322 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



been interpreted in terms of Matter and Motion, nothing remains to be 

 explained. This, however, is by no means the fact. The Doctrine 

 of Evolution, under its purely scientific form, does not involve Ma- 

 terialism, though its opponents persistently represent it as doing so. 

 Indeed, among adherents of it who are friends of mine, there are those 

 who speak of the Materialism of Buchner and his school, with a con- 

 tempt certainly not less than that felt by Mr. Martineau. To show 

 how entirely anti-materialistic my own view is, I may, perhaps, without 

 impropriety, quote passages which I have written elsewhere : 



"Hence, though of the two it seems easier to translate so-called Matter into 

 so-called Spirit, than to translate so-called Spirit into so-called Matter (which 

 latter is, indeed, wholly impossible), yet no translation can carry us beyond our 

 symbols." ' 



And again : 



" See, then, our predicament. "We can think of Matter only in terms of Mind. 

 "We can think of Mind only in terms of Matter. When we have pushed our ex- 

 plorations of the first to the uttermost limit, we are referred to the second for 

 a final answer; and, when we have got the final answer of the second, we are 

 referred back to the first for an interpretation of it. "We find the value of a; in 

 terms of y ; then we find the value of y in terms of x; and so on we may con- 

 tinue forever, without coming nearer to a solution. The antithesis of subject 

 and object, never to be transcended while consciousness lasts, renders impos- 

 sible all knowledge of that Ultimate Reality in which subject and object are 

 united." a 



It is thus, I think, manifest that the difference between Mr. Mar- 

 tineau's view and the view he opposes is by no means so. wide as he 

 makes it appear ; and further, it seems to me that such difference as 

 exists is, in truth, rather the reverse of that which his exposition im- 

 plies. Briefly expressed, the difference is this, that, when he thinks 

 there is no mystery, the doctrine he combats recognizes a mystery. 

 Speaking for myself only, I may say that, agreeing entirely with Mr. 

 Martineau in repudiating the materialistic interpretation as utterly 

 futile, I differ from him simply in this, that while he says he has found 

 another interpretation, I confess that I cannot find any interpretation ; 

 while he holds that he can understand the Power which is manifested in 

 things, I feel obliged to admit, after many failures, that I cannot under- 

 stand, it. This contrast does not appear of the kind which bis Essay 

 tacitly implies. I fail to perceive humility in the belief that human 

 thought is capable of comprehending that which is behind appear- 

 ances ; and I do not see how piety is especially exemplified in the as- 

 sertion that the Universe contains no mode of existence higher in Na- 

 ture than that which is present to us in consciousness. On the con- 

 trary, I think it quite a defensible proposition that humility is better 

 shown by a confession of incompetence to grasp in thought the Cause 



1 " Principles of Psychology," second edition, vol. i., 63. s Ibid., 2Y2. 



