Human Immortality: Two Supposed Objections to the Doctrine. William James

  • Davidson T
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
19Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

(1842-1910), became one of the most eminent of American philosophers and psychologists. He was a teacher at Harvard (1872-1907);, at first of physiology and anatomy, later of psychology and philosophy. This book was published in 1898 by Houghton, Mifflin and Company, The Riverside Press, Cambridge. This material was prepared for Religion-Online by Ted & Winnie Brock. Immortality is not incompatible with the brain-function theory of our present mundane consciousness. It is compatible in fully individualized form. Every memory and affection of one's present life is to be preserved. Preface James answers his critics who claim his thoughts are a pantheistic idea of immortality, not the Christian idea (survival in strictly personal form). He answers that one may conceive the mental world behind the veil in as individualistic a form as one pleases, without any detriment to the general scheme by which the brain is represented as a transmissive organ.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Davidson, T. (1899). Human Immortality: Two Supposed Objections to the Doctrine. William James. The International Journal of Ethics, 9(2), 256–259. https://doi.org/10.1086/intejethi.9.2.2375249

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free