309 
of God and of the truth of religion which is derived “from 
the general consent of mankind”; and as Stuart Mill supposed 
that he had “ disposed briefly”* of it, I will here notice his 
disposition. It has, we learn, “little scientific weight, but 
greater influence than much better arguments.” Why ? Ans. 
Because it appeals to “ authority,” by which the opinions of 
the majority are governed. But if we are to be governed at 
all, what should govern us save authority?! No answer given. 
“ Thinkers” do not value it; to them what Plato and Newton 
thought is unimportant, they can cogitate for themselves. 
“ The argument from other peopled opinions has little weight.” 
A question respecting the archaic religion of China, the man-, 
agement of an ironclad, the reform of a university, arises. The 
experts appear before us; we hear what they say, and smilingly 
dismiss them, remarking, “ That you have profoundly studied 
the subject and are agreed in your views of it does not affect 
us ; the argument from your opinions has little weight.” As 
a matter of fact, all the world knows that the argument from 
other people's opinions, e.g., the conclusions of the judges of 
the land or of eminent physicians has the greatest weight ; 
and rightly so, if it is possible for one man to know more of a 
subject than another. The opinions of others, he continues, 
should make us weigh their reasons. Doubtless. “Accord- 
ingly, those who make any claim to philosophic treatment of 
the subject, employ this general consent chiefly as evidence 
that there is in the mind of man an intuitive perception, or an 
instinctive sense, of Deity.” Certainly. “ From the generality 
of the belief, they infer that it is inherent in our constitution ; 
from which they draw the conclusion that the belief must be 
true.” The conclusion drawn is not that the belief must be 
true, as if proved to demonstration like a mathematical prob- 
lem, but that it thus comes before us with a vastly preponder- 
ating weight of probability in its favour — 95 points out of the 
100; and this conclusion is thus no mere vague possibility, as, 
e.g., that the belief may be true, which would afford no assist- 
ance. But the argument from consent is said to “beg the 
question.” How so ? Simply “ since it has itself nothing to 
rest upon but the belief that the human mind was made by a 
God, who would not deceive His creatures.” In other words, 
the argument assumes that the conclusions of the mind are to 
* Vide J. S. Mill, Theism, 155, et seq. 
f “ Kent. You have that in your countenance which I would fain call 
master. 
Lear. What’s that ? 
Kent. Authority .” — King Lear , act i., scene 4. 
