What
is Life?
Raynor C. Johnson was
an Australian physicist, Master of Queens College, University of Melbourne and
a highly respected academic. He spent
years studying many different aspects of philosophy, mysticism, mediumship and
Spiritualism in his attempt to arrive at an understanding of life that
accounted for all its myriad facets and not just the physical and obvious. He wrote several fascinating books, in all of
which his views are clearly and logically stated in non-academic language,
except where its use was unavoidable.
His book “Nurslings of
Immortality”, investigates the writings of Douglas Fawcett and his theory of
Imaginism. It is a compelling theory
that explains, logically, many aspects of life that scientists generally have
no explanation for or whose explanations cannot withstand serious, intelligent
examination. Briefly the theory holds that
God has imagined everything that exists throughout the universe, even events
and developments that take aeons of time to reach fruition. His imagining is continuous and is not the “once
and for all” that some religions claim.
His imagining is a living, vital process in which each one of us
contributes to some degree because we are each a part of Him. On the individual planets, such as Earth, the
realisation of God’s imaginings is in the hands of “imaginals” which I believe
equate to what Spiritualists think of as the higher spirits. Here I propose to include some extracts from
Johnson’s book in order to whet your appetite for more.
I start with a comment
on the tendency of scientists to classify things in groups in the mistaken
belief that such classification explains “why”:
“A nucleo-protein
molecule is still a molecule – even if it is convenient in biology to call it a
gene. It is incapable of accounting for
blueness in eyes, redness in petals, or the length of a nose; nor if it is
buffered by other neighbours, or if it drops an amino-acid from its tail, can
it produce brown eyes, white petals or a short nose. We do not dispute that certain molecular
conditions and ordering of the genes are conditions (from “below”) enabling
such characters to manifest. But we
claim that these qualitative features arise from “above”, because imaginals are able in these conditions
to appear. The philosopher must continue
to remind the biologist that “it is no good tapping the cask for wine that is
not there.”
When I survey the
account which Darwinism and its derivatives gives of Evolution of living things
from the Protozoa to Homo Sapiens, I am bound to say that the two themes of
Variation and Natural Selection, together with all the detailed knowledge which
genetics is supplying, hold out great promise of accounting for the factors in
Evolution which derive from “below”. I
am equally clear that regarded as the sole and sufficient basis of Evolution
they are completely inadequate. At every
step there is apparent the activity of imagining (spirit or higher activity), of a purposive drive towards the
interim goal of increasing awareness, and of experimenting to further that
plan. Some of the experiments have
obviously been failures; this is readily granted as we look back at the many
extinct forms of life. But something was
learned by these experiments, as we can see by the significant facts that
failures were not repeated and that successful devices were fully exploited.
It may be asked: Who or
what made these experiments and stored the wisdom? The answer leads us directly to consider the
factors in Evolution which come “from above”.
At certain important
stages of evolution, such as the invasion of dry land by the first amphibians
or the conquest of the air by primitive birds, a whole group of complex
adjustments had to be achieved approximately simultaneously. One or two alone could be of no value to the
creature. These variations were
presumably effected by co-ordinated genetic changes. … It
is of great interest that Professor A.C. Hardy has expressed the view “that
there must have been at least one element in the process of evolution that is
not mechanical or material in the ordinary sense”. Moreover, referring to telepathy, he has
said, “The discovery that individual organisms are somehow in psychical connection with one another
across space is, of course, one of the most revolutionary biological
discoveries ever made.”
In a later paper
Professor Hardy develops these views further:
“I find it quite
impossible to imagine how such a mathematical plan of growth could have been
evolved entirely under the selective influence of the very heterogeneous
environment. It seems to me to have all
the appearance of a definite mental conception like that of an artist or
designer – a pattern outside the physical world which in some way has served as
a template or guage for selective action.” (God?)
Now
to Psychic Research:
“Some people imagine
that psychical research is synonymous with Spiritualism. This is of course untrue, and such a view
could only be held in ignorance of both.
