Illogicality concerning Ghosts

Abstract

MR. HERBERT SPENCER, exposing the various inconsistencies that occur so frequently in the ghost-stories of the savage races, says:—“How illogicalities so extreme are possible, we shall the more easily see on recalling certain of our own illogicalities. Instance… that familiar absurdity fallen into by believers in ghosts, who, admitting that ghosts are seen clothed, admit, by implication, that coats have ghosts—an implication they had not perceived” (“The Principles of Sociology,” 3rd edition, vol. i. p. 104). It seems interesting to note that the same opinion was expressed about nineteen centuries ago by the Chinese philosopher, Wang Chung (circa, 27–97 A.D.), whose sceptic remarks on the traditions of all manners, handed down to his time in the Middle Kingdom, form a celebrated work named “Lun Han” or “Balance of Discussions.” In its twentieth book (fol. 14–15 in Miura's edition, Kyoto, 1748), he says:—“Since the beginning of the world, so vast has been the number of the deceased, that it enormously exceeds that of the whole present population. Therefore, should every one become a ghost after death, man is bound now to meet a ghost at each step on the road, and should he see ghosts in his dying moments, he ought to find not one or two singly, but several millions of them collectively filling the space. When a man dies by a weapon, his blood, the essence of his life, turns to what is termed ignus-fatuus, which has no resemblance to him, but gathering itself into an amorphous mass, looks like the light of fire. It is the ghost of bloody and presents an aspect quite different from a live man's blood, and, as the essence of life has been separated from the man's body, it cannot resume his shape in life. If all ghosts be seen in the form of dead corpses, you have reason to suspect the dead to become the ghost.… And, equally, a disordered fellow might be true in seeing a ghost of his live friend visiting him. But how could he see a dead man in his shape of lifetime?.… As warm ashes, even after the fire has gone out, can be made to produce it again, we may with some reason suggest the possibility of a dead man appearing in the same form as alive. When we know well, however, that a fire once extinguished can never burn anew, it is evident that a dead man can never become a ghost. And now, what is the ghost? All say it is the soul of a deceased. Then, even if it could be seen by man, it ought to appear stark naked and fully disrobed: for the clothes have no soul to cover the dead man's soul; while the latter has no material body to put on a material raiment. Soul is an outcome of blood and breath, which, though dependent on body during man's life, are the things distinct from it; hence it might be still well to suppose soul able to survive body as a ghost. But the clothes consist of nothing but threads, cotton, hemp and silk, which have all no intercurrence of blood and breath imparted by the wearer's body; nor do they possess any blood and breath of their own; so that even when they keep their form entirely, they are as soulless as a human corpse; and how then could they resume their former shape after their total decomposition? Thus, saying that a ghost appears clad necessitates the admission of its possession of body; which view itself militates against the definition of the ghost, because, according to this statement, the said ghost is a composite of the ghosts of body and clothes, which is essentially different from the soul of a deceased individual.”