Absurdities of immaterialism — Edition Insights

Pratt's Definition of Truth and Its Independence

Pratt begins by dismantling Taylder's assertion that the New Testament uniquely answers 'What is truth?' He argues that truth exists independently of human ideas or divine revelation. For example, he states, 'It is a truth that something exists in space,' and that geometric truths like 'the three angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles' were known before the Bible. He criticizes Dr. Good's definition that truth is 'the connexion and agreement, or repugnancy and disagreement, of our ideas,' calling it erroneous because truth is independent of ideas. Pratt insists that even if neither the universe nor God existed, 'eternal, unchangeable, and necessary truths' like boundless space and endless duration would still exist. This philosophical move establishes a foundation for materialism: if truth is material or grounded in material reality, then immaterialism (the belief in non-material spirit or mind) is logically flawed.

Critique of Immaterialist Philosophers

Pratt engages with several philosophers to expose what he sees as absurdities in immaterialism. He references Hobbes, Spinoza, Priestley, and Darwin (Erasmus, likely) as materialists who wrongly thought thought and feeling arise from organized matter. He then turns to Dr. Brown, who argued that a system of particles cannot have properties not possessed by individual particles. Pratt agrees with Brown on this point, but criticizes Brown for then supposing 'an individual unity to be inconsistent with extension and parts,' which Pratt calls 'an absurdity still more glaring.' He also mocks the idea that thought could be 'little particles of matter,' using Brown's own reductio ad absurdum: 'the twentieth part of an affirmation, or the quarter of a hope' is as nonsensical as 'the north and east corners of a comparison.' Pratt's method is to use logical consistency to defend a materialist view of mind.

Structure and Rhetorical Strategy

The excerpts show a clear structure: Pratt quotes Taylder, then systematically refutes each point using logic, geometry, and appeals to common sense. He often poses rhetorical questions, such as 'What does this author mean by the foregoing assertions?' to guide the reader. The text is dense with philosophical references, but Pratt avoids technical jargon, aiming for a broad audience. He also uses analogies, like comparing thought to geometric figures, to make his arguments concrete. Notably, the excerpts do not include any narrative or historical context about Mormonism itself; the focus is entirely on metaphysical debate. This suggests that the book is a polemical work intended to defend Latter-day Saint materialism against Protestant critiques, rather than a doctrinal exposition.

Readers should approach Absurdities of Immaterialism as a period piece of religious-philosophical controversy. Pratt's arguments are rooted in 19th-century metaphysics and may seem dated, but they reveal how early Mormon intellectuals engaged with broader philosophical currents. The text rewards careful attention to its logical structure and use of sources, though it assumes familiarity with the works of Priestley, Brown, and others. For those interested in the intersection of religion and philosophy, this pamphlet offers a unique window into a forgotten debate.

That rainy afternoon, Pratt’s stubborn geometry softened into something stranger—his insistence that even truth has weight left me porous. Later, staring at the window’s drips, I reached for Introduction to Non-Violence — Context and Discussion Introduction to Non-Violence — Context and Discussion, and found the same quiet firmness, only turned toward gentleness. One book’s walls became another’s doorway.