THE STABILITY OF TRUTH. 341 



outside of man and not within him. In this objective 

 universe which lies outside ourselves we find " the cease- 

 less flow of force and the rational intelligence that per- 

 vades it." No part of it can be fully 

 The infinite understood by us, but in it we find no 



understanding. . , , 



chance movement, " no variableness nor 



shadow of turning." That such a universe exists seems 

 to demand some intelligence capable of understanding 

 it, of stating its properties in terms of absolute truth, 

 as distinguished from those of human experience. Only 

 an Infinite Being can be conceived as doing this, hence 

 such knowledge must enter into our conception of the 

 Infinite Being, whatever may be our theology in other 

 respects ; for, to know any object or phenomenon in 

 its fulness, "all in all," "we should know what God 

 is and man is." 



It is therefore no reproach to human science that it 

 deals with human relations, not with absolute truths. 

 " The ultimate truths of science," Dr. Schurman has 

 said, " rest on the same basis as the ultimate truths 

 of philosophy " that is, on a basis that transcends 

 human experience. This is true, for science has no 

 " ultimate truths." There are none known to man. 

 "The perfect truth," says Lessing, "is but for Thee 

 alone." With ultimate truths human philosophy tries 

 in some fashion to deal. To look at the universe in 

 some degree through the eyes of God is the aim of 

 philosophy. In its aim it is most noble. Its efforts are 

 a source of strength in the conduct of human life. But 

 its conclusions are not truth. They range from the 

 puerile to the incomprehensible, and only science, that 

 is, " common sense," can distinguish the two. For this 

 reason, just in proportion as philosophy is successful, 

 it is unfit to serve as a basis of human action. Human 

 knowledge and action have human limitations. The 



