1880J Natural Science and Morality . 451 
efforts to reconcile the impossible, in the vain attempt to 
put in practice unnatural and ridiculous moral maxims,* or 
in the struggle with beliefs that disintegrate the mind. Of 
this one of the authors of this essayt can speak from per- 
sonal experience (as no doubt many others could) ; and all 
this is assumed to be necessary to benefit society in general, 
as if society rested upon an unstable basis that required 
fiftions to support it. Fortunately the majority escape this 
evil of young days, simply because they do not inquire into or 
realise what is taught them ; and it would be all the same, 
in their case, which of the thousand and one creeds of the 
world were inculcated . X Youthful minds of an exception- 
ally penetrating and inquiring character run the greatest 
risk of becoming hopelessly entangled here, or it is reserved 
for the most inquiring and thoughtful, and therefore pro- 
bably those who would have exceptional capacities for 
becoming useful members of society, to bear the brunt of 
this, in order to sustain a system for the fictitious benefit of 
the many. 
That there is no limit to the depths of absurdity and 
superstition to which even men of education will descend 
(and in this nineteenth century) in matters wrongly termed 
“ religion,”— especially where sectarian interests are involved, 
— is fortunately not without such instructive illustration as 
will serve to keep the thoughtful on their guard. The never- 
* Mill makes a remark bearing on this point (“ Utilitarianism,” p. 44) : — 
“ Unhappily it [the moral faculty] is also susceptible, by a sufficient use of the 
external sandtions [ i.e ., eternal punishment, &c.] . and of the force of early 
impressions, of being cultivated in almost any direction ; so that there is hardly 
anything so absurd, or so mischievous, that it may not, by means of these 
influences be made to adt on the human mind with all the authority of con- 
science.” # . 
f The other author, a friend formerly largely associated in the thought and 
preparation of the scheme of this essay, and who had an equal (perhaps 
greater) share in the development of the main principle, has reasons for re- 
maining anonymous for the present. The work and study connected with the 
essay has extended, from time to time, over some three years. This is men- 
tioned to avoid any idea of the publication having been entered on prematurely. 
+ The fadt that religious belief is a mere unrealised dead letter (or profession) 
with the majority, so as to have no pradtical effedt on their lives, is well illus- 
trated by Mill in his celebrated essay on “ Liberty.” At the same time, is it 
not a sad thought, in view of the enormous number of diverse creeds in the 
world (each sedt maintaining its own to be the only true one), to contemplate 
the means for the brain-poisoning of youth that the prevalence of so much 
error must afford ? It would not be of so much consequence if these dodtrines 
were not instilled before the intelledt is sufficiently developed to distinguish 
truth from error. For if ignorance be a great evil, how much greater must be 
the scourge of false dodtrine ! For it is indeed far more difficult to tm-learn 
than to learn. Moreover, does not the prevalence of so many diverse creeds 
in the world afford a signal illustration of the recklessness of ipvention on the 
one side, and of credulity on the other ? 
