WHAT IS THOUGHT?

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21329, 23 November 1934, Page 20

WHAT IS THOUGHT?

TO TUB liurroii or TUB WJKSTS. Sir, —Mr Craighead does not seem to agree with me that, sludents of the Bible write nonsense, but not only I say thai, but there is also the whole of historical fact to prove it. For centuries the so-called inspired students of the Bible maintained, as a tad. the teachings of the Ptolemaic philosophy, which placed our puny earth as the centre of flic whole universe, and when Copernicus and Galileo, who did no!, believe in inspiration but ralher in perspiration and gave the results of their labour, proving thereby that the earth was a mere satellite, those martyrs of science were tortured the self-styled inspired souls. The Kaiser also declared war on Ihe universe as a result of religious inspiration! , , , r But as this is beside the subject of "thought," I shall merely explain further my point, namely, thn! 1 ob.jcH to anyone claiming an infallibility in their'ideas and lark of ar»uincnlalion by simply claiming sources ol infallible inspiration. As to the last pprt of Mr Craighead s letter, I find myself in eomplete agreement, so that instead of being negative or rather receptive' to all kin,"ls of nonsense because it has been ho lieved in the past, it is our dp!;. In test, everything which is pul before us and use our power of thought lo dissect, analyse, and test. I believe tha' it is an insult to our forefathers to refuse to budge from the point where they left us.—Yours, etc.. UMBERTO COLONNA. November 22, 1934. [Subject to the*right of reply of E.B.R. this correspondence is now closed. —Ed., "Thp Press."] TO IHI HDITOB OF TEE PBIS3. Sir, —Mr Craighead in his letter of I this morning ..as not put clearly enough his theory of positive and | negative thought, !He must surely.

know that thought must be first one and then the other for any advance in evolution to be made. This shows that the outer form of the soul is of the least importance, as its outer gender is fixed, whereas mind is hermaphrodite, or manifests both feminine and masculine alternately. As one takes in impressions, or listens to another's thought he is being feminine, and if the thought taken in seems good to the negative one. then there it is certain the result will be a creation and something accomplished. As we study nature in all its forms—so we can apply it to ourselves, even from the bee and the flower to the proton-elec-tron. This creative act goes on in all planes and most certainly the plane of thought. We can see plainly that a positive mind is a one-sided affair and has narrow results. It keeps back its own evolution. This side of thought is only in its infancy, and it is going to be the lever which will jerk humanity and its religion into fitting in with | scientific findings.—Yours, etc., ! LEONIS. , November 22, 1934. ] i to mi EDiTOK or 'jhe piir.ss. Sir,—May I express my pleasure at seeing this profound subject elevated ! to the dignity of a leading article in your paper? It certainly deserves its position there. The experiments you refer to, however, seem rather to deal with the physical than the psychical aspects of our thought processes. They go no farther than demonstrating the physical reactions of the brain to thought stimulation from our sensory organs, in contradistinction to thought created, or evolved, from our psychic faculties. It seems to me that the origin and the machinery of thought vibrationsare of a distinctly dual character. For instance, the thought which prompted you to deal will") this subject in f a leading article no doubt owes its ongin to an entirely different .stimulus to that which inspired Mr John Maselield to write the poem he referred to. In your case, I would suggest that the thought process was entirely one of conscious volition on your part, prompted no doubt, by a variety of reasons, one of which perhaps, was a desire to contribute something towards the sum of our knowledge and understanding of the subject by giving your readers the benefit of your experience and logical reasoning. In the other case, the desire to write, as well as the subject matter of the poem, were not the result of any conscious effort, but were purely psychic or inspirational in their character, and therefore setting up thought processes from an entirely opposite direction to 1 lie other kind, and I think it was the inspirational aspect which "E.8.R." had in mind when he first propounded the problem, "What is thought?" The experiment with the rat which you instance is very interesting as showing to what degree the brain responds to thought, that is, if we can premise n rat having the faculty of thought. Personally. I would rather term'it instinct. But it merely serves further to illustrate the difference between the two kinds of thought which I have endeavoured to point out. It was stated by the experimenters that the rat was trained to do certain things, and it would therefore logically follow that such training should develop the animal's instinct to do these things automatically; much as we humans act in many ways by force of habit; and one may assume that the more these actions become automatic the less need is there for the assistance of the brain. Tt is just a question of how much or how little of the brain we need to enable us to respond to thought vibrations. The other experiments referred to. in which Professor Adrian and Mr Matthews made use of pads and a powerful amplifier applied to a person's head, are also extremely interesting in that they do seem to throw fresh light on the co-relation of thought to the functions of the brain, but they do not take us much further in the direction of the birth of thought. They tend to demonstrate the fact that the activity of the brain cells can be recorded on a chart as a regular, or rhythmic vibration when the mind is In a passive condition, and is not distracted by objective impulses. Thus, when theperson experimented upon was fold to open his eyes, his mind was morn or less reacting to things within his objective vision. This, apparently, disturbed or broke up the rhythmic' brain waves which were recorded on the, chart when tho person's eyes were closed, and transformed them into a smaller and more irregular sequence of waves. The same peculiar effect was observable even when the eyes were closed, but the person was asked to work out a simple sum in mental arithmetic. It shows that any concentrated effort on the part of the brain cells breaks up the regularity of the waves noticeable when the mind is in a passive condition. Tf it were possible to transform these chart recordings to sound waves, through the medium of a microphone, we would probably hear the activity of the brain cells as a monotonous humming or throbbing sound; and it is reasonable to suppose thai this could be equally disturbed, or modified, by static interference much in the same way as the former are altered by thought stimuli. All this, however, does not gel us much nearer to a solution of the real problem as to the nature or origin of thought, and I am convinced that we shall learn far more by conducting experiments on psychic, or metaphysical lines, than from the orthodox methods of material science, which tests everything in the laboratory A study of the experiments in hypnotism or clairvoyance will convince most people that they bring us far nearer to an understanding of thought forma

