Show questionable teaching the university chrona R the official organ of tile the university of utah publishes the following editorial on my articles the colle college collee e lag mi ail excellent series of papers by prof J 11 II paul on design in matuie a tuie in these papers anre re condense tl many wonderful truths truth concerning Z the corkings v of natures laws truths IN bih would bo be of untold i benefit to lo hania nily nere bere they only more I 1 idely known these cons constitute t itule 00 alp M 41 ia 1 I 1 rr IL I 1 V ff I 1 W if 4 V lit ia Z 11 1 14 0 r 4 I 1 I 1 L ti SALT LAKI LAKE TE MlLE I 1 the lie chief value of prof pauls series of of papers for the llie rest the rea reasoning sonin is is loose and often fallacious fore for example ample evenia even if it had bad been demonet demonstrated rated that tile the theories of atheists evolutionists and of school men are false and even if all theories ever held by inen me had been overthrown thrown t does not follow that another particular is ia true no even though tile the necessity for the existence of lit an intelligence governing nature is proved to a certainty does it follow that a particular deity whose exist existence emt to eay cay the least is somewhat doubt doubtfully full must be that intelligence then it is assumed that those who take an opposite view to that of the writer ascribe all the phenomena of nature to chance we fear the ibe pr professor olessor with all his learning knows but little of like writings of eminent evolutionists and agnostics else lie would know that they all and they thel alone have shon shown n the existence til of orderly sequence in matuie it seems that this critic has not read the article lie he criticises criticizes otherwise it would not be easy to account for the critics compliment that the chief value of the articles consists in the facts enumerated the facts are used in if the articles 0 only illy as a basis basi for the ahe inductions induction s and deductions and it is durfin surprising s in that any per person peron on of ordinary acumen should so ko widely miss the point as to praise the articles arli cles on account of the facts they contain with tah remark the colit editorial orial of the chronicle might be dismissed so BO far as in itself it contains anything thin I 1 fiort worthy hy of a reply but the Chro chronicle niclo is the official organ organ of the university y of utah representing the interests indicating the progress and to a considerable extent voicing tile the sentiment of our chief educational institution these circumstances cumptan cum stances ces demands that the article be answered it was shown in the last article the critic had before him that the well known facts of function instinct and human industry demonstrate on strate strato that these operations are an orderly series identical as aa to the end or purpose of them it was further shown that thavone e one part of this inseparable serio seri osof ai of actions is performed by means aneano of intelligence and will whence the inference tint that tho the other parts are also carried on oil by intelligence and will since we mut explain the parts we do not understand from the parts we do understand to explain our part in the process human industry as a result of function and instinct is to explain what is well under understood sto 0 d our own intel intelligence licence from what is obscure function and ills instinct the induction wa therefore that since it takes mind to carry on our part of the process it likewise takes lakes mind to carry on the whole process of which our industry y forms form a part on oil tho the well known principle that like effects are produced by like causes cames this reasoning my critic s tyles styles to loose and fallacious he points out no ile error any ally one can call names but acif an emanation from tile university of utah might well be expected to consist of sterner cauff so far is as it concerns the arguments set forth in these brief articles the theory of evolution has no bearing L one way or the other and will accord quite as well I 1 with T ith 11 my y 01 argument r g u me nt as 19 will any ally other theory therefore the critics ellort to indicate that if there be a any ny truth in the evolution theory there here can call be none in in my argument is alto altogether 0 ether incorrect and disingenuous ous notice how tile tho critic construes my assertions that tile the author of the surpassing order realized in the combined workings woi kings of function instinct and human industry is not dead items atoms as by atheists nor a 1 I good called vitality and the survival of the fittest as taught by some evolutionists nor the occult quality of tiling things as taught by the I 1 schoolmen schoolman scho olmen of middle ages but is i god him himself seif eif as taught cy by moses the critic exclaims it does not follow that a particular deity whose existence to say the least is is somei somewhat hat doubt doubtful ful must be that intelli intelligence M docant it does the critic know of any 0 ence that is not a particular intelligence lic li ge gence nee that is not a personal being if lie does h ho e should inform the world of his discovery for in that event my inference that if intelligence telli gence ence is manifest anywhere buch intelligence belongs to a per bonali y would not necessarily follow lut but until it is Elio shown iIii that there may be intelligence apart from personality it will bo be held valid that whatever is produced by intelligence 0 is produced bya by a personal intelligence 0 there is no such thing 1 as mind in general but only particular minds and for fora a critic to assert that tho though uh c tile the necessity for the existence g governing overn nature is proved a certainty still it does not follow that a particular deity must be that intelligence proves the critic to be e ut of logic 0 not to say ignorant 0 of psychology ch the critic further charges me ine with as assuming sliming that thoe who take an opposite view to that of the writer ascribe all the phenomena of nature to 10 chance whereas I 1 make no such assumption as will be seen horn flom the quotation above from the seventh article however since tile the critic has been so good as to urge this insinuation against me I 1 freely give him his choice of ground and reply that the alternative design i is chance that except in caso case 0 of f a commingling com mingling of tl these I 1 ese two there is no middle ground between desi desin design 0 n and chance that these are arc the only factors that concur in the tha production of any result whatever and that any given result is the action of one or both of these it is now in ill order for tile the critic to show that there are some results brought about by means other than design and chance As to the insinuation of ni my 3 r ignorance concerning the subject of which aich I 1 have chosen choen to write a few thought houghto houg hta R there seems no need to argue it at this thib time the critic insinuates that I 1 am ignorant of the writings of evolutionists because I 1 do not know that they and they alood have shown the existence of orderly sequence in nature of course I 1 do not know this no one knows it it is aasc and it would be wrong wrong a to forbear to chastise the auth luthor or of it a falsehood so BO coarse an and d low on the one point concerning which the critic boasts liis his knowledge lie he turns out ignorant the psalmist peal mist who exclaimed the heavens dollare the tha glory of 0 god of course knew nothing 0 of 4 orderly sequence in nature 12 if we nay may believe this critic hipnar chus kepler Corpe nicus newt dewton on of course never heard of orderly sequence the whole line of scientists scientist from the earliest days almost to the present made no discoveries co of order in nature because forsooth they had not heard of the theory of evolution the philosophers so who praised the poets who sung the beauties of natures order were deceived evolution was unknown to them Is this what is taught t in the university of utah 1 4 one on e of the roost penetrating L minds of our time has hag given out t this his declaration cl clara tiou the most terrible form of enmity against 0 god is not that 11 A F fv 10 PRESIDENT 1 DRI V r F which breaks out in foul oaths or pa passionate si onate fits of disobedience but that which deliberately drills drill the intellect to ignore all evidence of of his existence and to refuse an ail ear to any voice that speaks for him whether within the soul or without it is both a pity and a surprise that the official organ of tile tho university of utah should in its editorial columns labor to disseminate mal inal information of this character if I 1 understand him aright my iny critic makes four leading assertions or assumptions 1 7 that hat intelligence is not necessarily that of a particular or personal being 2 that there is sonic ionic other factor than design I 1 and chance in the product production i oil of events and things thinas 3 th that at evolutionists are the mt 1 1 aw 14 1 v 1 1 h I 1 ji MA 3 4 1 az L SECOND i JOSEPH V F only people that have discovered orderly sequence in in nature 4 1 I that the evolution theory if true would invalidate tile argument for design in nature I 1 deny in whole or in part pach each of the foregoing assumptions of rny my critic his proofs are called for ills his own defense seem necessary J 11 PAUL in college record ecord Il |