cu. iv.] PHENOMENON AND NOV MEN ON. 89 



blem. Since we do postulate Absolute Existence, and do 

 not postulate a particular occult substance underlying eacb. 

 group of phenomena, are we to be understood as implying 

 that there is a simile Being of which all phenomena, internal 

 and external to consciousness, are manifestations? Such 

 must seem to be the inevitable conclusion, since we are able 

 to carry on thinking at all, only under the relations of Dif- 

 ference and No-difference. We cognize any phenomenal 

 object, as tree or mountain, only through certain likenesses 

 and unlikenesses among our states of consciousness ; and 

 only through a revival of the same likenesses and unlike- 

 nesses can we represent the same object in memory or 

 imagination. It may seem then that, since we cannot attri- 

 bute to the Absolute Eeality any relations of Difference, we 

 must positively ascribe to it No-difference. Or, what is the 

 same thing, in refusing to predicate multiplicity of it, do we 

 not virtually predicate of it unity ? We do, simply because 

 we cannot think without so doing. Nevertheless we must 

 bear in mind that the relations of Difference and No-dif- 

 ference under which we are compelled to do all our thinking, 

 are relations just as subjective as any of the more complex 

 relations of colour, or resistance, or figure, which are built up 

 out of them ; and we cannot say that there exists, inde- 

 pendently of consciousness, anything answering to what we 

 know* ac Difference or as No-difference. "This" — to quote 

 Mr. Spencer — " is readily demonstrable. The sole elements, 

 and the indissoluble elements, of the relation [of Difference] 

 are these : — a kind of feeling of some kind ; a feeling coming 

 next to it, which, being distinguishable as another feeling, 

 proves itself to be not homogeneous with the first ; a feeling 

 of shock, more or less decided, accompanying the transition. 

 This shock, which arises from the difference of the two feel- 

 ings, becomes the measure of that difference — constitutes by 

 its occurrence the consciousness of a relation of difference, 

 and by its degree the consciousness of the amount of dif- 



