170 
It appears to me that the same truth holds good with re- 
ference to all our thoughts about Being and Existence. We 
must have the absolute knowledge of some one Being, as our 
stand-point from which to measure the relationships of other 
beings to this one Being, and as a standard with which to 
compare the relative proportions and qualities of other 
existences. 
If, for example, we could comprehend the conservative prin- 
ciple of the operations of which we are conscious, and which 
has been termed by physicians the vis medicatrix natural, we 
might proceed in our reasoning, as starting from this point 
of ascertained knowledge, to assign the relative value to the 
manifestations of the same force in the lower animals ; as in the 
lobster, which can reproduce its claw when occasion requires ; 
whilst we, who are possessed of so much more brain-power, 
cannot even reproduce a little finger. We might then continue 
our inquiries as to the exact effect of the higher concentration of 
nerve-power in the brain. We might learn much of the secrets 
of nature in connection with what I may be permitted to call 
the living soul, and its modifications in transmission from 
generation to generation. We could solve all questions of 
“ fixity of species ” and of “ unity of type,” where all is at 
present uncertain speculation, or presumptuous dogmatism. 
But the fixed starting-point is wanting. We do not abso- 
lutely know ourselves ! 
But if this is the case in reference to our lower nature, how 
much more evident is it that we are destitute of all proper 
appreciation of our spiritual nature. We are forced to the 
conviction that there is a wide difference in this respect be- 
tween ourselves and the animals with whom we associate. 
They look up to us as their supreme point of reference. We, 
on the contrary, have an irresistible tendency to look up to 
something superior to ourselves. And what is this Some- 
thing ? The Arabian chieftains tried to answer it in that cele- 
brated discussion which took place in the land of Uz, over 
3,000 years ago. The speeches were all very much to the 
point, giving a singular pre-eminence to this philosophical 
discussion; but the challenge of the Naamathite remained un- 
answered, and remains so to the present day : — “ Canst thou 
by searching find out God ? canst thou find out the Almighty 
unto perfection? as high as heaven ; what canst thou do? deeper 
than hell ; what canst thou know ? ”* When the narrative in- 
* Job xi. 7, 8. 
