ABSTRACT
There is one general argument in favour of the parallelistic theory: the consideration that by adopting this theory natural science acquires a particularly simple form. For the acceptance of parallelism implies the acceptance of the thoroughgoing mechanism of nature, or at least of the complete and exclusive validity in nature of the laws of physics and of chemistry. According to the parallelistic theory man is an 'automaton', it is argued, as well as, if not because he is, a machine. A 'consequence' of the parallelistic theory, and with it that theory itself, is by this objection made to appear laughable, as by the 'automaton' objection examined a consequence of the parallelistic theory was made to appear contrary to moral sense. The argument that 'parallelism consistently thought out leads to panpsychism' is thus not conclusive against the parallelistic theory as a scientific-philosophical statement.
