Telegram-herald., 1891-06-05
SCIENTIFIC cRuoiTlEs.
That IL How Lecturer Watts' Notions
Appear 70 n cd ESQ hort-s

Appear 10 % n 81 go hoit-
To the EDITOR Of the TxLxsEAx HEsALD:
A gentleman from Toronto, named
Watts, uttered some scientific absurdl-
ties the other night, which ought not TO
20 unehailenged.
l. The speaker said 1.-THE Bible Is no
longer regarded as too sacred for crit
eism," as though there ever Was time
when il Was 50 regarded. That WAS
gratuitous assumption entirely and MS
leading.
2 "To believe in creation" said the
speaker, is 10 deprive the orthodox OF
talth IN lnf1nlty. God could not be IN
Unite and create. Did the created
come from the infinite. Ii so. the IN
| finite is limited TO that extent. Did j.
come from somewhere else? Ii SO. the
exlstences OF that somewhere else dis
proves ms infinity. The created could
not come from nothing for the
/ infinite was eternal" These are
some OF the cTadltles uttered by
I Mr.. Watts. Now, like all the positive
assertions or negative philosophy, the
above are confusing and misleading.
| The faIacy OF the positions taken arises
| out OF confoundlng things that differ.
| The word ''lnfinite" defines neither a
person or thing. Used by Mr.. Watts
| IL has no meaning at all. Ii Is not
noun, II does not even designate per-
] sonal tribute, but merely expresses the
| expansions of a real or supposed at
| tribute. IL Mr.. Watts used the term as
an equivalent of the word God, then
the righteousness of his expressions
will appear if We state them thus: God
| could not be God and create. Did the
| created come from God? IL so, God IS
| limited 10 that extent" and that is Just
as nonsensieal as to say: "A printer
could not DO printer and print. Did
the paper come from the printer? IL SO
the printer is limited to that extent"
OF course the orator denounced the
idea of creation and assumed the eter-
nal duration of matter. He said: "Sci-
ence has demonstrated the lndestructl-
bihty of matter" "No atom can be de-
stroyed." 1t was the orthodox"
Quaker Dalton that gave to the world
the atomic theory. 1t is strange that
the "matterdoxlsts" do not see that
their theory does not clear up the
mystery OF origin, but deepens 1t. they
simply make an alternative. One or
two theories must be admitted. The
J CItdtlOu VI oy ah
God, or that the universe of matter is
eternal. Either things originated in
mind or never did originate. The latter
Is the alternative taken, namely that
matter is eternal. There never was
any origin to anything is the funda-
mental postulate of the school of thlnk-
ers to which Mr.. Watts belongs. The
very commonest sense can see through
the absurdity when it Is reduced TO
direct terms.
But Mr.. Watts asks, sis it not unrea-
sonable to affirm that of which nothing
is known" "to talk of creation i'll face
of the fact OF the stability OF natural
law" He then proceeds to affirm that,
from all eternity, matter has been
changing by evolution" and makes
the astonishing announcement that
"time and again has living matter been
produced from non-living." Now in
the latter statement the orator affirmed
that of which nothing is known and
thus convicts himself of being unrea-
sonable and absurd in his position. If
Mr.. Watts were here l would challenge
hun to cite one single case III which
living matter has become organized
and living without the interview
ton of, or act Of an antecedent
living organism. The statement of NJ.
Watts convicts him not only of affirm
ing that of which he knows nothing
but of ignorance of the positions OF the
greatest scientists OF the day, and of
Oratorical hypocrisy in assuming to
know that of which nothing as yet Is
known to science, namely, the origin of
life. l challenge any of Mr.. Watts
admirers, in his absence, to name the
embryo of insect, bird, fish or man,
that had non-living origin. He says
time and again it has been produced.
affirm to the contrary such has never
been produced. Mr.. Watts merely 10
tended 10 deceive, hence the hypocricy.
Would 1t not trench too much upon
your valuable space, l am prepared to
show that Mr.. Huxley rejected
Darwin's theory of Selection"
both artificial and Natural" and
affirms that there is no evidence
even of one group giving existence y
another group OF animals, which was
"in the least degree infertile IN the
first" Tvndall makes this remark
after studying to find life IN the ron-
living: "Let us radically change our
notions of matter" and declared that
life was not property of matter. 1t
|
life can never become another life of
another kind; that fact alone destroyes
the theory of materialistic evolution.
Now If Mr.. Watts Or anyone else has a
rational, Ineligible explanation of the
origin Of the world and man, let us
have it, but this claptrap, which only
shifts the origin of things. as we see
them back billion years, and then
slips into q hole and leaves us
in worse tangle than when We
tried to believe in an intelligent God,
we get tired of. These windy words are
stale. We've heard them for years.
Mr.. Watts is away behind modern
science, and we are tired of beng I'M
posed upon by these improved and un-
provable castles"
If they will talk from the other end
of the subject while, it viii oe refresh
ing. Matter was made by and for
mind. not mind by and for matter.
Why isn't life, or vitality, ss real as
vet unseen atom That Is common
sense, and experience every moment
lustities the supremacy OF mind and
life. MoLEscHorT.