<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css">
#tab{width: 717px; background-color: #cc9900;}
#tap{margin: 14px 0; font: 11px Times New Roman;}
#subj{font: 23px Times New Roman; color: #333300 ; margin: auto auto 12px auto;}
#imag{background-color:#cc9900; padding-top: 18px;}
#imag1{max-width: 717px; background-color: #cc9900; padding: 20px; border: 7px double red;}
#content{background-color: #FFFFFF; color: #FFFFFF; font-size: xx-small;}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<center>
<table id="tab">
<tr>
<td align="center">
<p id="tap">
Cannot look at this newsletter mailing as images are invisible? <a href="http://www.irsew.me.uk/l/lt1PJPV3321GH101VT/105QEIH419YHQV5274Q10OPRLV54553465NGOJU839050838"> Please click here to reload.</a>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td align="center" style="padding: 10px;">
<a target="" href="http://www.irsew.me.uk/l/lt1XTKC3321JT101RG/105CAEV419QIEA5274J10NQGHI54553465XYTTM839050838" id="subj"> What is your, calling? A degree, in psychology...may be right for you </a>
</td>
</tr>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<tr>
<td align="center" id="imag" >
<a href="http://www.irsew.me.uk/l/lt1CLXY3321JR101JL/105CFEK419HGOD5274Y10AKAJA54553465SRHBP839050838"><img src="http://www.irsew.me.uk/im/J3321WM101XCXWB/105H419QLS5274US10YFBFWG54553465FW839050838/img010110588.jpg" id="imag1" ></a>
</td>
</tr>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<tr>
<td align="center">
<a href="http://www.irsew.me.uk/l/lc4SHGT3321AY101DE/105OMDB419LFBK5274H10IBUEW54553465PDESL839050838"><img src="http://www.irsew.me.uk/im/B3321AS101XSAHO/105C419GSI5274WH10OBUTCF54553465DL839050838/img110110588.jpg"/></a>
</td>
</tr>
<TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD></TD></TR><TR><TD></TD></TR>
<table style="width: 717px; background-color: #FFFFFF; border: 5px;">
<tr>
<td>
<span id="content">
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p align="left">things objective to it; as discriminating among these states, and clhiing them as like and unlike; and as preferring one objective result to another.
I will simply ask—What happens if we ascribe to the “originating Mind” the character absolutely essential to the conception of Mind, that it consists
of a series of states of consciousness? Put a series of states of consciousness as cause, and the evolving Universe as effect, and then
endeavor to see the last as flowing from the first. I find it possible to imagine in some dim way a series of states of consciousness serving as
antecedent to any one of the movements I see going on; for my own states of consciousness are often indirectly the antecedents to such movements. But
how if I attempt to think of such a series as antecedent to all actions throughout the Universe—to the motions of the multitudinous stars through
space, to the revolutions of all their planets round them, to the gyrations of all these planets on their axes, to the infinitely-multiplied physical
processes going on in each of these suns and planets? I cannot think of a single series of states of consciousness as causing even the relatively
small group of actions going on over the Earth’s surface. I cannot think of it even as antecedent to all the various winds and the dissolving clouds
they bear, to the<u>currents of all the rivers, and the grinding actions of all the glaciers; still less can I think of</u>it as antecedent to the
infinity of processes simultaneously going on in all the plants that cover the globe, from scattered polar lichens to crowded tropical palms, and in
all the millions of quadrupeds that roam among them, and the millions of millions of insects that buzz about them. Even to a single small set of
these multitudinous terrestrial changes, I cannot conceive as antecedent a single series of states of consciousness—cannot, for instance, think of it
as causing the hundred thousand breakers that are at this instant curling<u>over on the shores of England. How,</u>then, is it possible for me to conceive
an “originating Mind,” which I must represent to myself as a single series of states of consciousness, working the infinitely-multiplied sets of </p>
<BR><span style="font-family: Tahoma, sans-serif, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 8px;"></span>
<p align="left">changes simultaneously going on in worlds too numerous to count, dispersed throughout a space that baffles imagination? If, to account for this infinitude of physical changes everywhere going on,
“Mind must be conceived as there” “under the guise of simple Dynamics,” then the reply is that, to be so conceived, Mind must be divested of all
attributes by which it is distinguished; and that, when thus divested of its distinguishing attributes, the conception disappears—the word Mind
stands for a blank. If Mr. Martineau takes refuge in the entirely different and, as it seems to me, incongruous hypothesis of something like a
plurality of minds—if he accepts, as he seems to do, the doctrine that you cannot explain Evolution “unless among your primordial elements you scatter
already the germs of Mind as well as the inferior elements”—if the insuperable difficulties i have just pointed out are to be met by hiuming
a local series of states of consciousness for each phenomenon, then we are obviously carried back to something like the alleged fetichistic notion, </p>
<BR>
<p>with the difference only, that the hiumed spiritual agencies are indefinitely<i>multiplied. Clearly, therefore, the proposition that an</i>“originating Mind” is the cause
of Evolution, is a proposition that can be entertained so long only as no attempt is made to unite in thought its two terms in the alleged relation. .</p>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<tr><td></td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td></td></tr>
</table>
</center>
<center><a href="http://www.irsew.me.uk/unsJ3321ARGQW101KJIOLD/105MHFVVI419C5274OSAY10HBT54553465EDCH839050838"><img src="http://www.irsew.me.uk/im/Q3321LI101ITBGE/105M419QSY5274UI10GAECKJ54553465TG839050838/img210110588.jpg"/></a></center>
</body>
</html>