579 
i88o.] Scientific or Natural System. 
life. In fa 6i the sectarian morality, when looked at a little 
below the surface, shows itself to be the exact antithesis of 
the scientific morality, founded on the study of Nature, 
which teaches that the path of virtue (or right condudf) 
actually coincides with that of self-interest, or present wel- 
fare, and that the path of vice is direftly opposed thereto,— 
thus affording the most natural and healthy motive to right 
conduct conceivable, and an equally forcible deterrent against 
wrong conduct. If, therefore, there be grounds for con- 
cluding that the scientific morality is good or beneficial, it 
must follow with equal necessity that the sectarian morality 
(as its antithesis) must be detrimental to a corresponding 
degree. In fatf: the one leads mankind by enlisting his pre- 
sent interest on the side of virtue, the other attempts to 
coerce him by a low and degrading system of terrorism, 
which (like all such attempts) must inevitably recoil upon 
itself, and have the exadt opposite effedt to that intended. 
This may perhaps form a not un-noteworthy instance of 
the fallacy of the idea of the salutariness of error,— so often 
warned against by a few eminent minds before, who have in- 
curred odium on that account, but who have nevertheless boldly 
asserted that error never can do good, and never can conduce 
to stability in society, but brings the positive harm insepa- 
rable from error. If a man is left in crass ignorance he has 
some chance, for he can inquire for himself; but when his 
brain is poisoned- (especially when young and extremely 
sensitive to first impressions) by the fearful dodtrines of 
sedts, he may be hopelessly ruined for life, as has un- 
questionably occurred in many casest under the wholesale 
* The poisoning is here literal ; for it is a well-known faCt that every sentence 
uttered physically affeCts the brain, and when reiterated may leave its perma- 
nent impress there. , . , t 
f Post-scriptum . — I look back with an indignation difficult to repress at what 
was taught me when young [i.e., at the system], and which almost proved my 
ruin, leaving its detrimental traces to the present day. I am led to mention 
this in the hope of benefitting others — as one of a class who perhaps rarely 
pass through their experiences with strength of mind left to analyse the system 
which produced their undeserved grievances. If error be not an evil, or if 
fallacies cannot cause injury, then what can ? — and errors of absolutely un- 
limited magnitude. Some people, however, appear to have so restricted powers 
of realisation that they can actually profess to believe such fallacies without 
the faintest conception of their import. Their inconsistencies are absolutely 
terrible (even if unconscious). They can protest the Deity is a God of Love 
one moment, and ascribe the boundless Hate involved in an eternal punishment 
the next. It apparently could not be of much consequence what was taught 
in their case. Life can only be extinguished with the greatest effeCt when it 
burns most brilliantly. The most sensitive children— those whose inquiring 
minds are readiest to appreciate the truth — are those who are most effectually 
strangled by fallacies of enormous magnitude. Let it not be supposed that 
there is exaggeration here. An intellect of high sensibility, while it will be 
