particular embodiment, had already
undertaken to demonstrate the immortality of the soul on the ground of
its distinctive nature.[209:16] According to his way of thinking, the
soul's essentially moral nature made it incapable of destruction through
the operation of natural causes. It is evident, then, that there were
already ideas in vogue capable of interpreting the Christian teaching
concerning the existence of a soul, or of an inner essence of man
capable of being made an object of divine interest.

[Sidenote: Spiritual Substance]

Sect. 95. The immediate effect of Christianity was to introduce into
philosophy as one of its cardinal doctrines the theory of a spiritual
being, constituting the true self of the individual, and separable from
the body. The difference recognized in Plato and Aristotle between the
divine spark and the appetitive and perceptual parts of human nature was
now emphasized. The former (frequently called the "spirit," to
distinguish it from the lower soul) was defined as a _substance_ having
the attributes of thought and will. The fundamental argument for its
existence was the immediate appeal to self-consciousness; and it was
further defined as indestructible on the ground of its being utterly
discontinuous and incommensurable with its material environment. This
theory survives at the present day in the conception of pure activity,
but on the whole the attributes of the soul have superseded its
substance.

[Sidenote: Intellectualism and Voluntarism.]

Sect. 96. _Intellectualism and voluntarism_ are the two rival
possibilities of emphasis when the soul is defined in terms of its known
activities. Wherever the essence of personality is in question, as also
occurs in the case of theology, thought and will present their
respective claims to the place of first importance. _Intellectualism
would make will merely the concluding phase of thought, while
voluntarism would reduce thought to one of the interests of a general
appetency._ It is evident that idealistic theories will be much
concerned with this question of priority. It is also true, though less
evident, that intellectualism, since it emphasizes the general and
objective features of the mind, tends to subordinate the individual to
the universal; while voluntarism, emphasizing desire and action, is
relatively individualistic, and so, since there are many individuals,
also pluralistic.[211:17]

[Sidenote: Freedom of the Will. Necessitarianis