Both these methods are the results of philosophy; they are founded on laws agreeable to the human mind. But philosophy not only influences the method of physical investigation, but also determines the object of research into the field of nature. The natural philosopher whose mind is imbued with a sensational philosophy, that is, a philosophy which declares that all mental states are the result of sensation, cultivates physical science with quite a different object in view from the philosopher who is influenced by an idealistic philosophy-that is, a philosophy based on a notion of self, with its native and exhaustless energies. To the former, nature is merely what it appears to the eye; he generalizes natural objects in their external relations only. The latter, also, accumulates facts relative to external objects, but he looks into nature to discover her hidden secrets-the forces which are everywhere in continual operation. "Nature," as it has been beautifully observed by Morrell, in his 'History of Modern Philosophy,' " is to the idealistic philosopher a glorious mystery, necessarily prompting us to the conception of spiritual agencies, which agencies are, in fact, only the indications of the Creator,' the varied forms in which a divine and spiritual power is diffusing itself throughout its own immense creation."

The influence of philosophy over physical science is still visible in the works of modern authors, and it will continue to exercise an influence over scientific research to the end of time. To those not familiar with the paramount importance of philosophy or mental science, we would recommend the perusal of Morrell's "History of Modern Philosophy;" the writings of Carlyle, Whewell, Humboldt, Herschel, &c. Look again at the influence of mental philosophy on literature. It is enough to allude merely to the historical writings of Hume, Gibbon, Macaulay, and Alison, to see the power which the philosophic tendencies of historical authors has over their respective productions. The poetry of Byron and Wordsworth affords a striking example of the effect of philosophy in moulding the thoughts and sentiments of poets, and leading them to an elevated or debased conception of man and nature. Byron has given some splendid descriptions of natural scenery-descriptions which, for power, beauty, and distinctness, have never been surpassed, if equalled, by any other poet, either ancient or modern. But graphic and minute as those poetical paintings are, they depict merely the outward and visible forms of nature. Wordsworth has also portrayed the outward forms of natural objects with great beauty and effect, but he has likewise endeavoured to discover in them the "good, the beautiful, and the true." To the former, nature appeared only a vast panorama of outward forms and beauty to the latter, a world pregnant with living power and moral significancy. To the one, nature is only a magnificent assemblage of

visible but isolated objects: to the other, a vast collection of varied forms, which link the spirit of man to the Spirit of the universe. Byron observed nature only as a poet: Wordsworth as a poet and a true philosopher. The latter has said, in his beautiful lines on Tintern Abbey,

"For I have learned to look on nature, not as in the Hour of thoughtless youth--but hearing oftentimes The still, sad music of humanity,

Nor harsh, nor grating, though of ample power

To chasten and subdue. And I have felt a presence

That disturbs me with the joy of elevated thought,

A sense sublime of something far more deeply interfused,
Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns,

And the round ocean, and the living 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 thoughts,
And rolls through all things."

This is a key to his whole writings. Byron's popularity is already on the wane; and after ages will regret that a false and gross sensational philosophy and other causes, so perverted his mind and corrupted his heart as to prevent him leaving to posterity one piece really worthy of the greatness of his powers and the splendour of his genius. The poetry of Wordsworth is addressed to the deeper and purer feelings of man; and it will be read and admired so long as the human mind is affected by the beauties of nature, by purity of thought, and elevated sentiment. Wordsworth's mind, unlike Byron's, was imbued with an idealistic philosophy-hence the difference of their respective writings.

Let us here consider shortly the influence of mental philosophy on legislation and the condition of nations. To go no further back than the latter part of last century. We would ask, what chiefly gave rise to the horrible first French Revolution? It was most assuredly the promulgation of pernicious philosophical principles, until they spread through all ranks and classes of men, and corrupted the public mind of France. It was this, chiefly, which overthrew religion, uprooted virtue, and roused the fiendish passions that trampled on the throne, degraded liberty, outraged all order and decency, and made France red with the blood of her citizens. This tragic historical drama alone shows the influence of philosophy, and the absolute necessity that exists, at all times, for the cultivation and dissemination of a sound, healthy, and enlightened philosophy of mind among the people of every nation.

Whatever kind of philosophy exists in the minds of our Lockes, Adam Smiths, and Benthams, colours or determines their principles of social or political economy. The principles, political or philosophical, which are held by these philosophers, affect the public mind through books, the press, lectures, speeches. They affect the minds of the lead

ing statesmen, who work them into a practical shape, and discuss and agitate them, until the public mind of a nation is affected by their truth or necessity, and legislative enactments are the result.

Philosophy also exerts a powerful sway over religion, not only over the religion of an individual, as in the case of Swedenborg, Priestley, and others, but over that of the Church. It has affected the religion of every Church in every age, modifying its opinions, its spirit, and its practices. The history of philosophy, as well as ecclesiastical and civil history, proves this. To take one example. It is the influence of a peculiar and somewhat mystical philosophy which is held by a few minds of the present day, that has produced the movement that is now going on in the Church of England. Whatever kind of philosophy is taught in the Universities, and imbibed by the theological and other students in attendance there, it will modify or give a colour to their religious opinions. Hence the necessity for a sound system of philosophy being taught in all Universities without which, creeds and articles of religious belief will be of little avail in promoting sound and scriptural views of religion among those who are destined to become the teachers of others.

