Dodge City times. [volume] (Dodge City, Kan.) 1876-1892, 1890-01-23

A'eo VI SoiutuVus VI " AutueI. 10cSe
men came as near "setting themselves
against the universal consent of intelli-
gent civilized mankind" as any Of whom
history furnishes a record. ..What DO
Newtons thoughts weigh against such
4 would-bc philosopher? Taking Prof.
Huxley as typical ''would-be phi.os.
opher' it may be presumed that New
towns thoughts weigh great deal
with him if not against him. .Aud
because these are christian men their
opinions, reasoning, conclusions are
worth nothing Such an idea has
probably never entered the mind of an
agnostic. eff their minds were sound
and worthy to be followed in material
things, are they any the less sound in
spiritual things" They may not be.
Permit counter question, If Hum
boldt, Darwin, Huxley, Tyndall, Mill,
Spencer and Glbbon were men of vast
learning, profound thought and scien-
ti6c methods, if they stood in the front
rank of modern philosophical investi-
gators, whose teachings have become
the generally accepted authority
throughout christendom, on the var
ious subjects treated by them-if they
were thus prominently great in the world
of science and of letters, is it not fair
to accord to their judgment on psychic
al questions discussed by them a lib
eral and respectful consideration? Sew
eral of the scholars last named gave
their attention particularly to met
aphysical ond psychical questions. AZ
ter years Of laborious investigation they
reached conclusions Numerically op-
posite to those held by some of the H.
lustrious men mentioned by Rev.
Wright, yet they were not dogmatic in
their opinions. They wished to have
them accepted, not because they were
theirs, but because Of the reasons ad-
duced in their support. eff they
reasoned well on physical questions
which they have studied, is it not rea-
sonable to presume that they reasoned
we'll on metaphysical questions which
they had likewise studied?' Certainly.
And is not the same true as applied to
Huxley, Haeckel, Tyndall, Spencer and
Mill? allow absurd the idea that men
who have devoted all their lives to the
study Of the grave problems Of God,
life, man, sin, redemption, eternal life,
punishment, etc, are not proper ones
to give an opinion upon those subjects
because, forsooth, each brain is king
dom, each mind is sovereign.--''
Certainly they have right to give an
opinion; Mr.. Ingersoll does not question
that for moment. But they must not
expect their opinions to be taken
authoritively or as an ultimatum. They
should be given and accepted for what
they are worth aud each man must
Judge Of their merits for himself unless
we are to do our thinking by proxy, and
are relieved from responsibility since
we divest OURSELVES of the right ofjudg-
ment. We're it otherwise Rev. Wright
would be bound to accept and passively
acqanesce in the opinions of S2inoza,
Hume, Spencer, ETC., for they were
men of transcendently great minds who
devoted much Of their lives to the study
of the great problems Of God, life, man,
sin, redemption, eternal life, punish
ment. etc. Sand one agonstic king
dom and sovereign can out weigh, out
rale,, Guido a host Of ten thousand
along the ages, who have hambly dis
covered few facts, and have had sense
enough to put them together in their
true relation Rev. Wright may say
so. No ono else claims it. By the
way can it be demonstrated that the
"few facts have been put together in
their true relation; or must that
assumption be taken as a fat?
"Was there ever such egotism." We
can discover no egotism in q man .
claiming for himself the right Of inde-
pendent judgment and the right Of
weighing evidence for himself. But if
there is egotism in it one would prob.
ably not have to go very far to match
it. "The opinion of one agnostlc is
worth more than a thousand sane mems
opinions, upon the same question"
The intimation here is that the agnostic
is not sane Suffice to say that the
agnostic does not claim that his opinion
is worth more than that of his christi n
brother. He claims for himself and
accords to his brother the right of in,
vestigation and Independent Judgment
He may be in the minority, but Calico
was in the minority. Columbus was In
the minority. Luther was in the min-
ority. The advanced thinkers eff the age
are always in the minority. Christ
himself was in the minority. Rev.
Wright and the writer of these lines
believe the agnostic is wrong but he is
not wrong because he is in the min
ority. That is not even presumption
against HIM. The Presbyterian church
is numerically in the minority. Protest.
ism as a whole is in the minority, there
beino more Catholics than Prosesta nts