could　be　made　to　hold　its　tongue。
  Medical　materialism　seems　indeed　a　good　appellation　for　the　too
  simple…minded　system　of　thought　which　we　are　considering。
  Medical　materialism　finishes　up　Saint　Paul　by　calling　his　vision
  on　the　road　to　Damascus　a　discharging　lesion　of　the　occipital
  cortex；　he　being　an　epileptic。　　It　snuffs　out　Saint　Teresa　as　an
  hysteric；　Saint　Francis　of　Assisi　as　an　hereditary　degenerate。
  George　Fox's　discontent　with　the　shams　of　his　age；　and　his　pining
  for　spiritual　veracity；　it　treats　as　a　symptom　of　a　disordered
  colon。　　Carlyle's　organ…tones　of　misery　it　accounts　for　by　a
  gastro…duodenal　catarrh。　　All　such　mental　overtensions；　it　says；
  are；　when　you　come　to　the　bottom　of　the　matter；　mere　affairs　of
  diathesis　（auto…intoxications　most　probably）；　due　to　the
  perverted　action　of　various　glands　which　physiology　will　yet
  discover。　　And　medical　materialism　then　thinks　that　the　spiritual
  authority　of　all　such　personages　is　successfully　undermined。＇2＇
  ＇2＇　　For　a　first…rate　example　of　medical…materialist　reasoning；
  see　an　article　on　〃les　varietes　du　Type　devot；〃　by　Dr。
  Binet…Sangle；　in　the　Revue　de　l'Hypnotisme；　xiv。　161。
  Let　us　ourselves　look　at　the　matter　in　the　largest　possible　way。
  Modern　psychology；　finding　definite　psycho…physical　connections
  to　hold　good；　assumes　as　a　convenient　hypothesis　that　the
  dependence　of　mental　states　upon　bodily　conditions　must　be
  thoroughgoing　and　complete。　　If　we　adopt　the　assumption；　then　of
  course　what　medical　materialism　insists　on　must　be　true　in　a
  general　way；　if　not　in　every　detail：　　Saint　Paul　certainly　had
  once　an　epileptoid；　if　not　an　epileptic　seizure；　George　Fox　was
  an　hereditary　degenerate；　Carlyle　was　undoubtedly
  auto…intoxicated　by　some　organ　or　other；　no　matter　whichand　the
  rest。　　But　now；　I　ask　you；　how　can　such　an　existential　account　of
  facts　of　mental　history　decide　in　one　way　or　another　upon　their
  spiritual　significance？　　According　to　the　general　postulate　of
  psychology　just　referred　to；　there　is　not　a　single　one　of　our
  states　of　mind；　high　or　low；　healthy　or　morbid；　that　has　not　some
  organic　process　as　its　condition。　　Scientific　theories　are
  organically　conditioned　just　as　much　as　religious　emotions　are；
  and　if　we　only　knew　the　facts　intimately　enough；　we　should
  doubtless　see　〃the　liver〃　determining　the　dicta　of　the　sturdy
  atheist　as　decisively　as　it　does　those　of　the　Methodist　under
  conviction　anxious　about　his　soul。　　When　it　alters　in　one　way　the
  blood　that　percolates　it；　we　get　the　methodist；　when　in　another
  way；　we　get　the　atheist　form　of　mind。　　So　of　all　our　raptures　and
  our　drynesses；　our　longings　and　pantings；　our　questions　and
  beliefs。　　They　are　equally　organically　founded；　be　they　religious
  or　of　non…religious　content。
  To　plead　the　organic　causation　of　a　religious　state　of　　mind；
  then；　in　refutation　of　its　claim　to　possess　superior　spiritual
  value；　is　quite　illogical　and　arbitrary；　unless　one　has
  already　worked　out　in　advance　some　psycho…physical　theory
  connecting　spiritual　values　in　general　with　determinate　sorts　of
  physiological　change。　　Otherwise　none　of　our　thoughts　and
  feelings；　not　even　our　scientific　doctrines；　not　even　our
  DIS…beliefs；　could　retain　any　value　as　revelations　of　the　truth；
  for　every　one　of　them　without　exception　flows　from　the　state　of
  its　possessor's　body　at　the　time。
  It　is　needless　to　say　that　medical　materialism　draws　in　point　of
  fact　no　such　sweeping　skeptical　conclusion。　　It　is　sure；　just　as
  every　simple　man　is　sure；　that　some　states　of　mind　are　inwardly
  superior　to　others；　and　reveal　to　us　more　truth；　and　in　this　it
  simply　makes　use　of　an　ordinary　spiritual　judgment。　　It　has　no
  physiological　theory　of　the　production　of　these　its　favorite
  states；　by　which　it　may　accredit　them；　and　its　attempt　to
  discredit　the　states　which　it　dislikes；　by　vaguely　associating
  them　with　nerves　and　liver；　and　connecting　them　with　names
  connoting　bodily　affliction；　is　altogether　illogical　and
  inconsistent。
  Let　us　play　fair　in　this　whole　matter；　and　be　quite　candid　with
  ourselves　and　with　the　facts。　　When　we　think　certain　states　of
  mind　superior　to　others；　is　it　ever　because　of　what　we　know
