vii REALITY AND IDEALISM 115 



&quot; between them &quot; they fall very far short of giving a 

 trustworthy test of reality. 



(1) The first is open to objection as a matter of fact. 

 It is doubtful how far the testimonies of the various 

 senses really corroborate one another, and how far they 

 are not rather incommensurable and referred to the same 

 thing for reasons of practical convenience. Are after 

 images and overtones, which regularly accompany sights 

 and sounds, to be esteemed unreal because we generally 

 find it convenient to neglect them ? And yet it is hard to 

 say to what data of touch they correspond. Again, what 

 can this criterion make of cases of hyperassthesia of one 

 sense, or of an occasional activity of some special 

 sensitiveness ? Are they to be rejected because they 

 necessarily lie beyond confirmation by the other senses ? 

 As far as this criterion goes, there is nothing to prevent 

 a real thing from contravening it, and an unreal thing 

 from conforming to it. Is Pepper s ghost unreal because 

 it cannot be touched ? Or is a hallucination affecting 

 several senses to be esteemed real ? 



(2) The second criterion is no better than the first. 

 So Mr. Ritchie smells a rat, in the case of his hypo 

 thetical mouse, 1 and limits its value by stipulating that 

 B, C, D, and E (who do not see it) should have good 

 eyesight. But how is it to be established that A (who 

 does see it) does not considerably surpass them in the 

 delicacy of his senses? In this difficulty, Mr. Ritchie 

 proposes to call in expert opinion in the shape of &quot; a 

 hungry cat.&quot; (What scorn he would pour on such an 

 appeal to the lower animals if it were a question of 

 establishing the objectivity of an apparition !) Very 

 good. But how if the cat side with the minority ? It is 

 to be hoped that Mr. Ritchie will prefer science to 

 democracy, and the authoritative judgment of Athanasius 

 and the cat against the rest of the world ! If he does 

 not, he might work out an amusing theory making the 

 Referendum the ultimate test of reality. That, at least, 

 would be a definite method of utilising the experience 



1 Loc. cit. p. 80. 



