Image provided by: Silverton Country Historical Society; Silverton, OR
About Torch of reason. (Silverton, Oregon) 1896-1903 | View Entire Issue (July 26, 1900)
T orch of O R eason . “TRUTH BEAR5 THE TORCH IN THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH.” — Lucretius- •S î ï A E K I h N, VOL. 4. The Atheist’s Grave. am ong th e c h u rc h y a rd s’ dead On a su n n y S ab b ath day, And I m ark ed a grave w here7th e sexton said An A th e is t’s ashes lay. I wandered A h eadstone p ointed th e lowly spot. In scrib ed w ith his age a n d nam e, But o th e r m em orial th ere was not To draw e ith e r praise or blam e. Yet th e daisy th e re was as fresh in its hue, T he elm did as lig h tly wave, And th e sp rin g tid e grass as greenly grew As over th e C h ris tia n ’s grave. And I m ark ed th a t th e sun beam s through th e trees Fell as lig h tly on th e sod As if its in m a te h a d been of these W ho had lived in th e faith of a God. And over m y m ind th e reflection cam e Of a new an d sta rtlin g k in d , ’Twas w hispered w ithin me th a t m an m ay blam e W here n a tu re no fau lt can find. The b ig o t’s curse from th e G o th ic pile On th e sk ep tical few m ay fall, But N a tu re e x te n d s, w ith a m o th e r’s sm ile, H e r p ity an d love to all. —[T ru th Seeker. Man. BY P R O F . L U D W IG B U C H N E R , M . D . T here are m any m arv els—b u t th e re is no g reater m arvel th a n M an.—Sophokles. God was m y first, R eason m y second, Man m y th ird a n d last th o u g h t. M an alons is an d sh all be our God. O utside m an is no sa lv a tio n .—L. F e u e rb a ch . H E sam e laws which in the m acrocosm , or universe, rule also in the microcosm, or the world of m an, in whose existence, being and th in k in g the universe is, as it were, reflected and contem plated. T h a t m an with all his em inent q ualities and faculties is not a work of God but a product of N ature, like all his fellow- creatures, and has proceeded from a natural and g radual evolution and self-education — th is m om entous and notorious tru th can only be doubted a t this day bv the ignorant or deliberately obstinate. D uring the short space of scarcely more than forty years the researches on the early history of the hum an race on earth have grown into a com prehensive science and have shown th a t m ankind has behind it a past in com parison with which the historical period is but very brief. As regards the biblical m yths an d fairy-tales about the world and man having been created some 5000 or 6000 years ago by a creative fiat, they are really too radically a t variance with the m ost notorious facts and results of the whole geological, archaeological and archaeogeological science, to be made the subject of a serious con T troversy. Not only has it been shown by the results of countless excavations, as well as by the investigations of E gyptologists, based on the reading of hieroglyphic scrolls, th a t in the venerable land of the Nile an adm irable and hig h ly developed cu ltu re and civiliza tion existed at a period to which the Bible only traces the creation of the first m an; but the researches of archieogeology as the union of geological and archaeological science is called, have proved beyond doubt th a t m an was a contem porary of the huge m am m als of the D iluvian age, which are now either extinct or have em igrated from Europe; th a t he existed in one of the earlier periods of the form ation of our ea rth , d u rin g which part the surface of the globe had a very different geographical configuration and was subject to different clim atic conditions from those th at exist at the preseut tim e. Nay, there are a num ber of theoretical argum ents, the full exposition of which would take up too much space, and which, taken in conjunction with the results of m any archaeogeological researches— though there m ay yet be some controversy on the in ferences to be draw n from these— make it appear in the highest degree probable th at the existence of m an, or ra th e r of his earliest beginnings on earth , goes back to a time th at m ust be com puted by geological, and neither by historic nor prehistoric stan d ard s of m easurem ent. By all appearances it will not be long before the existence of the so-called tertiary m an— th a t is to say, of a hum an or anthropoid creature, existing in a later or earlier division of the last g reat period of form ation of e a rth —will be looked upon with as much certainty as is now th e existence of the prehistoric or diluvial m an which had been doubted for such a length of time. Of course this would not affect the ancient belief in the principle of perfection, according to which man is the last and as yet highest o u t come of the organic process of evolution or graduated progression i on the stage of existence; for a l though, as scholars are now forced to adm it, the an tiq u ity of man on earth m ust be m easured by