  concerning　their　organic　antecedents？　　No！　it　is　always　for　two
  entirely　different　reasons。　　It　is　either　because　we　take　an
  immediate　delight　in　them；　or　else　it　is　because　we　believe　them
  to　bring　us　good　consequential　fruits　for　life。　　When　we　speak
  disparagingly　of　〃feverish　fancies；〃　surely　the　fever…process　as
  such　is　not　the　ground　of　our　disesteemfor　aught　we　know　to　the
  contrary；　103　degrees　or　104　degrees　Fahrenheit　might　be　a　much
  more　favorable　temperature　for　truths　to　germinate　and　sprout　in；
  than　the　more　ordinary　blood…heat　of　97　or　98　degrees。　　It　is
  either　the　disagreeableness　itself　of　the　fancies；　or　their
  inability　to　bear　the　criticisms　of　the　convalescent　hour。　　When
  we　praise　the　thoughts　which　health　brings；　health's　peculiar
  chemical　metabolisms　have　nothing　to　do　with　determining　our
  judgment。　　We　know　in　fact　almost　nothing　about　these
  metabolisms。　　It　is　the　character　of　inner　happiness　in　the
  thoughts　which　stamps　them　as　good；　or　else　their　consistency
  with　our　other　opinions　and　their　serviceability　for　our　needs；
  which　make　them　pass　for　true　in　our　esteem。
  Now　the　more　intrinsic　and　the　more　remote　of　these　criteria　do
  not　always　hang　together。　　Inner　happiness　and　serviceability　do
  not　always　agree。　　What　immediately　feels　most　〃good〃　is　not
  always　most　〃true；〃　when　measured　by　the　verdict　of　the　rest　of
  experience。　　The　difference　between　Philip　drunk　and　Philip　sober
  is　the　classic　instance　in　corroboration。　　If　merely　〃feeling
  good〃　could　decide；　drunkenness　would　be　the　supremely　valid
  human　experience。　　But　its　revelations；　however　acutely
  satisfying　at　the　moment；　are　inserted　into　an　environment　which
  refuses　to　bear　them　out　for　any　length　of　time。　　The　consequence
  of　this　discrepancy　of　the　two　criteria　is　the　uncertainty　which
  still　prevails　over　so　many　of　our　spiritual　judgments。　　There
  are　moments　of　sentimental　and　mystical　experiencewe　shall
  hereafter　hear　much　of　themthat　carry　an　enormous　sense　of
  inner　authority　and　illumination　with　them　when　they　come。　　But
  they　come　seldom；　and　they　do　not　come　to　everyone；　and　the　rest
  of　life　makes　either　no　connection　with　them；　or　tends　to
  contradict　them　more　than　it　confirms　them。　　Some　persons　follow
  more　the　voice　of　the　moment　in　these　cases；　some　prefer　to　be
  guided　by　the　average　results。　　Hence　the　sad　discordancy　of　so
  many　of　the　spiritual　judgments　of　human　beings；　a　discordancy
  which　will　be　brought　home　to　us　acutely　enough　before　these
  lectures　end。
  It　is；　however；　a　discordancy　that　can　never　be　resolved　by　any
  merely　medical　test。　　A　good　example　of　the　impossibility　of
  holding　strictly　to　the　medical　tests　is　seen　in　the　theory　of
  the　pathological　causation　of　genius　promulgated　by　recent
  authors。　　〃Genius；〃　said　Dr。　Moreau；　〃is　but　one　of　the　many
  branches　of　the　neuropathic　tree。〃　　〃Genius；〃　says　Dr。　Lombroso；
  〃is　a　symptom　of　hereditary　degeneration　of　the　epileptoid
  variety；　and　is　allied　to　moral　insanity。〃　　　〃Whenever　a　man's
  life；〃　writes　Mr。　Nisbet；　〃is　at　once　sufficiently　illustrious
  and　recorded　with　sufficient　fullness　to　be　a　subject　of
  profitable　study；　he　inevitably　falls　into　the　morbid　category。　。
  。　。　　And　it　is　worthy　of　remark　that；　as　a　rule；　the　greater　the
  genius；　the　greater　the　unsoundness。〃＇3＇
  ＇3＇　　J。　F。　Nisbet：　　The　Insanity　of　Genius；　3d　ed。；　London；　1893；
  pp。　xvi。；　xxiv。
  Now　do　these　authors；　after　having　succeeded　in　establishing　to
  their　own　satisfaction　that　the　works　of　genius　are　fruits　of
  disease；　consistently　proceed　thereupon　to　impugn　the　VALUE　of
  the　fruits？　　Do　they　deduce　a　new　spiritual　judgment　from　their
  new　doctrine　of　existential　conditions？　Do　they　frankly　forbid　us
  to　admire　the　productions　of　genius　from　now　onwards？　　and　say
  outright　that　no　neuropath　can　ever　be　a　revealer　of　new　truth？
  No！　their　immediate　spiritual　instincts　are　too　strong　for　them
  here；　and　hold　their　own　against　inferences　which；　in　mere　love
  of　logical　consistency；　medical　materialism　ought　to　be　only　too
  glad　to　draw。　　One　disciple　of　the　school；　indeed；　has　striven　to
  impugn　the　valu