On Infinites. 329 



properties, and are told that it -is unlike all but one of them, a 

 positive idea of the subject is then inevitable. It ought to 

 be kept in mind that positive and negative are entirely dis- 

 tinguishable from complete and incomplete, competent and 

 defective. Though in many cases one vviil involve the oth- 

 er, yet the line of distinction cannot be mistaken. If the 

 rule for positive and negative ideas, deduced from the above 

 remarks, is not the right one, it is obvious that no fixed and 

 general rule can be given; but the subject is left entirely to 

 the caprice or convenience of the individual who discusses 

 it. If it is the right one, then vte have a positive idea or 

 ideas of a subject, when we know to the least extent any 

 of its intrinsic properties; and merely negative ideas, when 

 we know only that it is diverse from several things specified, 

 and yet, as far as our minds are concerned, subject to all 

 the boundless variety of real and po-sible forms and condi- 

 tions which are not specified. It would seem, then, that 

 our idea of infinite space is as positive as it well can be ; for 

 we see with intuitive certainty that it is wholly unlike all 

 other real existences that are possible. Mr. Locke takes 

 some pains to prove, that infinite space is a real existence. 

 Bui a writer in a modern, and jnstly r^ lebrated work, as- 

 serts that God alone is infinite, an- at space is a mere 

 nonentity; not having in itself evf finite existence, but 

 possessing the potentiality of admi ig existence. He as- 

 serts at the same time, that mind wuh its affections has no 

 relation to space. To assert that the inevitable perception 

 of extent without limitation, which is present in almost ev- 

 ery mind, is solely and entirely the perception of an attri- 

 bute of the Deity, and then virtually to declare that mind 

 is incapable of such an attribute, evinces a versatility and 

 variety in the application of terms, which, however much 

 it may amuse the imagination, and exercise the intellect, 

 communicates a needless obscurity to the style and to the 

 argument. The same writer admits that wherever there is 

 matter there is space; that God can make h^3 works infinite; 

 and yet without proving or even supposing that he has not 

 made them so, he virtually declares, that if these works are 

 not infinite, infinite space is a mere nonentity, existing 

 only in conception. Notwithstanding the seeming incon- 

 gruity of this language when taken in its usual acceptation, 

 it appears probable enough, that he had the same idea of 