hundreds of thousands of years, this period is yet but exceedingly brief when com pared with the m any m illions of years which the earth , with her organized in hab itan ts, has lived through, in her gradual progress of developm ent; NOT - T so th a t the existence of m an on earth m ust upon all hands be con sidered as com paratively very short. Then again, m odern science ranges among exploded fables th a t idea th a t used to be en tertain ed on the strength of religious m yths, and according to which m an cam e out of the creato r’s hand as a readv- m ade product, endowed with all the qualities of the race. The u n changeable principle of the order of the world, based upon n atu ral and m echanical causality, acts and works in the same way in the gradual genesis and form ation of the highest of all organized beings as it does in the form ation of the least and lowliest.— [Force and M atter. flotives. RY H O R A C E S E A V E R . T IS the m otive, more than an y th in g else, th at renders an action good or bad. However fair the appearance of an action m ay be, if the rig h t m otive be w anting, th e action is hollow; if the m otive be a bad one, the action is rotten to the core. Who cares for an outw ard seeing, or show of affection unless th e heart be also on the sam e term s? W ho does not prize a rough outside, when it covers an honest inside,m ore than the most fawning fondness from a h eart th at is cold and false? T hus it is right to insist on the principles for their own sake, because the principles give their value to th e action, not the action to the principles, for tiiey are but dross. The principles are the gold on which is to be placed the stam p, and if the gold is not good, the stam p, though it often deceives the people, gives it no real worth; as he who gives the queen’s im age on base metal is punished for his forgery. I An Imagined, Invisible King. BY JE A N M E S L IE R . H E R E is a vast em pire governed by a m onarch, whose conduct does but confound the m inds of his sujects. He desires to be know n, loved, respected, and obeyed, but he never shows him self; everything tends to m ake uncertain the notions which we are able to form about him. The people subjected to his power have only such ideas of the character and the laws of their invisible sovereign as his m inisters give them ; these suit, however, be T cause they themselves have no idea of their m aster, for his ways are im penetrable, and his views and his qualities are totally incom prehensible; moreover, his m inisters disagree am ong them selves in regard to the orders which they pretend em anated from th e sovereign whose organs they claim to be; they announce them diverse ly in each province of the em pire; they discredit and treat each other as im postors and liars; the decrees and ordinances which they prom ulgate are obscure; they are enigm as, m ade not to be u n d er stood or divined by the subjects for whose instructions they were intended. The laws of the invisible m onarch need interpreters, b ut those who explain them are alw ays q u arrelin g am ong them selves about the true way of u n d erstan d in g them ; more than this, they do not agree am ong them selves; all which they relate of their hidden prince is but a tissue of contradictions, scarcely a single word th at is not contradicted at once. He is called suprem ely good, nevertheless not a person but com plains of his decrees. He is supposed to be infinitely wise, and in hi3 ad m in istratio n everything seems contrary to reason and good sense. They boast of his justice, and the best of bis subjects are the least favored. We are assured th a t he sees everything, yet his presence remedies nothing. It is said th a t he is the friend of order, ar.d everything in his universe is in a state of confusion and disorder; all is created by him , yet events rarely happen according to his projects. H e foresees every thing, hut his foresight prevents nothing. He is im patient if any offend him; at the sam e tim e he puts every one in the way of offend ing him. His knowledge is adm ired in the perfection of his works, but his works are full of im perfections, and of little perm anence. He is co n tin u ally occupied in creating and destroying, then repairin g w hat be has done, never appearing to be satisfied with his work. In all his enterprises he seeks b u t his own glory, but he does not succeed in being glorified. H e works but for the good of his subjects, and most of them lack the necessities of life. Those whom he seems to favor, are generally those who are the least satisfied with th e ir fate; we see them all co n tin u ally rev o lt ing against a m aster whose g reat ness they adm ire, whose wisdom they extol, whose goodness they worship, and whose justice they fear, revering orders which they never follow. This em pire is the world; its m onarch is God; H is m inisters are the priests; th eir subjects are m e n .— [Common Sense.