Image provided by: Silverton Country Historical Society; Silverton, OR
About Torch of reason. (Silverton, Oregon) 1896-1903 | View Entire Issue (April 26, 1900)
2 THE TORCH OF REASON, SILVERTON, OREGON, APRIL 26, 1ÔOÛ. ing it by the effects produced, we know just “what it is apart from Id e a lis tic A g n o s tic is m . these effects”. But Idealism pro- fesses ignorance of what a thing is BY HERMAN WETTSTEIN. apart from its effects without offer- ing any reasons for supposing that “ W hat th in g s are in th em selv es,ap art from th e ir effects upon us, and from th e it might be different than what our conscious sta te s to w hich they give rise, »V* « **• - ».- » r Continuing, Mi. Uuderwood says; Tiie above passage iro iu i»l I. A->. effects. That is the dividing line thiug itself, Idealists would no F. Underwood’s article, “All Phe between Materialism and Idealism. more accept the evidence of their “Just as there is no fragrance in a rose, the word ‘fragrance’ standing nomena Facts of Consciousness”, Our perceptions we regard as all- senses as final than they do in per only for the sensation produced which appeared in the Torch of sufficient in determining the quali ceiving them as a compact mass. through the sense of 6mell,” etc. Reason of February 8, contains the ties of the thing perceived, conclud Yet in their daily routine of life But dissociate the state of conscious giut and substance of Idealism, or ing that these qualities exist, not this evidence is accepted without what may more appropriately be apart or in a dissociate state from question. “Consistency, thou art ness from the gaseous molecules emanating from the rose, and you termed Idealistic Agnosticism in the thing itself, but that they con a jewel.” It is, with certain reservations, still have the thing in itself with contradistinction of that class which stitute its principal properties. “don’t know whether there is a god There is no such thing as an ob true that where there is no eye all of its qualities and emanations or not”, one class assuming that ject apart from its qualities. No there is no light; where there is no unimpaired. Are our other senses there is a great, unknowable “some reasons have ever been, or can be, sense of touch there is no heat; not in that case fully competent to thing or other” from a semi-scien given for supposing that a thing which propositions can be embrac judge of the nature of the rose with tific standpoint, to which “unknown can be any different from what our ed in the generalization that where out the sense of smell? Can a quantity” it has not as yet given a senses tell us it is. If our senses there are no organs of sense there chemist by evading it not ascertain name, while the other class is in were not evolved by “ Dame Na can be no cognition of exterior and its elementary constituency? What doubt concerning an alleged god, ture” (a myth, should be our sub interior influences or sources of ir can there be apart from that? Mr.Underwood continues: “There neither of which “bones of conten conscious mind) for the purpose of ritability. The reservations being apprising us of the properties of a that all organs of sense and all'the is uo musical quality iu a violin, tion” are the least “in evidence”. In perusing Mr. Underwood’s thing, for what could they have agencies that may irritate them but one who feels the ‘concord of very able effort to render the un been evolved? For the purpose of may exist in an inchoate state in sweet sounds’ . . . will arouse knowable known(1), I struck sever deceiving us? Why should the matter (or what we term matter), ‘music in the soul.’ ” But can the al snags, one being the imputation effects a thing has upon our senses which, if it can be maintained (and maker of the instrument not tell distinctly implied that reflecting not he a true criterion of what it is I believe it can), will warrant us iu “apart from” the sweet sounds what people ever held that qualities are iu itself? Why predicate such an asserting that heat, light, fragrance, material is needed to produce them? objective realities. He even asserts utter impossibily or incongruity as etc., exist in an undeveloped or ele If so, then he knows independent that: “This view is not confined to to dissociate a thing from the con mentary form in the inorganic of these effects what the thing, or the ignorant; it is held by some scious states it is capable of pro bodies of matter and the elements things that produce them is in who are instructed in science and ducing? If we want to judge of or thereof. Light I consider to be itself. Continuing, he says: “So with are accustomed to close observation determine the nature of any object, ether in motion, hence an entity, light, which is psychical, not phy and careful thinking in tlieir spe we can only do so from the states as we shall see further on. Let us briefly analyze the “illus sical.” Can psychical effects exist of consciousness to which it gives cial fields of thought.” If Mr. Underwood’s shafts are rise, and from their decision car»“oe trative statements” submitted by outside of, or apart from, physical aimed at Materialism, of which no appeal. Of what use would be Mr. Underwood in support of his agencies or auxiliaries? Can a there seems little doubt, he, indeed, the researches of science if we were position. “Vibrations of air com psychical phenomenon in complex expressing himself to that effect in to reject its dicta or the interpreta