Seeing, then, the influence of philosophy over the opinions and actions of man, over science, legislation, literature, and religion, and seeing that in one form or another it has always held sway in the world, and that it will continue to do so till the end of time, exercising a useful or a baneful sway according to its nature, we must conclude that mental philosophy ought to form not only an important part of the education of man, but should, also, claim his attentive consideration during every period of his active existence. It ought to be his constant aim to attain to the knowledge of a sound, pure, and elevated philosophy of mind. Further, an individual may have some excuse for his being ignorant of many sciences, but can have none for his ignorance of mind. He may not be able to purchase a telescope to sweep the heavens, and aid his study of astronomy; and he may remain almost ignorant of the unseen world of life around him, from not being in possession of the microscope to reveal its wonders; and of chemistry, from his want of proper instruction and suitable apparatus. But he has the means within himself to become even a master in mental science. Unaided and alone, he may study mental phenomena as they are manifested within himself, or as they are exhibited in those around him. In addition to the careful study of the standard works on mental philosophy, the student should study mind practically as well as theoretically, and not confine his attention to books bearing expressly upon the subject. He ought to study the human mind as it is reflected on the page of history,-here, as in the world, he may obtain a practical

knowledge of mankind, as well as become acquainted with the march of the human mind upwards through successive ages and civilizations to the present time, and also learn the various circumstances which influenced or retarded its progress and development. And he should study the mind as it is depicted by the powerful genius of Shakespeare, who has withdrawn the veil from the human heart, laid bare, with a master's hand, its hidden mysteries; explained the "subtilties of thought and the laws of passion"; who has presented us with a complete analysis of mind, with a perfect anatomy of the passions, emotions, and desires of man. And whether delineating the subtilties of love, the turbulence of passion, the rage of madness, or the chatterings of imbecility, or depicting any other phase of mind or character, he is equally natural, faithful, and profound. He is a metaphysician worthy of the closest study. The mind should be studied also as it is exhibited under the mild and genial sway of Christianity, and as it struggles for utterance through the gloomy atmosphere of infidelity, and as it is developed under the sway of the different religions and the different forms of political government. It should be studied among the rich and poor, the learned and unlearned, in its development, maturity, and decay; in health and in disease, at the festive board and at the hour of death. But, above all, the psychological student should study his own mind. It is here that his progress in mental science will be most satisfactory. For by attending closely to his own thoughts, emotions, and desires, and observing their springs and modes of action, by observing, in short, all the phenomena of mind as exhibited in himself, he may not only obtain a clear and comprehensive knowledge of the powers and susceptibilities of the mind, and of the laws which regulate their action, he may not only gain a knowledge of mental science, but, what is of more consequence, gain a knowledge of himself -a knowledge of his powers and capacities, his motives and desires, his virtues and defects,-a knowledge which will enable him to improve his intellectual powers, cultivate the affections of the heart, and give him the mastery of his will, make him firm in purpose and resolve, and fit him for the proper discharge of the duties and responsibilities of life.

391

DOES ANY ANALOGY EXIST BETWEEN INSANITY AND DEMONIACAL POSSESSION ?

BY THE REV. JOS. SOUTER,

Chaplain to the Essex County Lunatic Asylum.

WE have often heard the opinion, indeed it is asserted with a good deal of confidence, by some modern believers in the mystery of tableturning, that all insane persons are under the possession of devils. There are others, on the contrary, who are no less positive in their conviction that the influence of Satan in the matter, in ancient as well as modern times, is altogether a myth and an exploded folly. These latter hold that the demoniacs were merely insane. Both these opinions, though so utterly at variance with each other, start from the same point of some supposed and seeming analogy between insanity and possession. Whatever may be thought of the reasonableness of either of the above conclusions that have been drawn from it, it is certainly worth while to consider what grounds there are for supposing that such analogy exists. Believing this subject to be one of considerable interest, we propose, without further preface or apology, to enter upon its consideration, in a spirit alike removed, we trust, from an unreasoning bigotry on the one hand, and from the irreverence of a too bold rationalism on the other.

At the very threshold of this inquiry, it is of great importance that we should endeavour to ascertain whether the Evangelists make any special distinction between lunatics and demoniacs. We believe it to be universally acknowledged that no example is given of the cure of insanity, as called by that or any ana ogous name, to distinguish it from possession in any of the Gospels. But the twenty-fourth verse of the fourth chapter of St. Matthew is triumphantly appealed to by many writers, as proving that such cures were performed, and that no analogy between the two maladies can possibly be shown to exist. And certainly this passage forms a very plausible, if not unanswerable argument in favour of that opinion. We will quote the Evangelist's words:"There were brought to Christ, both those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatic, καὶ δαιμονιζομένους καὶ σεληνιαCoμévovs, and he healed them." Valpy's note on this passage is most positive. He says, "The persons possessed with devils are here expressly distinguished from lunatics, and could not be exactly the same." Many writers, both before and since the appearance of Dr. Valpy's Greek Testament, have maintained the same opinion; indeed, it has almost come to be regarded as treason or heresy to entertain a doubt about it. Dr. Adam Clarke expresses the utmost contempt and pity for those who are irrational enough, or infidel enough, to believe that the demoniacs were merely insane.