Absurdities Of Immaterialism
Orson Pratt
7 chapters
2 hour read
Selected Chapters
7 chapters
Absurdities of Immaterialism, Or, A Reply to T. W. P. Taylder's Pamphlet, Entitled, "The Materialism of the Mormons or Latter-day Saints, Examined and Exposed."
Absurdities of Immaterialism, Or, A Reply to T. W. P. Taylder's Pamphlet, Entitled, "The Materialism of the Mormons or Latter-day Saints, Examined and Exposed."
By Orson Pratt, One of the Twelve Apostles of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. "What is truth?" This is a question which has been asked by many. It is a question supposed to be of difficult solution. Mr. Taylder in his tract against materialism, says, "It is a question which all the philosophers of the Grecian and Roman schools could not answer." He seems to think the question was unanswerable until the introduction of the gospel; since which time he considers that the veil is ta
30 minute read
Read Chapter
Read Chapter
I.—Immaterialism is absurd, and opposed to true Philosophy.
I.—Immaterialism is absurd, and opposed to true Philosophy.
1. The immaterialist assumes that God consists of an immaterial substance, indivisible in its nature, "whose centre is everywhere and circumference nowhere." The indivisibility of a substance implies impenetrability; that is, two substances cannot exist in the same space at the same time; hence, if an indivisible substance exist everywhere, as it cannot be penetrated, it will absolutely exclude the existence of all other substances. Such a substance would be a boundless, infinite solid, without
2 minute read
Read Chapter
Read Chapter
II.—AN IMMATERIAL SUBSTANCE CANNOT EXIST.
II.—AN IMMATERIAL SUBSTANCE CANNOT EXIST.
1. We shall first endeavour to show what is absolutely essential to the existence of all substance. It will be generally admitted that space is essential to existence. Space, being boundless, all substances must exist in space. Space is not the property of substance, but the place of its existence. Infinite space has no qualities or properties of any description excepting divisibility. Some eminent philosophers have supposed extension to be a property of space, but such a supposition is absurd.
3 minute read
Read Chapter
Read Chapter
IMMATERIALISTS ARE ATHEISTS.
IMMATERIALISTS ARE ATHEISTS.
There are two classes of Atheists in the world. One class denies the existence of God in the most positive language: the other denies his existence in duration or space. One says, "There is no God;" the other says, "God is not here or there, any more than he exists now and then ." (Isaac Taylor's Physical Theory of Another Life Chap. II.) The infidel says, God does not exist anywhere. The Immaterialist says, "He exists Nowhere ." (Good's Book of Nature.) The infidel says, There is no such substa
5 minute read
Read Chapter
Read Chapter
A SPIRITUAL SUBSTANCE IS MATERIAL.
A SPIRITUAL SUBSTANCE IS MATERIAL.
That spirit or mind has a relation to space, is evident from the fact of its location in the body. The body itself exists in space, therefore every particle of substance which it contains must exist in space. No point can be assumed in the body but what has a relation to the surrounding space or extension. Therefore spirit must have a relation to extension or it cannot exist in the body. All unextended points have a relation to space, though they are no part of space, and do not occupy space; bu
13 minute read
Read Chapter
Read Chapter
OF THE ESSENCE OF SUBSTANCES.
OF THE ESSENCE OF SUBSTANCES.
Philosophers of modern times have asserted that we know nothing of the essence of bodies. It is affirmed that all that can be known of mind or matter, are merely its properties. Dr. Abercrombie, says, "We talk, indeed, about matter, and we talk about mind; we speculate concerning materiality and immateriality, until we argue ourselves into a kind of belief that we really understand something of the subject. The truth is, we understand nothing. Matter and mind are known to us by certain propertie
3 minute read
Read Chapter
Read Chapter
THE IMMATERIALISTS ONLY POSSIBLE ARGUMENT REFUTED.
THE IMMATERIALISTS ONLY POSSIBLE ARGUMENT REFUTED.
The only possible argument which the immaterialist pretends to bring forward in support of the inextension and indivisibility of a thinking substance, and consequently of its immateriality—is founded on the self-consciousness of such substance. A thinking substance is conscious of its own individual unity: it is conscious that itself is not many beings, but one. Mankind universally feel their own individual unity when each contemplates himself. Each one is certain that it is the same being that
59 minute read
Read Chapter
Read Chapter