There is, perhaps, no more striking example of the credulity of man
than the widespread belief in immortality. This idea includes not only
the belief that death is not the end of what we call life, but that personal
identity involving memory persists beyond the grave. So determined is the
ordinary individual to hold fast to this belief that, as a rule, he refuses
to read or think upon the subject lest it cast doubt upon his cherished
dream. Of those who may chance to look at this contribution, many will
do so with the determination not to be convinced, and will refuse to even
consider the manifold reasons that might weaken their faith. I know that
this is true, for I know the reluctance with which I long approached the
subject and my firm determination not to give up my hope. Thus the myth
will stand in the way of a sensible adjustment to facts.
Even many of those who claim to believe in immortality still tell themselves
and others that neither side of the question is susceptible to proof. Just
what can these hopeful ones believe that the word "proof" involves?
The evidence against the persistence of personal consciousness is as strong
as the evidence of gravitation, and much more obvious. It is as convincing
and unassailable as the proof of the destruction of wood or coal by fire.
If it is not certain that death ends personal identity and memory, then
almost nothing that man accepts as true is susceptible to proof.
The beliefs of the race and its individuals are relics of the past.
Without careful examination no one can begin to understand how many of
man's cherished opinions have no foundation in face. The common experience
of all men should teach them how easy it is to believe, what they wish
to accept. Experienced psychologists know perfectly well that if they desire
to convince a man of some idea, they must first make him want to
believe it. There are so many hopes, so many strong yearnings and desires
attached to the doctrine of immortality that it is practically impossible
to create in any mind the wish to be mortal. Still, in spite of strong
desires, millions of people are filled with doubts and fears that will
not down. After all, is it not better to look the question squarely in
the face and find out whether we are harboring a delusion?
It is customary to speak of a "belief in immortality." --
First, then, let us see what is meant by the word "belief." If
I take a train in Chicago at noon, bound for New York, I believe I will
reach that city the next morning. I believe it because I have been to New
York, I have read about the city, I have known many other people who have
been there, and their stories are not inconsistent with any known facts
in my own experience. I have even examined the time tables and I know just
how I will go and how long the trip will take. In other words, when I board
the train for New York, I believe I will reach that city because I have
reason to believe it.
If, instead, I wanted to see Timbuktu or some other point on the globe
where I had never been, or of which I had only heard, I still know something
about geography, and if I did not I could find out about the place I wished
to visit. Through the encyclopedia and other means of information, I could
get a fair idea of the location and character of the country or city, the
kind of people who lived there and almost anything I wished to know, including
the means of transportation and the time it would take to go and return.
I already am satisfied that the earth is round, and I know about its size.
I know the extent of its land and water. I know the names of its countries.
I know perfectly well that there are many places on its surface that I
have never seen. I can easily satisfy myself as to whether there is any
such place and how to get there, and what I shall do when I arrive.
But if I am told that next week I shall start on a trip to Goofville;
that I shall not take my body with me; that I shall stay for all eternity:
can I find a single fact connected with my journey -- the way I shall go,
the time of the journey, the country I shall reach, its location in space,
the way I shall live there -- or anything that would lead to a rational
belief that I shall really make the trip? Have I ever known anyone who
has made the journey and returned? If I am really to believe, I must try
to get some information about all these important facts.
But people hesitate to ask questions about life after death. They do
not ask, for they know that only silence comes out of the eternal darkness
of endless space. If people really believed in a beautiful, happy, glorious
land waiting to receive them when they died; if they believed that their
friends would be waiting to meet them; if they believed that all pain and
suffering would be left behind: why should they live through weeks, months,
and even years of pain and torture while a cancer eats its way to the vital
parts of the body? Why should one fight off death? Because he does not
believe in any real sense; he only hopes. Everyone knows that there is
no real evidence of any such state of bliss; so we are told not to search
for proof. We are to accept through faith alone. But every thinking person
knows that faith can only come through belief. Belief implies a condition
of mind that accepts a certain idea. This condition can be brought about
only by evidence. True, the evidence may be simply the unsupported statement
of your grandmother; it may be wholly insufficient for reasoning men; but,
good or bad, it must be enough for the believer or he could not believe.
Upon what evidence, then, are we asked to believe in immortality? There
is no evidence. One is told to rely on faith, and no doubt this serves
the purpose so long as one can believe blindly whatever he is told. But
if there is no evidence upon which to build a positive belief in immortality,
let us examine the other side of the question. Perhaps evidence can be
found to support a positive conviction that immortality is a delusion.
