THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE 417 



is just what the methodologist is anxious to discuss with the 

 relativist. The point, however, will readily illustrate the differ- 

 ence between matters on which evidence is admissible and 

 those on which evidence is impossible. It is possible (but im- 

 probable) that no actual velocity can exceed that of light. By all 

 means let us investigate the evidence and gather more when we 

 can. It is impossible and inconceivable that the limit to velocity 

 can be the velocity of light. 



So rarely does it happen that men of science are also philo- 

 sophers that we must express our gratitude to Sir Oliver Lodge 

 for placing considerations like these in a clear light and for 

 showing that there are explanations to all physical facts not at 

 variance with the laws of thought. The laws of thought, as the 

 greatest philosophers of all eras have pointed out in one way or 

 another, are the conceptual framework which we throw over the 

 material of perceptual reality. Why there should be laws of 

 thought and why these should possess validity over and above 

 the empirical rules we call the laws of science is a problem we 

 cannot discuss here. It will suffice to point out that it is so, 

 and that those of philosophic training have always recognised 

 the fact. The mathematician and the physicist on this point are 

 continually blundering. One generation, that of Kelvin and 

 Tait, will use the laws of thought as mathematical reasoning, 

 and will mistake them for the laws of things. We thereby get 

 grotesque estimates of geologic time, and the Dissipation of 

 Energy. The next generation will make the inverse mistake. 

 They will discover the peculiar behaviour of certain things and 

 will mistake the laws of things for the laws of thought. All we 

 are entitled to say is that electrons, under certain conditions, 

 behave in a certain manner. The certainty and security of 

 fundamentals continually needs to be emphasised by those who 

 deal with the wider aspects of physical science. Space is space, 

 and there is no such thing as crooked space. Velocity is a con- 

 cept which does not admit a finite limit. The ultimate entities 

 of the Universe are constant in quantity. Something cannot 

 become nothing. Action at a distance is inconceivable. Truths 

 like these can be misapplied, but they are more fundamental 

 than any derived from experiment. 



To the writer, the above is the most important aspect of the 

 address. To him, to speak candidly, the " spiritualism " is a 

 hasty and unwarranted assertion. The discussion of the dogmas 



