Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| The Intellect Coeval with the Soul in the Human Being. An Example from Aristotle Converted into Evidence Favourable to These Views. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
Chapter XIX.—The
Intellect Coeval with the Soul in the Human Being. An Example from
Aristotle Converted into Evidence Favourable to These Views.
Nor must we fail to notice those writers who
deprive the soul of the intellect even for a short period of time.
They do this in order to prepare the way of introducing the
intellect—and the mind also—at a subsequent time of life,
even at the time when intelligence appears in a man. They maintain that
the stage of infancy is supported by the soul alone, simply to promote
vitality, without any intention of acquiring knowledge also, because
not all things have knowledge which possess life. Trees, for instance,
to quote Aristotle’s example,1635
1635 His De Anima,
ii. 2, 3. | have vitality,
but have not knowledge; and with him agrees every one who gives
a share to all animated beings of the animal substance, which,
according to our view, exists in man alone as his special
property,—not because it is the work of God, which all other
creatures are likewise, but because it is the breath of God, which this
(human soul) alone is, which we say is born with the full equipment of
its proper faculties. Well, let them meet us with the example of the
trees: we will accept their challenge, (nor shall we find in it any
detriment to our own argument;) for it is an undoubted fact, that
whilst trees are yet but twigs and sprouts, and before they even reach
the sapling stage, there is in them their own proper faculty of life,
as soon as they spring out of their native beds. But then, as time goes
on, the vigour of the tree slowly advances, as it grows and hardens
into its woody trunk, until its mature age completes the condition
which nature destines for it. Else what resources would trees possess
in due course for the inoculation of grafts, and the formation of
leaves, and the swelling of their buds, and the graceful shedding of
their blossom, and the softening of their sap, were there not in them
the quiet growth of the full provision of their nature, and the
distribution of this life over all their branches for the
accomplishment of their maturity? Trees, therefore, have ability or
knowledge; and they derive it from whence they also derive
vitality—that is, from the one source of vitality and knowledge
which is peculiar to their nature, and that from the infancy
which they, too, begin with. For I observe that even the vine,
although yet tender and immature, still understands its own natural
business, and strives to cling to some support, that, leaning on it,
and lacing through it,1636 it may so attain
its growth. Indeed, without waiting for the husbandman’s
training, without an espalier, without a prop, whatever its tendrils
catch, it will fondly cling to,1637 and embrace
with really greater tenacity and force by its own inclination than by
your volition. It longs and hastens to be secure. Take also ivy-plants,
never mind how young: I observe their attempts from the very first to
grasp objects above them, and outrunning everything else, to hang on to
the highest thing, preferring as they do to spread over walls with
their leafy web and woof rather than creep on the ground and be trodden
under by every foot that likes to crush them. On the other hand, in the
case of such trees as receive injury from contact with a building, how
do they hang off as they grow and avoid what injures them! You can see
that their branches were naturally meant to take the opposite
direction, and can very well understand the vital instincts1638
1638 Animationem. The
possession and use of an “anima.” | of such a tree from its avoidance of the
wall. It is contented (if it be only a little shrub) with its own
insignificant destiny, which it has in its foreseeing instinct
thoroughly been aware of from its infancy, only it still fears even a
ruined building. On my side, then, why should I not contend for these
wise and sagacious natures of trees? Let them have vitality, as
the philosophers permit it; but let them have knowledge too, although
the philosophers disavow it. Even the infancy of a log, then, may have
an intellect (suitable to it): how much more may that of a human being,
whose soul (which may be compared with the nascent sprout of a tree)
has been derived from Adam as its root, and has been propagated amongst
his posterity by means of woman, to whom it has been entrusted for
transmission, and thus has sprouted into life with all its natural
apparatus, both of intellect and of sense! I am much mistaken if the
human person, even from his infancy, when he saluted life with his
infant cries, does not testify to his actual possession of the
faculties of sensation and intellect by the fact of his birth,
vindicating at one and the same time the use of all his
senses—that of seeing by the light, that of hearing by sounds,
that of taste by liquids, that of smell by the air, that of touch by
the ground. This earliest voice of infancy, then, is the first effort
of the senses, and the initial impulse of mental perceptions.1639 There is also the further fact, that some
persons understand this plaintive cry of the infant to be an augury of
affliction in the prospect of our tearful life, whereby from the very
moment of birth (the soul) has to be regarded as endued with
prescience, much more with intelligence. Accordingly by this
intuition1640
1640 Spiritu. The mental
instinct, just mentioned. | the babe knows his
mother, discerns the nurse, and even recognises the waiting-maid;
refusing the breast of another woman, and the cradle that is not his
own, and longing only for the arms to which he is accustomed. Now from
what source does he acquire this discernment of novelty and custom, if
not from instinctive knowledge? How does it happen that he is irritated
and quieted, if not by help of his initial intellect? It would be very
strange indeed that infancy were naturally so lively, if it had not
mental power; and naturally so capable of impression and affection, if
it had no intellect. But (we hold the contrary): for Christ, by
“accepting praise out of the mouth of babes and
sucklings,”1641
1641 Ps. viii. 2; Matt. xxi. 16. | has declared that
neither childhood nor infancy is without sensibility,1642 —the former of which states, when
meeting Him with approving shouts, proved its ability to offer Him
testimony;1643 while the other, by
being slaughtered, for His sake of course, knew what violence
meant.1644
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|