COSMIC PHILOSOPHY 



tinguish as psychical, and of the phenomena 

 which we distinguish as material, may well 

 be neither quasi-psychical nor quasi-material. 

 Whichever set of terms we use, we are using 

 symbols the values of which are determined by 

 our experiences of conditioned existence, and 

 which must therefore be totally inadequate to 

 express the characteristics of unconditioned ex- 

 istence. Nevertheless, in so far as the exigencies 

 of finite thinking require us to symbolize the 

 Infinite Power manifested in the world of phe- 

 nomena, we are clearly bound to symbolize it 

 as quasi-psychical, rather than as quasi-material. 

 Provided we bear in mind the symbolic charac- 

 ter of our words, we may say that " God is 

 Spirit," though we may not say, in the materi- 

 alistic sense, that " God is Force." ^ Such an 

 utterance is, indeed, anthropomorphic. But we 

 are now finding powerful confirmation of the 

 argument elaborated in our Prolegomena, that 

 a Positive mode of philosophizing is impracti- 

 cable, and that we can never get entirely rid of 

 all traces of anthropomorphism.^ As formerly 

 shown, " there is anthropomorphism even in 

 speaking of the unknown Cause as a Power 

 manifested in phenomena ; " and if this expres- 

 sion is liable to be honestly misinterpreted as 

 implying the identification of Deity with so- 



1 [See Introduction, § 3 4, for Fiske's later use of this passage.] 

 ^See above, vol. i. pp. 270, 271. 

 288 



