The Llano colonist. [volume] (Llano, Calif.) 191?-1937, 1922-11-18
The Rule Of Violence or
the Rule Of Love, Choose!

4 1
lous nature ruling with fangs and
crushing the weak. will inspire other
thoughts and ideals than the mag
cry of loving father who is kind
lhese is no need to argue the point.
for both views have right now their
adherents and defenders. and we can
point to actual results.
Out of the former has been evoI-
we'd the philosophy of might with
the powerful brute euphmisticalIy
called the superman' -as its ideal;
whilst the latter has inspired the Ser
mon on the Mount with its gospel of
equity. love and mercy.
Nor can there be any doubt as to
the different tendencies of these two
schools Of philosophy. Each is bound
to bring forth fruit after its own kind:
the one may produce Cambyses, a
Nero, a Napoleon, or perhaps a Croes-
US; and the other Gautama, Jesus,
Father Damien, a Florence Nighting-
|, dale, or Job hartman.
In trying to determine the merit as
between two conceptions Of nature. It
will be we'll to be on guard against be-
ing misled by two popular errors. One
OF these is that everything which
smacks of religion or theism is neces-
sarlly baseless superstition; and the
other that whatsoever is opposed to
manifest superstition is necessarily
sound 'sciense.'
A thelstic conception of the universe
such as that of Jesus. may be quite as
rational as an atheistic one, provided
that the conception or assumption is
admitted to be SYMBOLIC ONE.
ONLY and no deductions are made
from it. There is nothing more sci
entific' about cruel callous nature
than there is about kind father. IL
Illustrations or explanations may be
found, of course, in support of, as we'll
as in opposition to, either view. But
this only proves that NEITHER IS AN
ACCURATE DEDUCTION from the
phenomena of nature, but MENTAL
CONCEPT ONLY suggested in each
case by the particular aspect of nature
which happened to strike the observ-
ers Imagination.
in precisely the same manner have
originated the ideas from which have
been derived the terms electricity,
magnetism, 'gravitation. etc., all Of
(which ARE MERE NAMES or symbols
OF the unknown cause of the phenom-
ena to which they relate:
mo VALID CONCLUSIONS can
be drawn from conceptions, however
derived. We can gain them only from
well-established generalization, an UNI
Outstanding or discernment of the pro-
cesses or modus operandi of phenom-
ena, the so-called laws of nature
derived by observation and mtestiga-
ton of and experimentation with the
phenomena to which they Nrelate=ir-
respective of how we conceive the
phenomena to have been caused or
come to pass.
Nevertheless. and Notwithstanding
repeated warnings by the few more
accurate thinkers, the great majority
Of even educated people not only
have been constantly misled, and not
only have regarded a PURELY SYM
BOLICAL NOMENCLATURE AS RE-
PRESENTING ENTITIES, but, by Civ.
ing precise meanings to the terms, by
means of definitions, proceeded to de-
duce from them most fancifuI conclu-
sions.
The point | am trying to make is
this, that the truths of science cannot
be gained and therefore cannot rest
upon assumed fundamental conceptions
or general aspects of nature, but only
lon the correctness of the generaliza-
tons gained directly from the phen-
omena, and which constitute the
principles or laws Of the natural
sciences, which enable man to plan
and work out methods. mechanisms
and contrivance to utilize natural re-
sources and processes to supply hui
man necessities and requirements.
Thus viewed. it becomes clear that
a true social philosophy must be de-
duced directly from natural phenom-
ena; and our views of nature. or our.
general conception Of it. must be based
thereon, and not vice versa. To as
sumo god, to ascribe to him. her, or
it certain attributes. and then deduce
from such imaginings a philosophy, is
manifestly an inversion of the REAL |