THE STABILITY OF TRUTH. 335 



Such knowledge, tested and placed in order, we call 

 science. Science is no longer individual. It is the 

 gathered wisdom of the race. Only a part of it can be 

 grasped by any one man. Each must enter into the 

 work of others. Science is the flower of the altruism of 

 the ages, by which nothing that lives " liveth for itself 

 alone." The recognition of facts and laws is the 

 province of science. We only know what lies about us 

 from our own experience and that of others, this experi- 

 ence of others being translated into terms of our own 

 experience and more or less perfectly blended with it. 

 We can find the meaning of phenomena only from our 

 reasoning based on these experiences. All knowledge 

 we can attain or hope to attain, in so far as it is knowl- 

 edge at all, must be stated in terms of human experi- 

 ence. The laws of Nature are not the products of sci- 

 ence. They are the human glimpses of that which is 

 the "law before all time." 



Thus human experience is the foundation of all 



knowledge. Even innate ideas, if such 



Human experi- ideas exist, are derived in some way 



ence the basis of ^^^^ knowledge possessed by our an- 



human knowl- ... 



. cestors, as mnate impulses to action are 



edge. ' ^ 



related to ancestral needs for action. 

 But is human experience the basis also of belief as 

 it is of knowledge ? 



This raises the further question. Is "to believe" 



more than " to know " ? Shall a sane man extend belief 



in directions where he has no knowledge 



Knowledge and ^^^ j^ y^^^^ outside the bounds of his 



belief. « ^ „ ,. ^ 



power to act ? Can Belief soar in space 



not traversable by "organized common sense"? If 

 such distinction is made between "knowing " and "be- 

 lieving," which of the two has precedence as a guide 

 for action ? Is belief to be tested by science ? Or is 



