1907-8.] ; SPACE AND ITs DIMENSIONS. ; 331 
Now let us glance at the other side of the problem: Where do we 
find continuity? Do we find continuity in nature, ie., in what we call 
the external world? Take, for instance the perception of the white sur- 
face of a wall. Physically the wall consists of separated particles of lime 
etc., and the chemist will tell us that these particles consist of many 
molecules, the molecules of atoms, and the atoms, as we are taught re- 
cently, of an infinite number of electrons with comparatively large inter- 
stices between, and since even these electrons cannot be mathematical 
points, the possibility of division is not at an end here. ‘Thus we have in 
the physical objects separated particles. The light which is reflected 
from them consists of periodic movements of separated ether elements. 
All attempts to make the ether a continuous homogeneous solid lead to 
ridiculous absurdities. The vibrations of the separated ether elements 
are conveyed by means of separated atoms and molecules of the refracting 
media of the eye to the retina where they are transformed into a chemical 
process, very likely in the rods and cones. Each rod and cone is a sep- 
arate thing for itself and has its separate nerve fibre and this latter con- 
sists again of separated molecules, atoms, electrons, etce., etc. Through 
these separated nerve fibres the stimulation is transmitted to some central 
station in the brain. Now if we do not want to land at the fallacy of 
Descartes who gave the soul only a single mathematical point as its seat 
in the brain (in which point then the whole problem of unity and variety 
would start anew) we must assume that the central station of the sense 
of sight, no matter whether it is located in the occipital part of the cortex 
or anywhere else, must consist again of separated brain cells, and the 
cells of separated molecules, atoms, electrons, etc., etc. Where in the 
world does the continuity of the surface come from, which I perceive 
directly when I look at the wall? This directly perceived continuity 
has no analogue in the external world, none in the peripheral sense organ, 
none in the transmitting nerve, none in the central organ, consequently 
it has no physical analogon at all. The continurty exists only mm my con- 
sciousness. {1 claim one thing more: There ts no other continuity of 
which we can know anything except that in consciousness. Everywhere that 
we claim to have a continuity objectively, i.e., in the physical world 
independently of our consciousness, we are mistaken. The continuity 
is always im us. We ‘‘inject” it so to speak into that which we call the 
physical. This continuity of consciousness which is identical with the 
mathematical continuity in the apodictic realm (space) and with the actual 
continuity in the territory of the assertive facts (time) is the only con- 
tinuity we find. There is no other, and as this continuity is the first 
condition for all analysis and explanation zt 1s consequently utterly absurd 
to attempt to explain, describe, or define it. 
