, 1873-06-22


49,.
t1ios s.soso 49, De.'oe - ~ wa
-:...... ~: 1"~e..--.. 4-t ~ -4' ~. -,
ao1n.-taa1.. - 49, t.1,,1 h.,t;.4.e1.o..,,s.
otho-s .. x-o;,od - stora .,oatsto- -. ~.
nn;va-so sonna ..v +h.+ o. .1.ets =: ,o,t;o.
er;dsnt,w 49,. 1...ast .o-t;a, - ,,,,S;1s :,
| endlaae to-7no,+ othara ho1a +h.+ n -,rovida
! q hn.t.va1 to,,.. ha.,.oe., to.~a. ~ ta1r t-on
which the dcad nav ha raacnod hv tha nravsr
| NJ tho LIVING aon,o th;nt tha+ a. .uano1,5a ~,
1a1sa NJ tha na+n-a1 -vo,,d ~ ;,,ta~oass;on
In 'ahnrt va h.ra 80 ,,an.1 dit7a~ant nod,
aa ve h,va d;fraraot .oc+a and Nj;
chow. Tint nm tro,v ,oth;,c- - ~
,hont u;r, cnnsac-,ar+1- w.. se.,7nr+;or
that tbara ID anv naraan,1 a. ia 11-a1v o,r.tn,
itona po a1ao "a +ha idaa ~ 7,arxan.1 co7t;nr.
,nca afto- do.+b Tf+1,a son, IA ~ .x;st ha
foro h;r+, +h.ro .,o,.o,;t.~ ~ u,
conti,r;,,1r ~ a-1a+ ,ft.- aa,th r. oon+aaaod
+h,+ tho ~. ~ an;1,;,..;a = ..h,-..,t .~ A..
ami 81 II ~. a.. - daath .hho.o.t
o.,;t. .:~-.,,- :,:,.
90 Nv 14oo - s4AOu1l40
.t" ADo u4an' no"o'ei' uusS
80 "oo" oo
ouoAs ~ 1901 eA@tenoo
49," %t.@s ~ - q p111 - 1.' Stano ,asu4o
"n's. "a1 Debol.on n4ni' ano 1aSt, "1en 10
N'7'' 10 ~ "An w a. 11ee A1o1 pau @s tuousn 40
"o1o IL sne piolouno s1o1noe1 VI hea'u. 4ao
'eo" " ~ elo1nal 1le-o1 nos oe1nR aole 60 "e
'e' Va 'oe eont1e1S' Inc moss nor11o 5aAs hu-
11an iAncy can invent
Auo 1eaoe1 WILL perceive tnht LII. boecnnef,
"itn III Ills sonoffenee OF epeculanse
pn1losopny, nAs gone aa ooeply into II
as neea be. he talks about soul,
out cannot tell what it is, though he thinks it
resides In the brain. He talks about Thought,
but cannot tell whether it is distilled, woTen,
puddled, or cultivated with \ hoe. And when
Rudolph Wagner says that the moral upshot OF
his system is, !" Let us eat and drink, for to-
MORO" We die, he replies that Science Is not
concerned with the moral tendency Of facts.
It is only concerned to ASCERTAIN the
truth, and let the tendencies take care
Of themselves. A5 though he had
given us any facts whatever regarding the exist
ence Of q God, or personal continuance after
doathl He has given US merely his own specu-
lAtions upon certain facts, most Of which we're
known aud all of which had been held By indi-
yiduals before him. In his preface he disclaims
being an original Investigator, and in the text he
makes several blunde1s in the statement Of
facts, only one OF which, however, seems to be
OF real importance to his argument
This one relates to what is called
instinct In animals. He assures us roundly that
instinct in animals is only experience acquired
very soon after birth. The late Mr.. Mill Was
supporter OF the Experience philosophy, but he
old not venture upon 60 rash an assertion He
said that whether instinct in animals is expert
ence acquired very rapidly after birth, OF is an
Inherent attribute, is still undetermined and can
only be ascertained by experiment. The
recent experiments Of Mr. Samuel Douglass
with young chickens and turkeys hatchpd by
artificial means prove that instinct ia iDstinct
and not experience. Whether the instinct Of
fear which young turkeys betray at the note Of
hawk is hereditary, or whether it has been an
" innate idea in all turkeys from the begin
ming, may be question. But it has been con-
ahoTn that it iB not the result OF e1-
perienca in turkeys born now.
It does not help Us to e1pe1 God from the
universe to say that instead Of conscious De-
sign there is an ''imm1nent necessary instinct "
in Nature. To say this, even to prove it, ueray
the query. Where did the ''imma-
nent necessary instinct " come from? 1s it sup
posabla that TN immanent necessary instinct,
capable Of producing the countless changes
which this globe has undergone, including the
body and soul OF man (Dr Buechner admits that
there 1s such thing as soul, though not an
immortal one,) originated IN the inert matter OF
1no earth! Ihe 6oul "4A surely inquire where
tue lmmanent necessary Instinct came from.
ihe soul ls entitled to ask tor First Cause,
VII ASK 1or 1t, WILL not stop Short OF 1t.
1ne precise 0nefence, therefore. between
lhe Atnelse, as representea ~ 1t. Buechner,
and the Thelst is that the former deems it more
credible that matter created mind than that mind
created matter "hne to the lattor it is more con-
soi'aolo tna1 mlno created matter than that mat
'eF c.eaSeo nnna' me controversy can safely !
20 'e'' uere' ~ Lar Us II oepenos upon the SUI
anees " ssns'ene u0mes u AVa,ls noEn1ng TO
en us tnA' LIEU was uo'eiopeo 1rom tne low
" Allutn,3 -, ~ uconce,'aols Long eeo4oe1o perl
'as. 1neo1oes' "n'cn n perfectly con-
ens snA' "an snoulu nave oeen efe-
Ileu uiscsly 1io,n 'ne auss OF 'ne eafth'
b s'at1'eo ~ tne tnoueht tnat ne anoulo nave
,een created inonrectl5 1fom 'ne eamo source
20 sne eye Oh reason 1nere Ii no o11eEence pc
"oen toe t"o nooes' linus mncn may Do said