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

.umdo'y Au'iseo iSSPo""S iio" eHoSS
Who may differ from him. The writer
IF these lines believes himself to be in
accord with the general truths of Chris
tianity and is not at variance with the
conclusion of Rev. Wright, taking that
conclusion to be disagreement with
agnosticism. However VIC can not con-
cur in the gentleman remarkable rea-
soning nor reach our common conclu-
sion by the route he follows. Hoping
these remarks may not SAVIOR of disre
spect, attention will be given briefly to a
portion of Rev. Wright's contribution
under the date of Jan. 18th. IF
says he "mind is eternal it is infinite;
il matter is eternal it is also infinite;
thus We have the absurdity of two in
fnites occupying the same space at the
same time How is this? True if
mind is eternal it is infinite in duration,
but not necessarily infinite in other re-
spects. If matter is eternal it is also
Infinite in duration. But it does not
follow that the two entities must Occu-
py the same space at the same time,
or at any time. Space is infinite
in extent. Matter is finite in
extent. Therefore matter can only oc
cupy limited portion of space, and in
finite space remains for mind, even
though matter occupied space
to the exclusion of mind from the
space so occupied. But matter can
not occupy space to the exclusion Of
mind because mind is an immaterial
essence. Neither can mind, which sim.
ply exists in space, occupy it to the ex.
clusion of matter. Is the gentleman
stumbling over an elementary princi-
pie Of physics, made familiar to him in
his schoolboy days-the principal OF
the lmpenetrability of matter, that two
bodies can no. occupy the same space
at the same time? Two separate parti-
cles of matter occupy distinct and sep.
arate portions of space. If matter is
eternal, they will continue forever to
occupy distinct portions of space-no,
not the SANE space. Rev. Wright ar
CUES that there can not be two intiaites
otherwise they would occupy the same
space at the same time. Hence he
must conclude that the souls of men
are not immortal, for if they are i'm
mortal they are infinite, and two inf
mites, he says, are impossible. Rev
Wright does not mean this. His claw:
Of thought and logic" have led hin
astray. Mind and matter now simulta
neously exist. What is there in the ma
ture of thing to prevent them from
thus continuing forever? But to as
sumo the eternity of both is to say thai
mind and matter are equal which i:
absurd Not necessarily. They are
not equal now. Can infinite duration
reduce them to equality? 1t is to say
that each has an existence which was
without beginning and shall be without
end. Nothing more. Mind has attri
butes which matter has not, and matter
has qualities which mind has not
Hence they are unlike and unequal,
although upon assumptioD both arc
eternal. "Bnt some one will say 'the
opinion or judgement of the race proves
nothing: The common sense of man.
kind is unreliable, and the same one
affirms in the realm of thought major.
tiles do not determine. Each brain i.
a kingdom, each mind is sovereign.
Each brain may be kingdom, but one
alone is a very small one compared
with the race; and each mind may be
a sovereign, but many Of them are only
petty tyrants, swaying wooden scepters
in dlminutive kingdom: And no bet
ter evidence Of attempted tyranny
could we'll be given, than the fact that
few set themselves against the uni
versal consent of intelligent, civilized
mankind"
In the above Mr.. Wright is cvi IDENTIFY
quoting from and commenting upon an
article from the pnr of r. e. Iugcrsoll;
recently published and entitled ''Why
am an Agnastic? Let US consider Mr..
Wright criticism. He says: Each
brain may be kingdom, but one alone
is very small one compared with the
race We suppose he means that the
intelligence and knowledge of even the
greatest minds, such as Shakespeare S
and Darwin 9, arc small as compared
with the aggregate intelligence and
knowledge of mankind. Granting this;
what follows? Is Shakespeare or OAR
win, or anyone else precluded, as a
matter of right, from investigating any
subject and forming an opinion based
oDshis investigation? And is his opin-
ion necessarily wrong if it differs from
that Of the majority? "And each mind
may be sovereign but many ct them
are only petty tyrants swaying wooden
scepter in a diminutive kingdom. If
this is true it is equally SO of christians
and agnostics. "And No better evil
dence of attemnted TYRANNY conld VOL