[To THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR."]
Srn,—May I be allowed to amplify " Locuplea' " argument against the theory that the phantasm of a person implies that person's immortality P As " Locuples " trustworthily observes, the evidence for phantasms of animate other than man can- not lightly be disregarded. Assuming that there is some objective cause for any given phantasm, whether of a man or of a brute, we can even so only say of it that the percipient is caused objectively to see that phantasm ; we have no grounds for affirming that the phantasm is itself the conscious or unconscious cause of its being seen.
Again, phantasms of persons appear, as a role, in dress familiar to the percipient, or at least in such garb as causes the percipient no surprise ; surely the agency which can cause one to see the phantasm of a Norfolk jacket could also cause one to see that of a dog or of any other creature. The argu- ment, therefore, that a phantasm of a person implies that person's immortality is quite valueless ; unless, indeed, we suppose that Norfolk jackets also are immortal.—I am, Sir,
Previous page