or power than any other method hitherto tried. Even if such experiments do not give us a real solution as to what thought is, they have certainly proved that thought is a much more powerful force than is generally realised. For some considerable time hypnotism has been brought more and more into use in the treatment of physical ailments and diseases, and there are thousands of cases recorded where such treatment has been followed by most wonderful cures where orthodox medical treatment has utterly | failed. The same thing can be claimed for what is termed spiritual healing. The cases dealt with are far too well authenticated and vouched for to be dismissed with incredulity. Further research should be encouraged in every possible way and not hampered by tho ridicule or scoffing of the ignorant.--Yours, etc., W. D. THOMPSON. November 22, 1934. TO TH« »r>ITO» 07 THE- PB1S». Sir, —The chip made by your correspondent Umbcrto Colonna at your article on the subject "What is Thought?" is only the reflex of his own idiosyncrasy, and his gibe at those who have quoted the Bible is justified, but only with certain qualifications. Thought in most persons is only the creation of some suggestion described by some writers as an "involution"; and the Bible has been the best medium for the conveyance of the thoughts to man which have been "lamps to his feet and a light on his path." I am not quibbling at your correspondent's letter, it is one of the best lie has written to you. It is, however, a mistake to be so assertive, especially upon such a subject, as the above: at the same time it is our own prerogative to satisfy ourselves as to the correctness of the thoughts which we cherish. While speaking of the thought engendering power of the Bible, allow me , to ask from whence in all the world could such a confession be made as was made by Webster when he was asked what his greatest thought was? "The greatest thought that ever entered by mind," he replied, "was that of my personal responsibility to a personal God." He expanded upon that, and said. "There is no evil that we cannot either face or flee from, except the consciousness of duty disregarded. A sense of duty pursues us ever. It is omnipresent, like the Deity. If we take to ourselves the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, duty performed, or duty violated is still with us for our happiness or our misery. If wc say that the darkness shall cover us. in the darkness, as in the light, our obligations are yet with us. We cannot escape their power, nor fly from their presence. They are with us in this life, will be with us at its close, and in the sense of inconceivable solemnity which lies yet further forward, we shall find ourselves surrounded by the consciousness of duty to pain us wherever it has been violated, and to console us so far as God has given lis grace to perform it." So much then for the Bible as an originator of thought. It may be objected that there has been, in this correspondence, too little distinction made between thought and thinking! Is there any difference between thought and thinking? Is there any difference between + he player and the violin? But the violin is not a thought! It may be the revealer, the divulger, the discloser of a thought, but it is not the player! Is there any difference between a rower and a boat? But the boat is not a thought; it may, however, get the rower somewhere! Thought has played a wonderful part in the life of many a thinker. Here is a boy. He has had the seeds pf pious training and thoughtful care. Soon after leaving home he finds his way into the Bodleian Library at Oxford. A member of the staff persuaded him to read Darwin and Huxley. He finds at. once thoughts in his mind which are in conflict with the thoughts oE his early training. Another member of the Bodleian staff persuaded him to read "The Essays of Elia," Lamb's "Dissertation Upon Roast Pig." AH unconsciously he finds himself slipping through a gateway into a "broad" road and the love of literature enswathed him. Keats's "Ode to the Nightingale," and Walter Pater's "Marius the Epicuran" revealed to him the astringent and preserving place of discipline in relation to inspiration. Writer after writer was followed. He was like the rower in the boat; where would it get him? One day in a country road on the upper reaches of the Thames, he threw his bicycle on the grass and lay down beside it, taking' from his pocket, a little volume of Dents literary edition of the Bible. If contained Matthew's Gospel. Led possibly by the stimulus of having read something of Tolstoy, he, for Ihe first time in his life, read straight through the Sermon on the Mount. He jumped to his feet exclaiming, "Heavens! This would put the world right." The bankruptcy of human politics and economics made it; clear that the one hope of the world lay in a worldwide application to every man individually, and every people corporately of what was in that Sermon on the Mount and in Him who had spoken it. Thought is the mysterious force in the life of man which in the last resort will discern motives. Those of your readers who have read such writers as Carpenter, Lotze, Ulrici, and Beale, will be familiar with such