The former is a critical and scientific approach to all para-normal phenomena. The latter is a religious practice based upon
the conviction of man’s survival of death and the possibility of communication
between the incarnate and the discarnate.
… It is quite possible for a student in the field of psychical research
to hold that the spiritualist view is either right or wrong. The present writer has been driven to accept
its central contention as true, both by a critical appraisal of the evidence
and by certain personal experiences.
The late G.M Tyrell, a
distinguished worker in the field of psychic research, on many occasions drew
attention to the strangely neglectful attitude of otherwise thoughtful and
reasonable people towards the findings of psychic research. One would certainly have supposed that where
issues of the greatest importance to scientific and philosophical thought were
involved there would be widespread concern to investigate and assess them at their
true value. Apart from a small minority
of persons this is not so. The attitude
is on the whole one of neglect, or of derision, or of explaining away as
coincidental, happenings which, accepted, would be beyond the possibility of
explanation by our present scientific knowledge. It is clear that these commonplace attitudes
must have a psychological cause, and Tyrell suggests that in the course of
man’s evolution his mind as well as his body has been adapted to the physical
environment. In other words, there is an
unconscious factor in man’s mind which acts so as to prevent his interest and
belief from wandering too far from the familiar world which his senses present to
him. It leads him to assume that the
physical world ceases to exist at the point where his senses cease to register
it. It also leads him to suppose that “common-sense”
is a safe guide when faced with the question as to what is possible and what is
not possible in this world. …
Let us turn our
attention to the aspects of the world which science neglects. We have seen how it abstracts from the Whole,
for purposes of detailed study. Even
biology is not concerned with the distinctions that constitute
individuality. It is obviously of
significance for biology what members of a given species have in common, and of
little or no significance wherein its members differ. When we rise to the level of man it is obviously
of the greatest significance wherein one individual differs from another. In other words, feelings, desires, thoughts,
aspirations, ideals are not the concern of science, and only to a limited
extent the concern of psychology. In so
far as it is a science it is concerned with reactions shared by all men, and
not with those higher distinguishing characteristics in virtue of which we
cherish the friendship or admire the character of one person rather than
another.
Psychical research goes
further; it investigates a world whose limits are not determined by the
senses. It is obliged to recognise
profound individual differences – on a certain level. Consider the differing mental affinities of people
by which good telepathic rapport is possible between some and not between others. Psychical Research however, in its turn
neglects elements in personality which are higher in the scale of
significance. Those elements which we
describe as Values: sensitivity to Beauty,
the qualities of Compassion, of Kindness and of Self-sacrifice, the high
attainment of Wisdom of which the expression is found in intuitive insights;
these, which are the highest achievements of individuals, are not within its
ken. These partake of still higher
levels of the world we may appropriately call spiritual or transcendental to
distinguish them from those described as psychical. Human personality participates in these
higher levels, as rocks and trees and animals do not.”
What
is Religion?
“William James spoke of
it as “The feelings, acts and experiences of individual men in their solitude so
far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may
consider the divine.” G. Galloway
defined it as “Man’s faith in a power beyond himself whereby he seeks to
satisfy emotional needs and gain stability of life, and which he expresses in
acts of worship and service.” A.N.
Whitehead says, “Religion is the reaction of human nature to its search for
God.” E.D. Fawcett speaks of it as “Devotion
to the most perfect reality which shows in our experience.” It would be easy to multiply such
definitions, but they all point to certain things. The whole man is involved; it is a total
commitment which affects all the significant levels of man’s living. We are challenged by what we conceive to be
the Divine, and to it we make a glad response, realising that our only
happiness must be in our increasing awareness of Him.”
The
“Next Life”
“For some time it has
been my belief that the evidential case for man’s survival of death is a very
strong one. More recently, I have had
communications through the automatic writing of a friend in London which have
transformed that belief into conviction.”
He then goes on to
quote descriptions of the afterlife given from the spirit world. He lays great emphasis on the communication
through automatic writing, of F.W.H. Myers, a founder of the British Society
for Psychical Research and his belief in Group Souls.
I hope you find the
foregoing interesting and will investigate further for yourself.
