr. Joad writes: It is not clear to me why Mr. Leigh should be so anxious to cross metaphysical swords with me. • I ex- plicitly said that the " psychic-factor" theory was pure hypothesis and unverified at that,. and I never suggested that it covered all the field, If Mr. Leigh will read my Guide to Modern Thought, he will find it expressly stated that in my view no one hypothesis covers or is likely to 'cover all the field.
So far as the " spirit " hypothesis is concerned, I said in the article that " the internal evidence of the messages • is never. strong enough to make it certain that they emanate from a surviving spirit." Mr. Leigh appears to agree with me, suggesting as he does the possibility that many may be due to mediumistic lucidity. If there arc any which are positively not susceptible of this explanation and positively require- the hypothesis of " spirit " origin, what are they and where arc they to be found ?j
Previous page
