COSMIC PHILOSOPHY 



llshed, at least so far as transcendental inquir- 

 ies are concerned. It is therefore interesting to 

 observe the remarkable similarity between the 

 positions held respectively by Plato, Descartes, 

 and Kant, with reference to this twofold ques- 

 tion. In each case the psychological problem 

 is to explain the existence of knowledge, or at 

 least of conceptive faculty, that is apparently 

 congenital, and that is also apparently inexpli- 

 cable as the product of individual experience. 

 How does the uneducated youth come by his 

 rapid intuition of space-relations ? Plato, as we 

 have seen, replies with his hypothesis of remi- 

 niscence, Descartes with his hypothesis of innate 

 ideas, and Kant with his hypothesis of a priori 

 forms of thought; and between the three an- 

 swers, in spite of the wide superficial divergences, 

 how striking is the fundamental similarity ! We 

 shall hereafter see how the Doctrine of Evo- 

 lution, proceeding strictly upon the objective 

 method, supplies us with an interpretation which 

 adequately accounts for the phenomena, but 

 which leaves no room for the inferences which 

 metaphysicians, from Plato to Kant, have 

 founded thereon. Meanwhile, it has already 

 been sufficiently proved that the universality 

 and necessity of unconditional propositions, 

 whether relating to space-relations or to any 

 other relations whatever, must inevitably result 

 from absolute uniformity in the organic regis- 

 148 



