126 SCIENCE AND MORALS m 



and fair dealing untouched. Can it be — I put 

 this forward quite tentatively — that Mr. Lilly is 

 the victim of a confusion, common enough among 

 thoughtless people, and into which he has fallen 

 unawares ? Obviously, it is one thing to say 

 that the logical methods of physical science are of 

 universal applicability, and quite another to affirm 

 that all subjects of thought lie within the pro- 

 vince of physical science. I have often declared 

 my conviction that there is only one method by 

 which intellectual truth can be reached, whether 

 the subject-matter of investigation belongs to the 

 world of iDhj'sics or to the world of consciousness ; 

 and one of the arguments in favour of the use of 

 ph3^sical science as an instrument of education 

 v/hich I have oftenest used is that, in my opinion, 

 it exercises young minds in the appreciation of 

 inductive evidence better than any other study. 

 But while I repeat my conviction that the physical 

 sciences probably furnish the best and most easily 

 appreciable illustrations of the one and indivisible 

 mode of ascertaining truth by the use of reason, 

 I beg leave to add that I have never thought of 

 suggesting that other branches of knowledge may 

 not afford the same discipline ; and assuredly I 

 have never given the slightest ground for the 

 attribution to me of the ridiculous contention 

 that there is nothing true outside the bounds of 

 physical science. Doubtless j)eople who wanted 

 to say something damaging, without too nice a 



