CHAP. III. THE EXTEENAL WOKLD. 73 



more and more elaborated, so that when taken up ly an in 

 tellectual principle it is far indeed from being the same as in 

 lower creatures. 



He observes (p. 221) &quot;that the compound relation of 

 difference, as we know it, is dependent on structure,&quot; size, 

 and state. I reply : As we &quot; know it,&quot; meaning, as it is pre 

 sented to us sensibly yes ! As we &quot; know it,&quot; meaning, as it is 

 presented to us intellectually no ! 



We come now to the climax of negation before referred to, 

 namely, Mr. Spencer s denial of the objective validity On the - rela . 

 of our perception of &quot; difference &quot; itself presuming &quot; per!^- 611 

 Mr. Spencer means &quot;difference &quot; and not individual quenclfco- 

 differences between sensations. At p. 222, 93, dffference?* 

 he considers the pure relations of co-existence, s^eaccom&quot;&quot; 

 sequence and difference, and concludes that their pan 

 relations &quot;as we know them&quot; do not obtain beyond con 

 sciousness, because they cannot be thought of without a 

 &quot; tacit recognition &quot; of concrete existence ultimately derived 

 from our feelings. But as to this it may be replied that 

 &quot;difference&quot; (like genus and species) exists formally only 

 in mind, though materially in things. The abstract is not, of 

 course, the concrete. As to the &quot; tacit recognition &quot; of the 

 concrete, that is merely the phantasmata necessary to all 

 knowledge in our present condition. They are merely 

 counters made use of by the mind. We understand five 

 purely; through five counters, or five anythings. What 

 proves that Mr. Spencer can think of pure abstract difference 

 is, that he can write about it. Then as to this expression 

 above quoted, &quot; as we know them,&quot; we may reply : &quot; As,&quot; in 

 the sense of the means whereby we have them no ! &quot; As,&quot; in 

 the sense of agreeing with our intellectual apprehension so 

 obtained yes ! 



He next goes on (for the sake of clearness !) to attempt to 

 simplify the expressions co-existence and sequence by means 

 of terms expressing existences which in the first have, in the 

 second have not, differences &quot; in their order.&quot; Phenomena 

 which can be experienced in different orders of succession (as 



