SCIENTIFIC MATERIALISM. 79 



the region which men of science claim as their own, 

 and where it is futile to oppose their advance; and 

 also to define, if possible, the bourne between this and 

 that other region, to which the questionings and 

 yearnings of the scientific intellect are directed in 

 vain. 



But here your tolerance will be needed. It was the 

 American Emerson, I think, who said that it is hardly 

 possible to state any truth strongly, without apparent 

 injustice to some other truth. Truth is often of a dual 

 character, taking the form of a magnet with two poles; 

 .and many of the differences which agitate the think- 

 .ing part of mankind are to be traced to the exclusive- 

 ness with which partisan reasoners dwell 'upon one half 

 of the duality, in forgetfulness of the other. The 

 proper course appears to be to state both halves strong- 

 ly, and allow each its fair share in the formation of the 

 resultant conviction. But this waiting for the state- 

 ment of the two sides of a question implies patience. 

 It implies a resolution to suppress indignation, if the 

 .statement of the one half should clash with our convic- 

 tions; and to repress equally undue elation, if the half- 

 statement should happen to chime in with our views. 

 .It implies a determination to wait calmly for the state- 

 ment of the whole, before we pronounce judgment 

 in the form of either acquiescence or dissent. 



This premised, and I trust accepted, let us enter 



upon our task. There have been writers who affirmed 



.that the Pyramids of Egypt were natural- productions; 



. and in his early youth Alexander von Humboldt wrote 



a learned essay with the express object of refuting this 



notion. We now regard the pyramids as the work of 



men's hands, aided probably by machinery of which 



no record remains. We picture to .ourselves the 



swarming workers toiling at those vast erections, lift- 



