[223] Rapports, Ier Mémoire, § ii, near end. (Éd. 1843, p. 73.) Cp. Préf. (pp. 46–47). [↑]
[224] Ed. cited, p. 54. Cp. p. 207, note. [↑]
[225] Not published till 1824. [↑]
[227] Cp. Luchaire, as cited, p. 36. [↑]
[228] Lange, Gesch. des Materialismus, ii, 134. [↑]
[229] “Since Cabanis, the referring back of mental functions to the nervous system has remained dominant in physiology, whatever individual physiologists may have thought about final causes” (Lange, ii, 70). Compare the tribute of Cabanis’s orthodox editor Cerise (ed. 1843, Introd. pp. xlii-iii). [↑]
[230] Rapports, IIe Mémoire, near end. (Ed. cited, p. 122.) [↑]
[231] See the already cited introduction of Cerise, who solved the problem religiously by positing “a force which executes the plans of God without our knowledge or intervention” (p. xix). He goes on to lament the pantheism of Dr. Dubois (whose Examen des doctrines de Cabanis, Gall, et Broussais (1842) was put forward as a vindication of the “spiritual” principle), and of the German school of physiology represented by Oken and Burdach. [↑]
[232] Lawrence’s Lectures on Physiology, Zoology, and the Natural History of Man, 8th ed. 1840, pp. 1–3. The aspersion of Abernethy is typical of the orthodox malignity of the time. Cabanis in his preface had expressly contended for the all-importance of morals. The orthodox Dr. Cerise, who edited his book in 1843, while acknowledging the high character of Cabanis, thought fit to speak of “the materialists” as “interested in abasing man” (introd. p. xxi). On the score of fear of demoralization, the champions of “spirit” themselves exhibited the maximum of baseness. [↑]