226 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



define science simply as knowledge or " complement of cognitions," 

 it is contrasted with feeling or emotion. Its correlatives are produc- 

 tions designed to please, such as poetry, painting, or the fine arts 

 generally. 



If religion be regarded as proceeding wholly from the emotional 

 nature, it may be contrasted with science and classed among aesthetic 

 conceptions. But narrowing the definition further by qualifying 

 knowledge by the terms " logically classified," we then have science 

 as contrasted with or opposed to particular knowledge, or knowledge 

 imperfectly classified. Qualifying further by placing the word real 

 before knowledge, we have it contrasted with error or not genuine 

 knowledge. By reading Hamilton, it will be seen that error is his 

 antithesis to his real truth in the definition. But hypotheses are not 

 error, since they are not held as truth. The distinguishing character 

 of error is that, while false in fact, is is supposed to be true completely. 

 Hypotheses are neither genuine truth nor errors, so long as they are 

 held merely as :uch. They lie upon the border-lands of truth and 

 error, and Hamilton's definition cannot banish them completely from 

 the domain of science. They are properly allowed to hover around 

 its borders. But we totally disagree with Dr. Deems as to the value 

 of these " guesses " at truth. Says he, " A professor of religion has 

 just as much right to guess as a professor of science, and the latter 

 no more right than the former, though he may have more skill." 

 Now, as to the right, there can be no dispute, but, as to the value of 

 the guesses, this better skill makes all the difference in the world. 

 Prof. Huxley is right in his estimate of guesses. Says he, " Do not 

 allow yourself to be misled by the common notion that an hypothesis 

 is untrustworthy because it is an hypothesis. What more have we to 

 guide us in nine-tenths of the most important affairs of daily life than 

 hypotheses, and often very ill-based ones ? So then in science, where 

 the evidence of an hypothesis is subjected to the most rigid examina- 

 tion, we may rightly pursue the same course. You may have hypoth- 

 eses and hypotheses. A man may say, if he like, that the moon is 

 made of preen cheese ; that is an hypothesis. But another man, who 

 has devoted a great deal of time and attention to the subject, and 

 availed himself of the most powerful telescopes, and the results of the 

 observations of others, declares that it is probably composed of mate- 

 rials very similar to those of which the earth is made up ; and this 

 also is an hypothesis." You perceive that it makes a good deal of 

 difference both as to who guesses and as to what is guessed. Indeed, 

 so many scientific hypotheses have been verified in the face of the 

 opposing theological hypotheses, that there begins to be a strong 

 presumption in their favor before verification. Nor is it strange that 

 we should be led to regard them as highly probable. The investiga- 

 tor of Nature, familiar with her processes and her laws, founds these 

 guesses upon broad and deep analogies. 



