Quick Links
-Search Website
-Have A Question?
-Wallace News
-About This Site

Misinformation Alert!
Wallace Bio & Accomplishments
Wallace Chronology
Frequently Asked Questions
Wallace Quotes
Wallace Archives
Miscellaneous Facts

Bibliography / Texts
Wallace Writings Bibliography
Texts of Wallace Writings
Texts of Wallace Interviews
Wallace Writings: Names Index
Wallace Writings: Subject Index
Writings on Wallace
Wallace Obituaries
Wallace's Most Cited Works

Taxonomic / Systematic Works
Wallace on Conservation
Smith on Wallace
Research Threads
Wallace Images
Just for Fun
Frequently Cited Colleagues
Wallace-Related Maps & Figures

Alfred Russel Wallace : Alfred Wallace : A. R. Wallace :
Russel Wallace : Alfred Russell Wallace (sic)

Dr. A. R. Wallace and the 'Subliminal Self'
(S592: 1901)

Editor Charles H. Smith's Note: A brief article from page 29 of the Light (London) issue of 19 January 1901 reprinting a letter by Wallace originally sent to answer an inquiry, and that was printed in "The Sermon" (Toronto? --I have not been able to locate an existing copy of this issue). To link directly to this page, connect with: http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/wallace/S592.htm

     'The Sermon,' for December, publishes a letter from Dr. Alfred R. Wallace, written on the 6th of November last, in reply to a letter of inquiry by J. W. Ney, of Bracebridge, Canada. Dr. Wallace says:--

     'I do not feel called upon to answer T. J. Hudson's clever but one-sided article. If the facts he states were all the facts, his theory would be possibly true but very improbable. But there are hosts of other facts which this theory will not account for. Such are, the statement of facts known to no one living; the giving of facts by such means or in such a way as to temporarily deceive all present; and of facts which all present believe to be erroneous. This last is very common in messages by raps, when letters or words are given which seem to be nonsense or errors to all present; the communicating intelligence insists, and upon adding one or two words, or sometimes one or two letters, the whole becomes plain. I have witnessed this many times, and it seems to show as clearly as possible the presence of an independent mind which takes this method of showing that it is independent. Of course all the phenomena of independent writing and drawing, of spirit-photos, levitation, and materialisations of recognisable forms, receive no explanation. I myself wholly reject the theory of the "subliminal," or "second," or "unconscious" self, as being wholly unproved.'

*                 *                 *                 *                 *

Return to Home