378 COSKIC PHILOSOPHY. [PT. in 



of primitive anthropomorphism to be retained b} our Cosmic 

 Philosophy, or is it to be rejected ? And if it is to be re 

 jected, what are the grounds which justify us in rejecting it 1 

 Lot us not forget, in stating the question, that we are now 

 in a region of thought where absolute demonstration, in the 

 S3ientific sense, is impossible. I believe it is beyond the 

 power of science to prove that the divine Power immanent 

 in the Cosmos either does or does not work by anthropo 

 morphic methods. We cannot expect, therefore, to obtain a 

 result which, like a mathematical theorem, shall stand firm 

 through mere weight of logic, or which, like a theorem in 

 physics, can be subjected to a crucial test. We can only 

 examine the arguments upon which the anthropomorphic 

 hypothesis is founded, and inquire whether they are of such 

 a character as to be convincing or satisfactory to thinkers 

 who rigidly adhere to the Doctrine of Evolution, who assert 

 the relativity of knowledge, and who refuse to reason upon 

 the subjective method. If, then, it turns out that these argu 

 ments are not thus satisfactory, it will follow that, as the 

 Doctrine of Evolution becomes more and more widely under 

 stood and accepted, the anthropomorphic hypothesis will gene 

 rally fall into discredit, not because it will have been disproved, 

 but because there will be no sufficient warrant for main 

 taining it. Or to restate the case if the hypothesis which 

 represents God as working after quasi-human methods be 

 found harmonious with the scientific truths upon which our 

 Cosmic Philosophy rests, it may survive the complete estab 

 lishment of that philosophy ; but if otherwise, it will perish, 

 as other doctrines have perished, through lack of the mental 

 predisposition to accept it. It is, indeed, generally true that 

 theories concerning the supernatural perish, not from extra 

 neous violence, but from inanition. 1 The belief in witchcraft, 



1 Ce n est pas d un raisonnement, mais de tout 1 ensemble des science! 

 modernesqne sortcet immense resultat il n y a|&amp;gt;as de surnaturel.&quot; Renaa 

 Etude* tfHistrire Eeligieuse, p. 206. 



