344 



FOOT-NOTES TO EVOLUTION. 



losophy this offers no difficulty. It is still plausible to 

 suppose that by some combinations of primitive units 

 these variant atoms are formed. Such an idea would 

 have logical continuity, and as we are becoming used to 

 notions of primal unity, we find such an idea satisfying 

 to our consciousness. If this be true, somewhere, some- 

 how, lead will be resolved into its primal elements, and 

 these elements may be reunited in the form of gold. 

 Then will the dream of the alchemist become fact ; 

 but not until then which is a matter of the greatest 

 importance. Such transmutation is as yet no part of 

 knowledge. We certainly do not know that lead can be 

 changed into that which is transmutable into gold. We 

 do not know it, I say ; but may we believe it ? Is the 

 foundation of belief less secure than that of knowledge ? 

 Can we trust philosophy to tell us what to believe, 

 while we must look to science to tell us what we know ? 



This brings us to the question of definitions. If 

 knowledge and belief are of like rank, both must rest on 

 science, and the results of philosophy must come to sci- 

 ence only as hints or suggestions as to future lines of 

 research. 



If knowledge implies stability, and belief does not, 

 the relation of the two is also clear. In that case belief 

 would be a word of light meaning, expressive of whim 

 or of the balance of probabilities in association with 

 prejudice. Belief would then be the pretense of knowl- 

 edge, as compared with knowledge itself. Along its 

 paths life can not march with courage and effectiveness. 

 It is not for such beliefs as this that the martyrs lived or 

 died. Their inspiration was the positive belief of science, 

 or the negative belief of the falsity of the ideas tyranny 

 or superstition had forced upon them. 



To avoid a discussion foreign to my purpose, I wish, 

 if possible, to separate the word " belief," as used in this 