The belief in immortality expresses itself in two different forms. On
the one hand, there is a belief in the immortality of the "soul."
This is sometimes interpreted to mean simply that the identity, the consciousness,
the memory of the individual persists after death. On the other hand, many
religious creeds formulated a belief in "the resurrection of the body"
-- which is something else again. It will be necessary to examine both
forms of this belief in turn.
The idea of continued life after death is very old. It doubtless had
its roots back in the childhood of the race. In view of the limited knowledge
of primitive man, it was not unreasonable. His dead friends and relatives
visited him in dreams and visions and were present in his feeling and imagination
until they were forgotten. Therefore, the lifeless body did not raise the
question of dissolution, but rather of duality. It was thought that man
was a dual being possessing a body and a soul as separate entities, and
that when a man died, his soul was released from his body to continue its
life apart. Consequently, food and drink were placed upon the graves of
the dead to be used in the long journey into the unknown. In modified forms,
this belief in the duality of man persists to the present day. But primitive
man had no conception of life as having a beginning and an end. In this
he was like the rest of the animals. Today, everyone of ordinary intelligence
knows how life begins, and to examine the beginnings of life leads to inevitable
conclusions about the way life ends. If man has a soul, it must creep in
somewhere during the period of gestation and growth.
All the higher forms of animal life grow from a single cell. Before
the individual life can begin its development, it must be fertilized by
union with another cell; then the cell divides and multiplies until it
takes the form and pattern of its kind. At a certain regular time the being
emerges into the world. During its term of life millions of cells in its
body are born, die, and are replaced until, through age, disease, or some
catastrophe, the cells fall apart and the individual life is ended.
It is obvious that but for the fertilization of the cell under right
conditions, the being would not have lived. It is idle to say that the
initial cell has a soul. In one sense it has life; but even that is precarious
and depends for its continued life upon union with another cell of the
proper kind. The human mother is the bearer of probably ten thousand of
one kind of cell, and the human father of countless billions of the other
kind. Only a very small fraction of these result in human life. If the
unfertilized cells of the female and the unused cells of the male are human
beings possessed of souls, then the population of the world is infinitely
greater than has ever been dreamed. Of course no such idea as belief in
the immortality of germ cells could satisfy the yearnings of the individual
for a survival of life after death.
If that which is called a "soul" is a separate entity apart
from the body, when, then, and where and how was this soul placed in the
human structure? The individual began with the union of two cells, neither
of which had a soul. How could these two soulless cells produce a soul?
I must leave this search to the metaphysicians. When they have found the
answer, I hope they will tell me, for I should really like to know.
We know that a baby may live and fully develop in its mother's womb
and then, through some shock at birth, may be born without life. In the
past, these babies were promptly buried. But now we know that in many such
cases, where the bodily structure is complete, the machine may be set to
work by artificial respiration or electricity. Then it will run like any
other human body through its allotted term of years. We also know that
in many cases of drowning, or when some mishap virtually destroys life
without hopelessly impairing the body, artificial means may set it in motion
once more, so that it will complete its term of existence until the final
catastrophe comes. Are we to believe that somewhere around the stillborn
child and somewhere in the vicinity of the drowned man there hovers a detached
soul waiting to be summoned back into the body by a pulmotor? This, too,
must be left to the metaphysicians.
The beginnings of life yield no evidence of the beginnings of a soul.
It is idle to say that something in the human being which we call "life"
is the soul itself, for the soul is generally taken to distinguish human
beings from other forms of life. There is life in all animals and plants,
and at least potential life in inorganic matter. This potential life is
simply unreleased force and matter -- the greatest storehouse from which
all forms of life emerge and are constantly replenished. It is impossible
to draw the line between inorganic matter and the simpler forms of plant
life, and equally impossible to draw the line between plant life and animal
life, or between other forms of animal life and what we human beings are
pleased to call the highest form. If the thing which we call "life"
is itself the soul, then cows have souls; and, in the very nature of things,
we must allow souls to all forms of life and to inorganic matter as well.
Life itself is something very real, as distinguished from the soul.
Every man knows that his life had a beginning. Can one imagine an organism
that has a beginning and no end? If I did not exist in the infinite past,
why should I, or could I, exist in the infinite future? "But,"
say some, "your consciousness, your memory may exist even after you
are dead. This is what we mean by the soul." Let us examine this point
a little.
