‘295 
arrive at any satisfactory conclusion in the matter, without a vast extension 
of our ordinary notions as to the variety of creation in two particular direc- 
tions :-(l) As to the extent to which the imponderable or mthereal forms 
of matter are involved in the structure and functions of living things ; and 
(2) As to the existence and almost boundless variety of psychical entities, as 
forming constituent parts of animal organisms, the latter being more 
strictly than the former individual creations ; but both, of course, products of 
the same Infinite Power and Wisdom, and formed to carry out the purposes 
of His beneficence. In a matter of this kind, hypothesis is unavoidable ; 
but, as it has been well observed, hypothesis, if duly guarded, is a necessary 
and most useful precursor of ascertained truth. And the supposition that a 
“ world of mind ” exists, having at least as wide a range as that which science 
recognises as the world of matter, is one which is in perfect harmony with 
the patent facts of our own consciousness, and of our surroundings. 
“ After specifying two classes of theories on the subject of Vitality, Dr. 
Nicholson points out (p. 283) the importance of distinguishing between the 
pr oduction and direction of force in living beings, and that what accounts for 
the one does not necessarily account for the other. He had just before 
granted to the advocates of the materialistic theories, that many vital 
phenomena are due to ordinary physico-chemical forces, but denied that all 
could be so accounted for. This truth (which rescues us from being 
reckoned as mere pieces of machinery) may, I submit, be best explained 
upon a principle which I strongly hold, — that all force is, properly speaking, 
the acting of will ; and that we have here the simultaneous and concurrent 
action of two wills, a higher, which originates and directs the force that 
produces the physical and molecular motions, and a lower (created) mind and 
will, which has been endowed with a limited control over, and direction 
of, the physical forces of matter, whether gross or a 3 thereal. The 
term ‘ created mind ’ here used I regard as equivalent to the author’s 
psyche (p. 291). It is not necessary to suppose that this mind is 
always conscious of its own actions, or that it always acts from 
purpose. This cannot be said evnn of the human mind. And though to 
draw a distinct line of demarcation between the operations of the two forces, 
the physical and the imjchical , is clearly beyond our power, this does not 
forbid the recognition of both as factors in vital movements. 
“To refer, then, only to theories alluded to in the paper before us:— the 
author points out (pp. 269, 270) the absurdity of assuming the identity of the 
chemical characters of living and dead protoplasm, and the fallacy of argu- 
ments based upon this assumption. And this, coupled with the obvious 
fact that no proof has been, or indeed can be, given, of the chemical 
condition and composition of living protoplasm, entirely vitiates many of 
the conclusions of the materialistic school of philosophers. 
“ Mr. H. Spencer’s definition of £ life ’ (p. 279) as i a combination 5 of 
certain phenomena, is quite inadequate, because it specifies no producing 
cause for the combination. Mr. Bastian (p. 281) places all vital action on the 
level of chemical and mechanical phenomena. But does this writer undertake 
