In these two paragraphs, Gabino Barreda references the ideas of Condorcet, a philosopher from the Enlightenment period. Condorcet argued that the similarity between moral precepts in all religions and philosophical sects is enough to prove that these precepts are based on a truth independent of specific religious dogmas or philosophical principles. He believed that the origin of ideas of justice, virtue, and moral duties should be sought in the moral constitution of humanity itself.
Barreda then states that Condorcet's desire to find the cause and foundation of morality within humanity itself, rather than in religious dogmas, has already been fulfilled. He mentions the genius of Gall, who provided irrefutable arguments based on insightful analysis of human intellectual and emotional faculties and a comparative study of animals. Gall demonstrated that both humans and animals possess innate tendencies that incline them towards good as well as tendencies that push them towards evil. These inclinations are believed to have their organs located in the cerebral mass. Contrary to the beliefs of theologians and metaphysicians who thought humans were exclusively inclined towards evil, Gall's findings showed that humans, as common sense had already established, also have innate benevolent inclinations.
In relation to Barreda's argument, these paragraphs suggest that the concept that evil is an inherent human instinct, as believed by theologians and metaphysicians, is contradicted by Gall's findings. By showcasing the presence of innate benevolent inclinations in humans, Gall's research supports the idea that the foundation of morality lies within human nature itself, rather than being dictated exclusively by religious doctrines. This aligns with Barreda's overall argument about the pointlessness and irrelevance of religion in shaping moral principles, as the source of morality is inherently human and not dependent on religious beliefs.