I have no remembrance of the months I lay in my mother's womb. I cannot
recall the day of my birth nor the time when I first opened my eyes to
the light of the sun. I cannot remember when I was an infant, or when I
began to creep on the floor, or when I was taught to walk, or anything
before I was five of six years old. Still, all of these events were important,
wonderful, and strange in a new life. What I call my "consciousness,"
for lack of a better word and a better understanding, developed with my
growth and the crowding experiences I met at every turn. I have a hazy
recollection of the burial of a boy soldier who was shot toward the end
of the Civil War. He was buried near the schoolhouse when I was seven years
old. But I have no remembrance of the assassination of Abraham Lincoln,
although I must then have been eight years old. I must have known about
it at the time, for my family and my community idolized Lincoln, and all
America was in mourning at his death. Why do I remember the dead boy soldier
who was buried a year before? Perhaps because I knew him well. Perhaps
because his family was close to my childish life. Possibly because it came
to me as my first knowledge of death. At all events, it made so deep an
impression that I recall it now.
"Ah, yes," say the believers in the soul, "What you say
confirms our own belief. You certainly existed when these early experiences
took place. You were conscious of them at the time, even though you are
not aware of it now. In the same way, may not your consciousness persist
after you die, even though you are not aware of that fact?
On the contrary, my fading memory of the events that filled the early
years of my life leads me to the opposite conclusion. So far as these incidents
are concerned, the mind and consciousness of the boy are already dead.
Even now, am I fully alive? I am seventy-one years old. I often fail
to recollect the names of some of those I knew full well. Many events do
not make the lasting impression that they once did. I know that it will
be only a few years, even if my body still survives decay, when few important
matters will even register in my mind. I know how it is with the old. I
know that physical life can persist beyond the time when the mind can fully
function. I know that if I live to an extreme old age, my mind will fail.
I shall eat and drink and go to my bed in an automatic way. Memory -- which
is all that binds me to the past -- will already be dead. All that will
remain will be a vegetative existence; I shall sit and doze in the chimney
corner, and my body will function in a measure even though the ego will
already be practically dead. I am sure that if I die of what is called
"old age," my consciousness will gradually slip away with my
failing emotions! I shall no more be aware of the near approach of final
dissolution than is the dying tree.
I am aware that now and then at long intervals there is a man who preserves
his faculties until a late period of his life. I know that these cases
are very, very rare. No superstition needs to be called into service to
account for the unusual things that are incident to life. There may be
those who retain, in a measurable degree, consciousness and mental activity
beyond the time of the ordinary mortal. Still, everyone with the least
information knows that it is almost a universal rule that the body declines
with age, and that those who live a long life gradually yield their intellectual
activity until they reach the period of senility and unconsciousness.
In primitive times, before men knew anything about the human body or
the universe of which it is a part, it was not unreasonable to believe
in spirits, ghosts, and the duality of man. For one thing, celestial geography
was much simpler then. Just above the earth was a firmament in which the
stars were set, and above the firmament was heaven. The place was easy
of access and in dreams the angels were seen going up and coming down on
a ladder. But now we have a slightly more adequate conception of space
and the infinite universe of which we are so small a part. Our great telescopes
reveal countless worlds and planetary systems which make our own sink into
utter insignificance in comparison. We have every reason to think that
beyond our sight there is endless space filled with still more planets,
so infinite in size and number that no brain has the smallest conception
of their extent. Is there any reason to think that in this universe, with
its myriads of worlds, there is no other life so important as our own?
It is possible that the inhabitants of the earth have been singled out
for special favor and endowed with souls and immortal life? Is it at all
reasonable to suppose that any special account is taken of the human atoms
that forever come and go upon this planet?
If man has a soul that persists after death, that goes to a heaven of
the blessed or to a hell of the damned, where are these places? It is not
so easily imagined as it once was. How does the soul make its journey?
What does immortal man find when he gets there, and how will he live after
he reaches the end of endless space? We know that the atmosphere will be
absent; that there will be no light, no heat -- only the infinite reaches
of darkness and frigidity.
If there is a future place for the abode of the spirits of the dead,
where is this place? Trusting people have made pictures and mental images
of this abode of the dead. The revelation of St. John treats rather specifically
of this far-off land, but it is evident that St. John was a psychopath
and his case would be plainly recognized today. True, this picture of St.
John's is not very alluring to intelligent men. Still trusting and confiding
mortals have visioned in words, at least, a land where families would be
reunited and neighbors and friends come together once more. In this smug
little place, fashioned upon experiences of life upon this mundane sphere,
husbands and wives, long parted, will be united. Parents and children,
and grandparents and grandchildren, too, will assemble in families in that
land of the blessed and the dead.
