578 Sectarian Morality contrasted with the [September, 
In regard to our second proposition, viz., the premium 
necessarily set on wrong-doing by the above system, — inde- 
pendently of any motive to do so, but inherent in the system 
itself, — we may observe, first, that the fundamental principle 
involved here is that the escape from a certain imminent 
danger (such as a punishment of unlimited magnitude) is 
made contingent on certain conduct. The man appealed to 
therefore infallibly reasons that if the asserted danger be a 
myth, then such prohibited conduct must be in itself ex- 
tremely desirable and profitable ; for he argues that it would 
be transparently absurd to hold out an enormous (infinite) 
punishment as a deterrent, unless the course of conduft 
itself were exceptionally attractive or conducive to profit; 
If, therefore, his belief in the asserted punishment in a 
future world is very shadowy (as is actually the case with 
the majority of mankind), he may be naturally induced to 
follow crime and vice in the belief that (in escaping the 
enormous future punishment) they must be extremely con- 
ducive to present interests. So far therefore from being 
taught that crime is unprofitable in itself (or brings its own 
punishment with it), he is in effeCI led to infer the exaCt 
opposite. Thus the highest premium (in fad by implication 
infinite) is set on wrong-doing by this doCtrine, and, con- 
versely, a deterrent set on virtue, which is made to appear 
opposed to present interests. For it may be justly argued 
(in an analogous way) that if an infinite reward in a future 
world be necessary for right conduCI, then such conduCt 
must be connected with great hardship and privation in this 
advance of knowledge is sure to exhibit in a clearer light the happiness caused 
by the friends of science, so it will show more plainly the misery caused by its 
opponents ; and it is inevitable that in the purer intellectual atmosphere of the 
future the condemnation of these sectarian propaganda will be far more em- 
phatic than has ever been penned yet. For the growing appreciation of the 
benefits of truth must unavoidably run parallel to that of the evils of error. 
It is a significant faCt that those who opposed these propaganda most bravely 
in the past are becoming more and more recognised as the true champions of 
the happiness of mankind, as time advances. The severest judgment the 
public could pronounce on themselves would lie in their failure to appreciate 
the services of men who took so signal a part in the battle against fanaticism 
and superstition, one of the chief sources of human misery. To speak of the 
“ conflict between religion and science ” is to speak of ignominious defeat, or 
to degrade “ religion ” to doctrines unworthy of the name. The defunCt Hebrew 
cosmogony once classed as “ religion ” may picture the fate of the Hebrew 
ethics of threats and promises. It may be superfluous to lay stress on the 
perfectly well-known faCt that promises and threats have (all the world over) 
been the most commonplace devices adopted to influence mankind ; the only 
peculiarity here being that both the threats and the promises are magnified 
absolutely without limit, as if to strain the credulity of mankind beyond 
bounds. 
