CAN GOD ORGANIZE MATTER TO THINK? by Dudley Marvin Canright

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Nov 29, 1877

CAN GOD ORGANIZE MATTER TO THINK?

By Dudley Marvin Canright

(Continued.)

Hear Bishop Clark’s argument upon this point: “The opinion that even organic matter could, by any possibility, be made to exhibit such power, cannot be received without the most clear and indubitable evidence. What is there to be found in the composition of the brain and nervous system, or in their organization, that would lead us to look for the development of thought, feeling, or conscience in them? The brain has been analyzed, and more than eight-tenths of its substance has been found to be water. Indeed, this, mixed up with a little albumen, a still less quantity of fat, osmazome, phosphorus, acids, salts, and sulphur, constitutes its material elements. In all cases, water largely predominates. Take even the pineal gland—that interior and mysterious organ of the brain, supposed by Descartes, and by many philosophers after him, to be the peculiar seat of the soul—even this has been analyzed. Its principal elements are found to be phosphate of lime, together with a smaller proportion of carbonate of lime and phosphates of ammonia and magnesia. “If the brain at large constitutes the soul, then the soul is only a peculiar combination of oxygen and hydrogen with albumen, acids, salts, sulphur, &c. Or, if the pineal gland constitutes the soul, then the principal element of soul is phosphate of lime!”—Man All Immortal, pp. 57, 58.

To immaterialists this may sound like good reasoning: to us it is foolish sophistry. It is simply setting aside the power of God entirely, and arguing that what we cannot do, cannot be done. How foolish!

Try his argument on the organization of dumb beasts. I have in my hand a little live mouse. Behold how bright his eye, how keen his sight. Look at his ear. How sharp his hearing. Prick him with a pin. How quickly he feels it. Again, how acute is his smell. How soon he will find a piece of cheese, or detect the presence of a cat. Here we certainly have sight, hearing, smelling, feeling, and, indeed, all the senses. Let us analyze this little animal, as the bishop did the brain, and what do we find? “Eight-tenths of its substance has been found to be water. Indeed, this, mixed up with a little albumen, a still less quantity of fat, osmazome, phosphorus, acids, salts, and sulphur, constitutes its material elements. In all cases water largely predominates.” We have found simply “a

peculiar combination” of oxygen, hydrogen, sulphur, &c.

How unreasonable to suppose that these gross materials could ever see, hear, or smell! No; it cannot be so. There must be an immaterial, immortal, never-dying soul in that mouse, which did all the seeing and hearing. The mouse must have an immortal soul, and the mosquito surely has a never-dying spirit! Reader, to such ridiculous conclusions are our opponents driven, to maintain their immaterial theory. It is simply a square denial of the power of God and the commonest observation of every-day life. Such reasoning is a mere appeal to the vulgar prejudices against matter. Let me try it in a different manner.

Here is a fond mother with a dear sweet little girl of four summers, whom she greatly loves: nor can we blame her for being proud of so beautiful a child. The little girl has a bright, twinkling eye, fat, rosy cheeks, curly hair, finely shaped, dimpled hands, and a fair complexion. She is neatly dressed in the most tasteful manner. How the mother loves to throw her arms around her, and press her to her heart! But stop. Let us put this lovely object into the chemical laboratory, and analyze it. A thorough analysis shows that four-fifths of that body is nothing but water, a few parts albumen, sulphur, phosphorus, salts, acids, and a little fatty matter. Lay them out here each by itself. Is there anything very lovely here? Would you like to embrace and kiss these? Oh, no; the loveliness is all gone. And yet but a few minutes ago, that mother was caressing these very elements in the most affectionate manner. Was she then so much in love with a little water, phosphorus and sulphur? How ridiculous this seems to be! It is no more absurd, however, than the arguments of our opponents,—that a little water, sulphur, &c., cannot think.

But the falsity of this kind of reasoning lies just in this: It takes the unorganized, unvitalized elements separately, and reasons as to what these can do, and what these can be, and what they cannot do in this condition. It sets aside the very points at issue; namely, organization and proper combination. It is just like taking an exquisite painting, and undertaking to prove that there is nothing beautiful about it by the same process. Put that painting into the chemical laboratory, wash off the paint with an acid, and analyze its elements; and what do you find? A little oil, a few ounces of lead, and several different minerals. Lay them out there side by side. Now I can sneeringly say, Where is its beauty? Where its comely form? Where is there anything to be admired? But how absurd would be such a course! The whole beauty of that picture is not in the rough material, but in their skillful combination and arrangement. Destroy the combination, and the beauty is gone, the picture is destroyed.

Just so foolish does he reason, who undertakes to analyze a man’s brain, and finding only water, phosphorus, albumen, &c., sneeringly says, “This cannot reason, this cannot think.” No, very true; in that shape they cannot. But as God put them together they can think, and they do. Further than this, we know that a man’s brain does think; because in more than one case it has been seen in the act of thinking. A certain man had by an injury a large piece entirely removed from the top of his skull. It exposed two or three square inches of his brain, but did not kill him. Interesting observations were made in his case by physicians. When he was asleep the brain would settle down, and become greatly contracted. It would be all quiet. The moment he awoke, the brain would grow larger and begin to quiver. As he entered into conversation, this motion of the brain increased. When his mind became agitated, this motion was very rapid.

What does this show? It shows that the brain does think. The science of phrenology confirms the fact that the brain does think. It shows that the size and quality of a man’s brain determine the capacity of his mind. A large brain, of a fine organization, always gives a giant mind. Even Bishop Clark thus inadvertently admits this fact: “A finer and more perfect organization in the human species affords finer development of mental power.”—Man All Immortal, p. 99. Look at the charts and busts exhibited by the phrenologist. It will be seen that the organization of the brain has been the measure of the mental man.

D. M. CANRIGHT.

(To be Continued.)