THE DOGMA OF 



between matter living and the same matter dead? and, 

 secondly, what is the difference between different kinds of 

 living matter? These are the questions which have to 

 be answered. The authority who frankly declares that 

 there is no difference at all may be admired for his force of 

 character, and thanked for his candour. But the authority 

 who tells people that the difterences between living and 

 dead, as well as the differences between one living form and 

 the rest, are to be expressed by such adjectives as " modi- 

 fied," "changed," "varied," and the like, pays indeed a 

 poor compliment to intelligence, for he tries to impose 

 upon or to delude the minds he professes to instruct. He 

 substitutes evasion for explanation, and evasion is the 

 characteristic of a philosophy which has been popular at 

 several different periods of the world's history. 



Faith in universal physical causation one may embrace, 

 but it is not a faith which rests upon reason, neither is there 

 any reason for the faith. It cannot be proved by evidence, 

 nor does it rest upon observation. The basis of such a 

 faith is the dictum of those who assert that they know, or 

 fancy they know, or are supposed by others to know more 

 than they are really cognizant of. They fail to impart the 

 knowledge they are supposed to possess to others, but yet 

 they are credited with no ordinary knowledge. Opinions 

 may be infallible, but hitherto belief in infallibility has only 

 retarded knowledge and postponed progress. He who 

 asserts and teaches the universality of physical causa- 

 tion, forcibly shuts his eyes. It is doubtful if one who 

 had been born blind could have imposed upon his other 

 faculties sufficiently to imbibe such a faith. 



The physical philosopher prides himself upon never 