municated to the sense of hearing,” organisms be isolated or exist inde his concluding paragraph, I beg tion of our senses of the nature of he asserts, “give rise to a sensation pendent of a physiological process called sound.” Very true, but of some kind? Only Spiritualists leave to parry them (though I do the thing perceived? What would be thought of a would not these vibrations exist to would answer this in the affirmative. not subscribe to all of its tenets) by “Light,” he continues, “is a sen asking him to produce a single in judge and jury who refused to con tally independent of any auricular stance in which a Materialistic sider the evidence in a case sub organs? And in view of the favor sation produced by the action of writer, or one who is versed it but mitted to them? What if they with which the sentient matter ether-waves upon the retina and the rudiments of science, has made should bring in a verdict to the doctrine is now being received by fibres of the optic nerve.” Will he such a preposterous statement as effect that: What the merits and many of our most prominent phys please “rise and explain” how he that the “so-called qualities of ma demerits of the “case in itself” are, icists, may a sense akin iu its na reconciles this statement with the terial bodies, like fragrance, sweet apart from the effects it has upon ture to sound not be awakened in fact that many infusoria and other ness, etc., are usually thought of the public morals and general wel- all aggregations of matter irritated organisms of the lower orders in as objective realities; that they are fare, and outside of the various by these vibrations, and even in which not a trace of a visual organ states to which it may give rise, we their components? If so, then can be discovered, are susceptible to conceived of as existing per se”. It does not stand to reason that do not know,having decided to re sound evidently exists “at both the action of light? Is his asser any one could, with but a moment’s ject all evidence in the matter? ends of the line ” — in its incipient tion not on a par with the conten reflection, have assumed such an Would not a long-suffering public state in atoms, and in its develop tion that there is no mind where there is no brain, and this in the untenable position, for, if the qual think that such a decision required ed form in auricular organs. But be this as it may: the cause face of the fact that the lowest ities of a body are objective reali a ‘lunatics in-quirendo’ into the ties, what is the body itself? A mental state of the court so offend of the vibrations of, say a bell, and orders of life in which not a trace non-entity? Can there be two ob- ing? The Idealists present, an an- the medium of propagation remain of a cerebral organ can be found, jective realities in, let us say, a di- alogical case. They profess their unaffected in themselves, whether exhibit unmistakable evidences of ainond in its entirety? While,ther, ignorance in the subject under con- the sensation we term sound be pro intelligence? “Different colors,” Mr. Under Mr. Underwood has presented in an sideration, refusing the most valid duced or not. Hence we know from admirable manner the relations evidence that can possibly be pre- the conscious states to which they wood continues, “depend upon diff existing between the qualities of a sented — that of their own senses, would give rise if they were to im erent velocities of the ether-waves thing and the thing itself, he has, They need not depend upon hear- pinge upon an auditory sense, what gathered together by the optical in the main, expatiated only on say or other testimony open to sus- the nature of the thing that caus apparatus of the eye . . giving picion, but they can judge for ed them would be, outside of or rise to sensations that appear ob what no one has ever disputed. What Materialists affirm is, first, themselves. Their subconscious apart from them. In other words, jectively as colors — blue, green, that the things in themselves are mindhas furnished them with every by abstracting the sonorous effect violet, etc.” But what causes these objective realities; second, that all available means with which to as- from the vibrations that exist in different velocities of the ether- objects and their qualities are know certain what “the thing in itself’ dependent of it, we are enabled to waves? Is it not the different able as far as an analysis of the is and what its qualities are, and determine the nature of “the thing molecular arragements of the sur thing itself can make its qualities still they have some vague idea in itself”, It must necessarily face particles of the object from and elements known, and, third, that it mav be different after all be without such effect, precisely which the ether-waves are reflected that the thing itself, or “the thing from what it appears to be. what it is with it; hence by judg-, if not self luminous? Thus may we For the Torch of Reason. in itself”, with its qualities, exists independent of any sense-impress ions it may produce. Or, to para phrase Mr. Underwood’s express ion: It claims to know from the effects the thing in itself has upon the conscious states to which it What the nature of its constitu- ents may be, is a point not involv- ed iu the present controversy, but if these constituents could produce facts of consciousness on every one of their five senses, that is to say, if they could see, hear, feel, touch