These conceptions were formed early in the history of man; in fact,
it has only been in recent years that we have had any knowledge or vision
of the immensity of space and the impossibility of any such place as is
visioned by the credulous and trusting. We know now that the earth revolves
upon its axis at a terrific speed. This motion makes a complete revolution
in twenty-four hours. We know down to the second of time that no spot
bears the same relation to space as it did before. If no one who dies at
midnight has a soul and starts on his trip to Heaven, he goes in an opposite
direction from one who dies at noon, and chances to meet under any circumstances
which can be conceived would grow less as they traveled on. Besides this
revolution on its axis, the earth is traveling at an inconceivable speed
around the sun, which, at times, is about ninety-three million miles
away. This complete journey is made once a year. In its orbit around the
sun it travels more than a thousand miles a minute. This constant appalling
speed would evidently add to the confusion of two mortals locating themselves
in the same spot in space, even though they had souls. The atmosphere,
even in its most attenuated form, does not reach over five hundred miles
away from the earth, and for only a small fraction of that space could
life as we conceive it exist. And when the earth leaves a given spot in
space the atmosphere is carried along with it. In addition to the motion
of the earth on its axis and its unthinkable speed in its circuit around
the sun, the whole solar system is traveling around the pole star, accompanied
no doubt by many other systems like our own; no one can tell how fast it
goes or how far it goes, in what seems endless space. And these systems
travel in turn around some other central point in the far-off Milky
Way, and no one knows how many other apparently central points somewhere
off amongst the stars and worlds and suns furnish foci around which the
earth and all the systems constantly revolve. What possible means of locomotion
could be furnished for mortals to find a place of rest, and what possible
unimaginable guide could pilot individuals going in different directions
at all times of the day and night and all portions of the year and century,
and other greater periods of time, to this haven of the blessed? All of
these conceptions beggar any sort of imagination and make and substitute
the wildest unthinkable dreams in place of real beliefs.
There are those who base their hope of a future life upon the resurrection
of the body. This is a purely religious doctrine. It is safe to say that
few intelligent men who are willing to look obvious facts in the face hold
any such belief. Yet we are seriously told that Elijah was carried bodily
to heaven in a chariot of fire, and that Jesus arose from the dead and
ascended into heaven. The New Testament abounds in passages that support
this doctrine. St. Paul states the tenet over and over again. In the fifteenth
chapter of first Corinthians he says: "If Christ be preached that
he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection
of the dead? ... and if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain....
For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised." The Apostles'
Creed says: "I believe in the resurrection of the body." This
has been carried into substantially all the orthodox creeds; and while
it is more or less minimized by neglect and omission, it is still a cardinal
doctrine of the orthodox churches.
Two thousand years ago, in Palestine, little was known of man, of the
earth, or of the universe. It was then currently believed that the earth
was only four thousand years old, that life had begun anew after the deluge
about two thousand years before, and that the entire earth was soon to
be destroyed. Today it is fairly well established that man has been upon
the earth for a million years. During that long stretch of time the world
has changed many times; it is changing every moment. At least three of
four ice ages have swept across continents, driving death before them,
carrying human beings into the sea or burying them deep in the earth. Animals
have fed on man and on each other. Every dead body, no matter whether consumed
by fire or buried in the earth, has been resolved into its elements, so
that the matter and energy that once formed human beings has fed animals
and plants and other men. As the great naturalist, Fabre, has said: "At
the banquet of life each is in turn a guest and a dish." Thus the
body of every man now living is in part made from the bodies of those who
have been dead for ages.
Yet we are still asked to believe in the resurrection of the body. By
what alchemy, then, are the individual bodies that have successfully fed
the generations of men to be separated and restored to their former identities?
And if I am to be resurrected, what particular I shall be called
from the grave, from the animals and plants and the bodies of other men
who shall inherit this body I now call my own? My body has been made over
and over, piece by piece, as the days went by, and will continue to be
so made until the end. It has changed so slowly that each new cell is fitted
into the living part, and will go on changing until the final crisis comes.
Is it the child in the mother's womb or the tottering frame of the old
man that shall be brought back? The mere thought of such a resurrection
beggars reason, ignores facts, and enthrones blind faith, wild dreams,
hopeless hopes, and cowardly fears as sovereign of the human mind.
Some of those who profess to believe in the immortality of man -- whether
it be of his soul or body -- have drawn what comfort they could from the
modern scientific doctrine of the indestructibility of matter and force.