terms as "the spiritual body and "the nerves of the soul." Each of these writers talks freely of much sand thrown into the eyes of materialism. Carpenter says a human soul is a finite creature capable of infinite possibilities. Ulrici says a human soul is an ethereal-nonatomic-enswathement. It enswathes the entire human being. Its entire organism co-ordiates living tissue, possessing intelligence with permanence of unity in all the flux of the atoms of the body. The unity of consciousness is there: so also is the persistence of personal identity. It is an immense fad that each individual feels himself to be one, and that throughout every event of his life his identity is certain. Who is he? We say he is the ego! Of himself he speaks of "my mind." The organs of the mind are thought, memory, will, knowledge—these are enough for our present purpose. Knowledge is a mental faculty; wisdom is the right appropriation of it. Thought is the existence of an unexecuted plan. It exists nowhere in its initial state, but in the organism of "the ethereal-non-atomic-enswathement of the spiritual body." The thinker is the ego who puts the thought into execution. Much more could be said, but in conclusion may I say that while the mind is open to the intrusion of unwelcome thoughts God has made provision for the guarding of the thoughts always providing the ego is willing.—Yours, etc., W. T. KINGSTON. Tcmuka, November 21, 1934. TO THE EDITOR OF TUB PUBSS. Sir,—lt is easy to push Mr Craighead off' into the deep end, following the line of thought he is on. We shall soon be discussing—What is evidence? Reliable witnesses giving personal experiences should produce the best evidence. The experience of the expert anatomist, with his scalpel in search of the soul, finding none, does not prove that there is none; it merely proves that he has taken the wrong line of thought. The Governor-General is about to launch a ship in Belfast, transmitting his wish along a wire. Some future governor-general may do the same thing by focusing his thought. Many years ago I assisted at a seance held to experiment with the "alter ego" of a medium (the Rev. S. Harris). She (or it) was supposed to have made a round the world trip in one hour. The evidence (?) came later by mail. We were told that the needle of some instrument in London was agitated, synchronising with our seance in Christchurch. There were several prominent citizens present with us. Sir William Crookes was supposed to be assisting Mrs Harris, whose body was in a trance for an hour.—Yours, etc.. PETER TROLOVE. November 22, 1934. TO THB IDIIO* OT TBS I'RISS. Sir,—What a time we correspondents would have if we had no editor to watch us. Mr Peter Trolove asked point blank for that right top corner to be used as a refresher course for sky pilots. If it had been we would have been sure of a first-class scrap for the ground or wingless variety of sky pilot usually fights long and bravely, even worse than the pacifists. So we drifted back again into the power of thought, though this was not quite apparent until after our letters had been read. The healing power of this stuff is undoubted, for where there are so many imaginary ills we must have imaginary cures for them, but for a substantial hurt, such as a broken leg we waste no time in rushing off to a doctor; and it costs very little, for he gets most of his fees from the first class. Then the editor chipped in, and passed on some tests, which proved that our minds were always rattling away, and if we want to know what two and two are we have to throw the whole lot out of gear, after which off we go again. Some poets and correspondents, also politicians, depend on being asleep for doing their best work. I have never tried that, but I know what it is to be half asleep, and if it could be twice as bad as that, heaven help you and your readers.—Yours, etc., T A.S November 22, 1934.