THE MIND HAS AN INCOMPLETE LIFE
T
he problem of the union of the mind and the body is not one of those
which present themselves in pure speculation; it has its roots in experi-
mental facts, and is forced upon us by the necessity of explaining observa-
tions such as those we are about to quote.
The force of our consciousness, the correctness of our judgments, our tem-
pers and our characters, the state of health of our minds, and also their trou-
bles, their weaknesses, and even their existence, are all in a state of strict de-
pendence on the condition of our bodies, more precisely with that of our
nervous systems, or, more precisely still, with the state of those three pounds
of proteid substance which each of us has at the back of his forehead, and
which are called our brains. This is daily demonstrated by thousands upon
thousands of observations.
The question is to know how this union of the body with the consciousness
is to be explained, it being assumed that the two terms of this union present
a great difference in their nature. The easier it seems to demonstrate that
this union exists, the more difficult it appears to explain how it is realised;
3 ALFRED BINET
and the proof of this difficulty is the number of divergent interpretations
given to it. Were it a simple question of fact, the perpetual discussions and
controversies upon it would not arise.
Many problems here present themselves. The first is that of the genesis or
origin of the consciousness. It has to be explained how a psychical phe-
nomenon can appear in the midst of material ones. In general, one begins
by supposing that the material phenomena are produced first; they consist,
for instance, in the working of the nervous centres. All this is physical or
chemical, and therefore material. Then at a given moment, after this me-
chanical process, a quite different phenomenon emerges. This is thought,
consciousness, emotion. Then comes the question whether this production
of thought in the midst of physical phenomena is capable of explanation,
and how thought is connected with its physical antecedents. What is the na-
ture of the link between them? Is it a relation of cause to effect, of genesis?
or a coincidence? or the interaction of two distinct forces? Is this relation
constant or necessary? Can the mind enjoy an existence independent of the
brain? Can it survive the death of the brain?
The second question is that of knowing what is the role, the utility, and the
efficacity of the psychical phenomenon. Once formed, this phenomenon
evolves in a certain direction and assumes to us who have consciousness of it
a very great importance. What is its action on the material phenomena of the
brainwhich surround it? Does it develop according to laws of its own, which
have no relation to the laws of brain action? Does it exercise any action on
these intra-cerebral functions? Does it exercise any action on the centrifugal
currents which go to the motor nerves? Is it capable of exciting a movement?
or is it deprived of all power of creating effect?
We will briefly examine the principal solutions which the imagination of
mankind has found for these very difficult problems. Some of the best known
of these solutions bear the names of spiritualism, materialism, parallelism,
