Part 23 (1/2)

You ask h I think not I should say the rollers want fresh inking As to the _matter_ of your speci ani_, collecting butterflies]--I think you _cannot_ spend your ti to set down clearly, in that essay-form, your ideas on any subject that chances to interest you; and _specially_ any theological subject that strikes you in the course of your reading for Holy Orders

It will be ainst the time when you try to compose sermons, to try thus to realise exactly what it is you mean, and to express it clearly, and (a et into proper shape the _reasons_ of your opinions, and to see whether they do, or do not, tend to prove the conclusions you coic, at all, I fancy [I _had_, but I freely admit that the essay in question proved that I had not then learnt to apply reat help: but still it is not indispensable: after all, it is only the putting into rules of the way in which _every_ mind proceeds, when it draws valid conclusions; and, by practice in careful thinking, you et to know ”fallacies” when youthe forive _reasons_, you are in considerable danger of propounding fallacies Instances occur in this little essay of yours; and I hope it won't offend your _aic for forty years,to enter _at all_ on the subject-ree, or not, with your _conclusions_: but ic-lecturer's point of view, your _pre to them

(1) ”As the lower animals do not appear to have personality or individual existence, I cannot see that any particular one's life can be very iue: I don't knohat you mean by it If you were to ask yourself, ”What test should I use in distinguishi+ng what _has_, froht perhaps be able to express yourh, and is in direct logical contradiction to the phrase ”particular one” To say, of anything, that it has _not_ ”individual existence,” and yet that it _is_ a ”particular one,” involves the logical fallacy called a ”contradiction in terms”

(2) ”In both cases” (animal and plant) ”death is only the conversion of ue--I fancy you use it in a sort of _chear is starch in another forenerally believed to be a rearrangement of the very same atoms) If you mean to assert that the difference between a live animal and a dead animal, _ie,_ between animate and sensitive matter, and the same matter when it becoeible (It is a bolder one than any biologists have yet advanced The most sceptical of the _per se _However, that is beside my present scope) But this premiss is advanced to prove that it is of no ”consequence” to kill an ani that the conversion of sensitive into insensitive e of ”for this, we cannot escape the including under this rule all si pain, and the _absence_ of that power, are only a difference of ”for_ pain, and the _not_ feeling it, are _also_ only a difference in for pain, into e its ”for form” is of no ”consequence” in the case of sensitive and insensitive matter, we must admit that it is _also_ of no ”consequence” in the case of pain-feeling and _not_ pain-feeling ine, you neither intended nor foresaw The pre too iven to you, when you begin to coave to a young e (in India, it sees, without a jury, like our County Court judges) ”Give _your decisions_ boldly and clearly; they will probably be _right_ But do _not_ give your _reasons: they_ will probably be _wrong”_ If your lot in life is to be in a _country_ parish, it will perhaps not iven in your sermons do or do not prove your conclusions But even there you _ation you would be _sure_ to ue, ill detect your fallacies and point them out to those who are _not_ yet troubled with doubts, and thus under

At Eastbourne, last suument, ”We believe that the Bible is true, because our holy Mother, the Church, tells us it is” I pity that unfortunate clergy Men's Debating Club where there is some clear-headed sceptic who has heard, or heard of, that ser ht, and would say to hiet hi in a circle!”

The bad logic that occurs in er to modern Christianity When detected, it may seriously injure many believers, and fill the theological student, is ”Sift your reasons _well_, and, before you offer them to others, make sure that they prove your conclusions”

I hope you won't give this letter of ht to write) just a single reading and then burn it; but that you will lay it aside Perhaps, even years hence, it ain

Believe son

CHAPTER VIII

(1892-1896)

Mr Dodgson resigns the Curatorshi+p--Bazaars--He lectures to children--A ical controversy--Albert Chevalier--”Sylvie and Bruno Concluded”--”Pillow Probleious difficulties--A village seric”

At Christ Church, as at other Colleges, the Coht in the ht, it takes the place of a club, where the ”dons” may see the newspapers, talk, write letters, or enjoy a cup of tea After dinner, uests if any are present, usually adjourn to the Co-room hard by for those who do not despise the haroodly store of choice old wines

The Curator's duties were therefore sufficiently onerous They were doubly so in Mr Dodgson's case, for his love of reatly increased the amount of work he had to do It was his office to select and purchase wines, to keep accounts, to adjust selling price to cost price, to see that the two Coenerally to look after the co heard,” he wrote near the end of the year 1892, ”that Strong illing to be elected (as Curator), and Coned The sense of relief at being free froe ahtful I was made Curator, December 8, 1882, so that I have held the office more than nine years”

The literary results of his Curatorshi+p were three very interesting little pamphlets, ”Twelve Months in a Curatorshi+p, by One who has tried it”; ”Three years in a Curatorshi+p, by One whom it has tried”; and ”Curiosissima Curatoria, by 'Rude Donatus,'” all printed for private circulation, and couched in the saician he naturally liked to see his thoughts in print, for, just as the mathematical ical -press ith to set forth its deductions effectively

A few extracts must suffice to show the style of these pamphlets, and the opportunity offered for the display of huement of the prices at which wines were to be sold to members of Common Room, he found a fine scope for the exercise of his mathematical talents and his sense of proportion In one of the pamphlets he takes old Port and Chablis as illustrations

The original cost of each is about 3s a bottle; but the present value of the old Port is about 11s a bottle Let us suppose, then, that we have to sell to Cominal cost of the whole being 12s, and the present value 20s These are our data We have noo questions to answer First, what sum shall we ask for the whole? Secondly, how shall we apportion that sum between the two kinds of wine?

The su precedent, is to be the present oes on to say--