COSMIC PHILOSOPHY 



open to controversy. Such a requirement would 

 virtually prohibit philosophy altogether. The 

 difference between a scientific and a metaphy- 

 sical theorem is not that the former is not open 

 to controversy, but that it admits of verification ; 

 it can, either now or at some future time, be 

 proved to be either true or false. All such the- 

 orems may be admitted by a scientific philoso- 

 phy. Until they have been verified, we may 

 take account of them provisionally, as legiti- 

 mate hypotheses : after they have been put to 

 a crucial test, we may either incorporate them 

 with our philosophy or definitely abandon them. 

 Our philosophy, therefore, like all the sciences 

 whence it obtains the general truths which it 

 seeks to organize into a body of universal 

 truth, may admit any number of subjects of 

 dispute, but it can admit no question as a fit 

 subject of dispute which, from the nature of 

 the case, can never be settled. It is perfectly 

 in keeping, for example, for two upholders of 

 the Doctrine of Evolution, as well as for two 

 scientific specialists committed to no general 

 doctrine, to hold opposite views concerning the 

 hypothesis of spontaneous generation. Since 

 this is strictly a scientific hypothesis, deahng 

 solely with phenomena, and invoking no un- 

 knowable agencies ; and since there is no rea- 

 son, in the nature of things, why it should not 

 sooner or later be established or overthrown by 

 190 