This doctrine, they say, only confirms in scientific language what they
have always believed. This, however, is pure sophistry. It is probably
true that no matter or force has ever been or ever can be destroyed. But
it is likewise true that there is no connection whatever between the notion
that personal consciousness and memory persist after death and the scientific
theory that matter and force are indestructible. For the scientific theory
carries with it a corollary, that the forms of matter and energy are constantly
changing through an endless cycle of new combinations. Of what possible
use would it be, then, to have a consciousness that was immortal, but which,
from the moment of death, was dispersed into new combinations, so that
no two parts of the original identity could ever be reunited again?
These natural processes of change, which in the human being take the
forms of growth, disease, senility, death, and decay, are essentially the
same as the processes by which a lump of coal is disintegrated in burning.
One may watch the lump of coal burning in the grate until nothing but ashes
remains. Part of the coal goes up the chimney in the form of smoke; part
of it radiates through the house as heat; the residue lies in the ashes
on the hearth. So it is within human life. In all forms of life nature
is engaged in combining, breaking down, and recombining her store of energy
and matter into hew forms. The thing we call "life" is nothing
other than a state of equilibrium which endures for a short span of years
between the two opposing tendencies of nature -- the one that builds up,
and the one that tears down. In old age, the tearing-down process
has already gained the ascendency, and when death intervenes, the equilibrium
is finally upset by the complete stoppage of the building-up process,
so that nothing remains but complete disintegration. The energy thus released
may be converted into grass or trees or animal life; or it may lie dormant
until caught up again in the crucible of nature's laboratory. But whatever
happens, the man -- the You and the I -- like the lump of
coal that has been burned, is gone -- irrevocably dispersed. All the King's
horses and all the King's men cannot restore it to its former unity.
The idea that man is a being set apart, distinct from all the rest of
nature, is born of man's emotions, of his loves and hates, of his hopes
and fears, and of the primitive conceptions of undeveloped minds. The You
and The I which is known to our friends does not consist of an immaterial
something called a "soul" which cannot be conceived. We know
perfectly well what we mean when we talk about this You and this
Me: and it is equally plain that the whole fabric that makes up
our separate personalities is destroyed, dispersed, disintegrated beyond
repair by what we call "death."
As a matter of fact, does anyone really believe in a future life?
The faith does not simply involve the persistence of activity, but it has
been stretched and magnified to mean a future world infinitely better than
the earth. In this far-off land no troubles will harass the body or
the soul. Eternity will be an eternity of bliss. Heaven, a land made much
more delightful because of the union with which those who have gone before.
This doctrine has been taught so persistently through the years that men
and women of strong faith in their dying moments have seen relatives and
friends, long since dead, who have come to lead them to their heavenly
home.
Does this conduct of the intense disciple show that he really believes
that death is a glad deliverance? Why do men and women who are suffering
torture on earth seek to prolong their days of agony? Why do victims of
cancer being slowly eaten alive for months and years prefer enduring such
pain rather than going to a land of bliss? Why will the afflicted travel
all over the world and be cut to pieces by inches that they may stay a
few weeks longer, in agony and torture? The one answer that is made to
this query is that the afflicted struggle to live because it is their duty
to hang fast to mortal life, no matter what the pain or the expected joy
in heaven. The answer is not true. The afflicted cling to life because
they doubt their faith, and do not wish to let go of what they have, terrible
as it is.
Those who refuse to give up the idea of immortality declare that their
nature never creates a desire without providing the means for its satisfaction.
They likewise insist that all people, from the rudest to the most civilized,
yearn for another life. As a matter of fact, nature creates many desires
which she does not satisfy; most of the wishes of men meet no fruition.
But nature does not create any emotion demanding a future life. The only
yearning that the individual has is to keep on living -- which is a very
different thing. This urge is found in every animal, in every plant. It
is simply the momentum of a living structure: or, as Schopenhauer put it,
"the will to live." What we long for is a continuation of our
present state of existence, not an uncertain reincarnation in a mysterious
world of which we know nothing. The idea of another life is created after
men are convinced that this life ends.
I am not unmindful of those who base their hope of a future life on
what they claim are the evidences furnished by the investigation of spiritualism.
So far as having any prejudice against this doctrine, I have no more desire
to disbelieve than I have as to any other theories of a future life. In
fact, for many years, I have searched here for evidence that man still
lives after all our senses show that he is dead. For more than fifty years
until almost ten years past, I have given some attention to spiritualism.
