COSMIC PHILOSOPHY 



tween certain groups of relations observed in 

 this giraffe and certain other groups of relations 

 previously classified as pertaining to ruminants, 

 ungulata, mammals, and vertebrates. Obviously, 

 therefore, the reasoning by which the places of 

 animals in the zoological scale are determined 

 consists in the compounding of cognitions of 

 likeness or unHkeness between certain given 

 groups of relations. 



So far, then, the mental operation performed 

 by the naturalist seems to be not unlike that 

 performed by the astronomer. And indeed, in 

 spite of the superficial difference which seems 

 so widely to separate the classification of ani- 

 mals from the measurement of celestial spaces, 

 it will appear, on a moment's reflection, that 

 the only real difference between the mental pro- 

 cesses involved in the former case, and those 

 involved in the latter, is the extent to which 

 likeness is predicated of the relations concerned. 

 Deeply considered, the act of the astronomer 

 is the same as that of the naturalist, — save 

 that, while the former classifies together sundry 

 groups of relations as equal to one another, or 

 indistinguishable from one another, the latter 

 classifies together sundry groups of relations 

 as like one another, or but slightly distinguish- 

 able from one another. Now, in this state- 

 ment we see that what is meant by equality is 

 merely exact likeness; but something more is 

 150 



