He suppresses the me, but insists that there is a soul. He abolishes the freewill, and yet contends that there is such a thing as morals. He makes of the idea of God an idea that is merely relative and conditional, but yet asserts that there may be such a thing as religion.
I say he abolishes the me; for the me is the soul. The soul is the understanding, general and one; but if there be no understanding as general, there can be no soul.
According to Gall, there is nothing real and positive except the faculties.
And these faculties alone are possessed of organs. “None of my predecessors,” says he, “had any knowledge of those forces which alone are the functions of special cerebral organs.”[58]
By the contrary reasoning, neither the will, nor the reason, nor the understanding, are possessed of any organs, for they are nothing but forces; they are nothing but nouns collective—words.
“These observations may suffice,” says Gall, “to convince the reader that there cannot exist any special organ of the will, or the freewill.”[59] He adds: “It is equally impossible that there should be any peculiar organ of the reason.”[60]
Finally he says: “From all that I have now said it follows, that the idea of an organ of the intellect or understanding is quite as inadmissible as the idea of an organ of the instinct.”[61]
Hence there can be nought but the faculties; and, according to Gall, these faculties are so distinct, that he attributes to each particular one a separate organ.[62] He divides the understanding into little understandings.