I have read most of the important books of scientists: Alfred Russel Wallace,
Crooks, Oliver Lodge, and the books of many other men of ability and integrity
who believed that they had found their dead friends who had come back to
them. Likewise, I have for years investigated what are called spiritual
phenomena. I am satisfied that if any intelligent man, in possession of
his senses, thoroughly investigates spiritualism, he will find that there
no evidence to support his faith. At least nine-tenths of the phenomena
can be set down as pure fraud and imposition. The evidence comes in the
main from mediums who are ignorant, and whose tricks are clumsy in the
extreme. Perhaps one-tenth of the manifestations are not the result
of fraud but the evidence is entirely inadequate to prove the cause of
the phenomena. It is possible that there are phenomena which no one can
explain. I have many times seen what are called manifestations of spirit-return
that I could not explain, but all of these failed utterly to convince me
of the communication of disembodies spirits. It does not follow that because
the manifestations are strange and weird, and for the present unexplainable,
that those phenomena show that life persists after death. In the realm
of these manifestations, the evidence of scientists, is worth no more than
the evidence of other men. Most likely it is worth much less. The truth
is that real scientists, outside of their special field, are more helpless
than other men in detecting frauds and tricks. It is likewise true that
most of the men of science, like Sir Oliver Lodge, have come to their conviction
late in life, and under some great stress, which is calculated to unsettle
the mind, in the particular field to which they appeal.
Sir Oliver Lodge lost his son in the great war. This was a sore bereavement
to this eminent scientist. When one considers the greatness of Lodge, the
clearness with which he discusses every scientific theory with which he
deals, and then reads his book called Raymond, in which he tells
of his meetings with his beloved son, it is not difficult to see that as
to this bereavement his mind was unsettled and he is reaching out in the
darkness to find what he so strongly wants.
Is it possible that any sort of proof could prove the existence of an
individual after his decay? Suppose that some good fairy, distressed at
my unbelief, should come to me with the offer to produce any evidence that
I desired to satisfy me that I would see my loved ones after death; suppose
I should tell this fairy that my father had been dead for twenty years;
that I followed his lifeless body to the crematory where he was converted
into ashes; that I desired to have him brought back to me as a living entity,
and to stay in my house for a year, that I might not be deceived. Assume
that when the year had passed I should go out and tell my neighbors and
friends that my father had been living in my house, although he died two
score years ago; suppose that they believed implicitly in my integrity
and my judgement; even then, could I convince one person that my statement
was true? Would they be right in doubting my word? After all, which is
the more reasonable, that the dead have come back to life, or that I have
become insane? All of my friends would say: "Poor fellow, I am sorry
he has lost his mind." Against the universal experience of mankind
and nature, the dementia or the insanity of one man, or a thousand men,
could count as nothing. The insane asylums of the world are filled with
men who have these dreams and visions which are realities to them, but
which no one else believes, because they are entirely at variance with
well-known facts.
All men recognize the hopelessness of finding any evidence that the
individual will persist beyond the grave. As a last resort, we are told
that it is better that the doctrine be believed even if it is not true.
We are assured that without this faith, life is only desolation and despair.
However that may be, it remains that many of the conclusions of logic are
not pleasant to contemplate; still, so long as men think and feel, at least
some of them will use their faculties as best they can. For if we are to
believe things that are not true, who is to write our creed? Is it safe
to leave it to any man or organization to pick out the errors that we must
accept? The whole history of the world has answered this question in a
way that cannot be mistaken.
And after all, is the belief in immortality necessary or even desirable
for man? Millions of men and women have no such faith; they go on with
their daily tasks and feel joy and sorrow without the lure of immortal
life. The things that really affect the happiness of the individual are
the matters of daily living. They are the companionship of friends, the
games and contemplations. They are misunderstandings and cruel judgements,
false friends and debts, poverty and disease. They are our joys in our
living companions and our sorrows over those who die. Whatever our faith,
we mainly live in the present -- in the here and now. Those who hold the
view that man is mortal are never troubled by metaphysical problems. At
the end of the day's labor we are glad to lose our consciousness in sleep;
and intellectually, at least, we look forward to the long rest from the
stresses and storms that are always incidental to existence.
When we fully understand the brevity of life, its fleeting joys and
unavoidable pains; when we accept the facts that all men and women are
approaching an inevitable doom: the consciousness of it should make us
more kindly and considerate of each other. This feeling should make men
and women use their best efforts to help their fellow travelers on the
road, to make the path brighter and easier as we journey on. It should
bring a closer kinship, a better understanding, and a deeper sympathy for
the wayfarers who must live a common life and die a common death.